They're firing from within friendly territory now, not occupied territory being constantly harassed by enemy forces

That also, the 50,000 figure is probably a 1 day surge effort

But it sure makes good copy for retards like WaPo

Who is "they"?
Many people from ktard to analysts also predicted Kyiv would fall in anywhere from 2 days to 2 weeks

AS IF SOME PEOPLE LIED

Russian logistics fuckup is obvious although the "40 mile convoy" is a bit of a meme granted

Put it this way if they are anybody, they should in fact have taken Kyiv by now

The 50k figure like I said is probably 1 surge effort, it's the kind of glib figure that someone would throw a reporter, but who says it's sustained?

Again: who says it's sustained?

In any case numbers like these anyone can throw around. To date the most solid figures are given by official US / Brit estimates and Oryx's pictures.

KRI Nanggala found

RIP

Edit: oh it was discovered long ago? I don't recall

Pepatah melayu baru: biar undi pencuri jangan undi Dap

This post has been edited by KLthinker91: Jul 6 2022, 07:03 PM

I said it before, the day KF-21 flies I will believe

I believe

Whoever depending on Sukhoi Growlerski, might want to think again

US will have figured out the exact countermeasures soon



Mai189 is trying to argue that Western tanks > Russian tanks

you are trying to argue that ATGM > Western and Russian tanks

so my question to you is, if you believe ATGM > all, then what's the conclusion? No point buying ANY tanks at all? or just buy bare minimum T-55 standard?

I asked you to state your point

I mean, frankly, I'm sitting here wondering what you 2 are arguing about since from my point of view it hardly seems to differ. Hence why I wondered if you could state, precisely, what is your objection to what he said.

ATGMs can destroy tanks. That's like... an observation that isn't new since the invention of the PIAT.

Well, part of the issue is that your point is too simple.

Not all ATGMs are the same and not all tanks are the same

TOW-1 for example is probably not going to cut it against say the frontal armour of T-72B3

Yes, it's true that even an RPG-7 could mission kill a T-72B3 from behind

But do you really want to go to war with a weapon that ONLY works on the aft aspects of the enemy's tanks?

yang ni apa kaitan dengan Deftech? they are middleman?

Really?
From where do they mine the raw materials?

Any army will have the same policy. However the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

unfortunately I'm not there

being in KL every Merdeka I get to see Su and Hornet
last time every August they fly practically outside my school window even

nah
more likely looking for budget option because P-8 is the gold-plated option of them all

nah
SG-US ties are strengthening even more actually
saying there's an ethnic connection is like saying US and Africa abang adik because ramai blacks in US
lmao
total retard link

appreciated, but don't do it just for me babe
I'm not that young to go chasing hot curvy babes that break the sound barrier any more
(maybe about twenty-five years ago )

in your dreams
57th far far more likely

Hunter was only prototyped in mid-2018. 500 modern vehicles in 4 years?! you siao lah, only countries like the USA and China builds at that rate.

a) learn what is "enclosed mast"

b) that's not big enough to be 127mm. might be 76mm or even 57mm, most likely the former like the Martadinata-class frigates

c) the model shows only 56 VLS forward and 16? VLS amidships which is not more than a Burke. even if it's MICA, in the future environment with drone swarms a possibility there's nothing wrong with squeezing a few more tubes in

and at the end of the day, in the words of Patsy, it's only a model - as usual you let your head run away with building assumptions on top of assumptions on top of assumptions. simple answer to your castle in the sky: "final product may differ from illustration shown"

what on earth is a 35mm gun going to contribute?

dual 76mms can deal with more than one threat in two directions at once, or both target an incoming missile. noting wrong with that. have a look at the Italian Horizon-class frigate.

integration of non-NATO equipment depends on the equipment capabilities and what level of integration is ultimately achieved. refer: AGM-88s on MIG-29s, GBU-10s on Su-30s.

the model is a model, nothing more and nothing less. quit running around like Chicken Little

This post has been edited by KLthinker91: Nov 7 2022, 12:01 PM

Yeah sure
And nobody in the history of defence has ever played around with serial numbering before (and other methods) to disguise the true numbers of assets

There are practically no details at all on the main mast. As usual you're jumping to conclusions than jumping from there to ever further conclusions until what you say barely resembles reality. Yes, an "enclosed mast" could well be a possibility, though personally I think the model is simply incomplete. You however ignored the option entirely and proceeded to rant and rave as usual.

The Type 45 project is going on 20 years old now. This is a proposal for a future design. The threat picture has changed significantly and there's no reason why a ship may mount more VLS cells. Which is why the Royal Navy is adding 24 more missiles to the Type 45 for a total of 72 Aster 30 and CAMM. Go on, go tell them they're idiots and barely resemble reality.

The Oto Melara 76mm system is more capable than the 35mm Millenium, even for anti-air and close in defence role. It's not for lack of options that the Italian Navy chose it - it's one of the best gun-based anti-missile defences around. If the Indonesians don't mind a little extra top weight, or shell out for lightweight mounts, theres no reason why it shouldn't be chosen.

P.s. I won't say what can or can't be done with Brahmos OR any other missile system. Suffice to say I won't be so arrogant or so far removed from anything resembling reality as to imagine that it is TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE!!1!!

This post has been edited by KLthinker91: Nov 7 2022, 01:45 PM

Oh no, this is just a discussion of military equipment. You said PT PAL's model "barely resembles reality", I'm showing you that your criticism barely resembles reality

If you had looked at the Martadina frigate you would realise that the gun on the model is based on its 76mm Oto Melara, and the VLS cell is the same as VL MICA. Furthermore if you had looked at examples of enclosed mast instead of integrated masts, you would have realised that it's possible that the model is depicting an enclosed mast which indeed need not have planar arrays if the radar it is enclosing is not that type.

Hence as you were ignorant of these points, your assessment was very far removed from reality.

I used Type 45 as an example because you seem unaware of the modern needs of warships for deeper VLS capacity. MICA is not a heavy missile, having a 56 cell farm in the bow of a 140 metre ship is not impossible. Though I think it is more likely to have 32 forward and 24 midships. Topweight is an issue but again a 140m ship is more stable than e.g. the Martadinata which you have fixated on, and if PT PAL shells out for lightweight mounts it is certainly doable. There are many considerations that go into a ship's missile and ammo capacity and stability is only one of them.

Hence your assessment of the ship's weapons fit is very far removed from reality.

Similarly the anti-missile role is about more than just bullets per second. There are more considerations in play that altogether makes the Italians quite satisfied with their 76mm anti-missile defence systems. The Indonesian Navy uses the Oto Melara 76mm gun system already, it makes sense to fit two of them if possible on a larger warship that can fit two.

Again, it's not outside the realm of possibility for an Indo-Russian missile like Brahmos can't be fit on a Western-type ship. If PT PAL knows the integration is doable within their budget, why not. It depends on the weapon system and the ship's systems.

Hence your assessment that this is totally impossible is very far removed from reality.

As for Hunter, it is not comparable with M113 in terms of complexity regardless of how many vehicles SG wants to acquire. Even so, your own data shows that 1000 M113s were acquired over a timeframe of 15 years. Singapore may eventually produce 1000 Hunters, why not. But it is highly improbable that Singapore produced 500 Hunters in the span of 4 years and even through the Covid19 disruption.

Welcome to the UFO era

B-21 Raider

check out the new RUSI Ukraine report

UAF interceptors was decisively defeated by Russian counter-air, mainly due to using older generation USSR designs - they have no active guided medium range AAM

seems UAF SAMs are doing the work of denying air superiority.

what is true however is that UAF CAS birds have been active on the front lines due to RuAF inability to establish air superiority. serious balls.

Americans did that

well, the AGM-88 HARM consists of an add-on module, and it was designed to be integrated quickly on various different platforms from F-4 Phantoms to F-16s, so inherently it is less work than say a radar-guided AMRAAM

but in the case of the Ukrainian Mig-29 they performed a very ingenious software hack to trick the Russian avionics into thinking it is a Russian Kh-31 HARM, example below

on the HARM end they set it to use an independent active seeker mode so the HARM uses its own acquisition sensors rather than depend on aircraft radar, as it would if for example connected to an EA-6B Prowler



in the cockpit rather than use the HARM computer module which is rather bulky, they launched it off some kind of iPad-like touchscreen now that is truly ingenious!

(note also the Garmin tacked on the right)



This post has been edited by KLthinker91: Dec 5 2022, 02:15 PM