tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2348464617577736454.post2354401212284064235..comments2024-03-28T21:39:05.175+08:00Comments on Senang Diri: The old and the new #tankDavid Boeyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11401913253357584603noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2348464617577736454.post-73064258695704932922017-10-13T10:46:27.901+08:002017-10-13T10:46:27.901+08:00With all due respect to the South Koreans and Japa...With all due respect to the South Koreans and Japanese, neither have fought a modern tank battle and had little experience with tank operations in a modern combat environment apart from training situations. Hence, with limited manpower, it makes sense to have 3-man tanks, which allows you to deploy a larger tank corps in peacetime. <br /><br />The U.S. army, in contrast, has fought in a number of wars using MBTs in the last fifty years, and is still actively involved in several warzones with heavy armour. Hence, decisions relating to MBT design come from real experience. The autoloader issue I understand is more than about reliability, but considering the overall combat effectiveness of a tank over a extended operational period, a crew of four will maintain readiness far better than a crew of three.<br />XPeriment626https://www.blogger.com/profile/10677226833700459956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2348464617577736454.post-23847338805562605022017-10-13T09:16:33.766+08:002017-10-13T09:16:33.766+08:00The main reason why the M1 Abrams, the Leopard 2’s...The main reason why the M1 Abrams, the Leopard 2’s cousin, has no auto loader, even when the technology and know-how was available, according to its program manager at the time, there was no guarantee that the system can work 99.99% of the time, which is true.<br /><br />But that said, if the auto loading system can be made to work reliably, then use it. The South Korean K2 Black Panther and Japanese Type 10 are good examples Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16930529741557104470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2348464617577736454.post-3075527734111916232017-03-28T13:47:50.783+08:002017-03-28T13:47:50.783+08:00I think that the Bionix Light Tank would be a heav...I think that the Bionix Light Tank would be a heavily-modified variant of the original which will be armed and armored similarly to the CV90120-T:<br /><br />http://www.military-today.com/tanks/cv90120t.htm<br /><br />Personally, I would like Singapore to be the first nation to adopt and produce directly in Singapore what I strongly believe should be the true successor to our SM1 AMX-13 tanks, which is the M8 Expeditionary Light Tank, previously known as the Armored Gun System:<br /><br />http://www.armyrecognition.com/united_states_army_heavy_armoured_vehicles_tank_uk/expeditionary_light_tank_bae_systems_air_deployable_vehicle_technical_data_sheet_specifications_pictures_video_12110151.html<br /><br />http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a23455/bae-us-armys-light-tank-program/Crimson Crusaderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07150705924194109115noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2348464617577736454.post-48861618150464207032016-04-14T21:57:25.956+08:002016-04-14T21:57:25.956+08:00When the defence minister showed the map plan for ...When the defence minister showed the map plan for SAF 2030 there will be the next generation bionix.Is that next generation bionix the new light tank related to the bionix family or a new class of a light tank or is the nex generation bionix a replacement for the currently serving bionix 2 with 30mm gun? Benjaminhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17051711637388268043noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2348464617577736454.post-53351234701088603012016-03-02T12:16:19.703+08:002016-03-02T12:16:19.703+08:00Just a quick comment about the Leopard having a hu...Just a quick comment about the Leopard having a human loader, which given our manpower situation, is a disadvantage from the autoloader of the AMX-13. It is useful to note the direction that NATO armies have taken in avoiding an autoloader in an MBT despite the technology being used by the Soviets/Russians for decades. The tradeoff here is that the increased crew size is extremely useful for non-combat related duties, which arguably take up the bulk of the time, especially for a nation not actually at way. This includes, maintenance, cleaning, loading of supplies, guard duty, and other general tasks. It can be argued that the increased efficiency and effectiveness of the slightly larger crew provides better overall bang-for-the-buck than having more tanks with smaller crews each, performing sub-optimally because the crews are exhausted from the rigours of keeping the MBT operational on a long-term basis. XPeriment626https://www.blogger.com/profile/10677226833700459956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2348464617577736454.post-85405539167130468572016-01-09T23:43:14.886+08:002016-01-09T23:43:14.886+08:00Firstly, Happy New Year to David and the other rea...Firstly, Happy New Year to David and the other readers of this fantastic blog!<br /><br />I've been wondering what's happening with the AMX-13 replacement. While some say the Leopard serves as the AMX-13 replacement, they forget that the Leopard is a replacement of 'another capability' rather than the AMX-13. Furthermore, the retirement of the AMX-13 takes away a lot of firepower from the Amour battalions. Whilst the 30mm of BX2 is respectable, it cannot replace the 75mm gun of the AMX-13 which the Coalition forces missed in Iraq and Afghanistan where MBTs were not really suitable. Firing a 120mm HEAT round into a building to dispense with 1 insurgent is not efficient especially where collateral damage is problem. <br /><br />So, while the M113s are replaced by BX, what will replace the AMX? I agree with David's POV on protection and situational awareness / network capability being paramount. It should serve in a capacity similar to the Russian BMPT Terminator as an infantry fire-support tank which superior firepower and can take on MBTs if the need arises (and maybe have a NLOS capability). Personally, I would think the Namer platform would be ideal considering its high protection levels ability to mount weapons and other equipment. <br /><br />That being said, our Terrex are currently under-gunned with 7.62mm, 12.7mm guns or 40mm AGLs. The US are already requested up-gunning their Strykers with 30mm RWS and other such as the Polish have the 30mm and Spike capabilities with their wheeled AFVs. Not that I know of any such plans but I would think that this would be a natural evolution for our fighting vehicles. <br /><br />Keep up the thought provoking, albeit cryptic, blogs! <br /> D-Boyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06280928479558496394noreply@blogger.com