Signup
LoginAMX-13
256 posts
-
-
Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe Israel sold their AMX-13 tanks to Singapore because these tanks with their 75 mm guns were unable to penetrate the armour of the T-54 and T-55 during the Six-Day War.
Rumour has it that when the tanks arrived in Singapore, some had blood-stains on them.
it seems the Israelis got rid of their tanks cheap ......but at least they got more than what the scrap yard man offered..............and the tanks put up a great show at the National day Parade........in front of the malaysian DPM....but of course, he was not quite impressed.....
-
-
-
Originally posted by idwar:Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe Israel sold their AMX-13 tanks to Singapore because these tanks with their 75 mm guns were unable to penetrate the armour of the T-54 and T-55 during the Six-Day War.
Rumour has it that when the tanks arrived in Singapore, some had blood-stains on them.
it seems the Israelis got rid of their tanks cheap ......but at least they got more than what the scrap yard man offered..............and the tanks put up a great show at the National day Parade........in front of the malaysian DPM....but of course, he was not quite impressed.....Yep , u are right, becos they were scared sh!t
Becos MY at that time do not even have a single light tank!!!!
Even at this moment , they are still scared, why???
Becos 350 AMX-13SM1 against only 26 Scorpion 90!!!
Of course they are scared!!!
You want proof, well, for example Pedra Banca case where MY's naval and police boats intrusion into the water there, just one warning from Dr. Tony Tan abt possible conflicts due to MY intrusion, since then we dun hear anymore abt MY's boat intruding Pedra Banca's water!!!
Wow! Dr. Tony Tan's words so powerful
Why?? , becos he has the military muscle to backup his words!!!
-
-
-
idwar, ur trolling just make me laugh!!!
MAF is nothing compare to SAF.
1) First thing we have 2x the trained soldiers as compare to MAF.
(350k vs 170k)
2) We have 13.5x of light tanks as compare to MAF. (350 vs 26)
3)We have 2x of IFV/APC as compare to MAF (1400~1600 vs 780)
4) We have abt 5x 155mm Howitzer as compare to MAF.(200 vs 40)
Only thing we dun have MLRS, but our arty overwhelm what MAF have.
5)We have abt 3x more fighter a/c as compare to MAF.(150 vs 46)
And we have Awacs, attack helos and 100+ UAV where RMAF have practically have none.
6)We have 12 missile armed ships and 4 operational subs whereas RMN have 16 missile armed ships. So more or less balanced here.
So just looking at the orbat, of course MY are scared!!!
You are scared too, otherwise why r u always popping up here with all the stupid threads???
Two reasons , inferior complex and scared sh!t!!!! Edited by gary1910 01 Apr `05, 4:37AM -
Originally posted by idwar:Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe Israel sold their AMX-13 tanks to Singapore because these tanks with their 75 mm guns were unable to penetrate the armour of the T-54 and T-55 during the Six-Day War.
Actually that statement dun hold true anymore.
Not after we have developed APFSDS rounds for the 75mm gun, it was estimated by some experts to have a penetration of abt 310mm RHA @ 0-deg @ 1km, this is sufficient against the frontal armour of T-54/55 which is abt 200mm RHA armour protection.
Anyway, 75mm gun could destroy any AFVs that MAF currently have, whether is Condor, Sibmas, KIFV, Scorpion etc so what your point???
In fact, the SM1 light tanks are also a better protected AFVs than any MAF's AFVs at the moment.Edited by gary1910 01 Apr `05, 4:10AM -
Originally posted by kaka_22:A tank with blood is a sign off good-luck.....
He just talk cock only lah!!!
The AMX were refurbished when they are delivered , so where got blood!!
idwar always talk cock w/o proof!!!
-
-
-
Originally posted by gary1910:idwar, u trolling just make laugh!!!
MAF is nothing compare to SAF.
1) First thing we have 2x the trained soldiers as compare to MAF.
(350k vs 170k)
2) We have 13.5x of light tanks as compare to MAF. (350 vs 26)
3)We have 2x of IFV/APC as compare to MAF (1400~1600 vs 780)
4) We have abt 5x 155mm Howitzer as compare to MAF.(200 vs 40)
Only thing we dun have MLRS, but our arty overwhelm what MAF have.
5)We have abt 3x more fighter a/c as compare to MAF.(150 vs 46)
And we have Awacs, attack helos and 100+ UAV where RMAF have practically have none.
6)We have 12 missile armed ships and 4 operational subs whereas RMN have 16 missile armed ships. So more or less balanced here.
So just looking at the orbat, of course MY are scared!!!
You are scared too, otherwise why u are always popping up here ???
Two reasons , inferior complex and scared sh!t!!!! Don't be evil towards our northern friend lah.
KD (Kapal DiRaja) Lekiu (30)
KD Jebat (29)
KD Kasturi (25)
KD Lekir (26)
KD Tun Abdul Jamil (135)
KD Mohammad Amin (136)
KD Hang Nadim (134)
KD Tan Pusmah (137)
KD Pahang
KD Kedah
KD Handalan P3511
KD Perkasa P3512
KD Pendekar P3513
KD Gempita P3514
KD Sri Indera Sakti
KD Mahawangsa
Submarines
Agusta 70 Class Training Submarine
SSK Scorpene Class Attack Submarine x 2
Helicopters
AS 555 SN Fennec
In the early 1990s, Malaysia undertook a major program to expand and modernize its armed forces. This included procurement of F/A-18D Hornet and C-130 Hercules aircrafts from the United States. Malaysia was also the first country in the world to have purchased warplanes from both sides of the cold war, when she also acquired MiG-29N Fulcrum from the USSR. However, budgetary constraints imposed by the 1997 financial crisis slowed military procurement. The recent economic recovery may lead to relaxation of budgetary constraints on the resumption of major weapons purchases. In October 2000 the Defense Minister announced a review of national defense and security policy to bring it up to date. This review will address new security threats that have emerged in the form of low intensity conflicts, such as the kidnapping of Malaysians and foreigners from resort islands located off the East Malaysian state of Sabah.
Current procurements for the air force include 18 Su-30MKM with a possible additional 10, Augusta Westland A109 light helicopters for the army while AEW&C platforms are being evaluated. No recent news on the offer of Super Hornets by the US.
The army is getting 48 Twardy PT-91 main battle tanks from Poland. Last major procurement was the Astros MRLS from Brazil.
Edited by SMAPLionHeart 01 Apr `05, 4:21AM -
But got alot of disputes ..
The Spratly Islands, with People's Republic of China, Philippines, Republic of China, Vietnam, and possibly Brunei.
The Philippines have not fully revoked claim to Sabah.
Two islands in dispute with Singapore.
Ambalat in east Borneo with Indonesia. -
RSS Bedok (M105) - commissioned 1995
RSS Kallang (M106) - commissioned 1995
RSS Katong (M107) - commissioned 1995
RSS Punggol (M10
-
commissioned 1995
RSS Endurance (207) - commissioned 2000
RSS Resolution (20 -
commissioned 2000
RSS Persistence (209) - commissioned 2001
RSS Endeavour (210) - commissioned 2001
RSS Fearless (94) - commissioned 1996
RSS Brave (95) - commissioned 1996
RSS Courageous* (96) - commissioned 1996
RSS Gallant (97) - commissioned 1997
RSS Daring (9 -
commissioned 1997
RSS Dauntless (99) - commissioned 1997
RSS Resilience (82) - commissioned 1998
RSS Unity (83) - commissioned 1998
RSS Sovereignty (84) - commissioned 1998
RSS Justice (85) - commissioned 1998
RSS Freedom (86) - commissioned 1998
RSS Independence (87) - commissioned 1998
RSS Sea Wolf (P76)
RSS Sea Lion (P77)
RSS Sea Dragon (P7
RSS Sea Tiger (P79)
RSS Sea Hawk (P80)
RSS Sea Scorpion (P81)
RSS Victory (8 -
commissioned 1990
RSS Valour (89) - commissioned 1990
RSS Vigilance (90) - commissioned 1990
RSS Valiant (91) - commissioned 1991
RSS Vigour (92) - commissioned 1991
RSS Vengeance (93) - commissioned 1991
RSS Formidable (6 - launched
2004
RSS Intrepid (69) - launched 2004
RSS Steadfast (70) - launched 2005
RSS Tenacious
RSS Stalwart
RSS Supreme
RSS Challenger - commissioned 1997
RSS Conqueror - commissioned 1999
RSS Centurion - commissioned 1999
RSS Chieftain - commissioned 2001
Not to mention almost 50% of them has Harpoon missiles which can strike more then 90 km away..which "skims the surface of the sea"Edited by SMAPLionHeart 01 Apr `05, 4:26AM
-
-
-
Whether or not the tanks were second hand or even obsolete doesn't really matter.
Based on what former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew wrote in his memoirs, the main purpose for acquiring tanks was to deter Malaysia from trying to retake Singapore island after the Seperation.
At that point in time, relations were still extremely bad and many threats were made about retaking the island by Malaysian nationalists. These threats ended abruptly when Singapore first paraded the newly acquired tanks.
The reason was pure and simple, Malaysia at that time did not have tanks yet.
The fact that we are not part of Malaysia now, shows that the tanks served their purpose already. Who cares whether or not they were obsolete to begin with?
-
-
-
i noticed a trend...everytime idwar tries displaying his 'intellectual prowess' and his 'superior military knowledge', he only manages to start the topic... then his topic would elicit much sensible replies from us, then u wouldn't hear from him anymore for some time, then he would start a new topic again(which would again highlight his 'knowledge'), and the cycle goes on.
-
-
-
Originally posted by sword:i noticed a trend...everytime idwar tries displaying his 'intellectual prowess' and his 'superior military knowledge', he only manages to start the topic... then his topic would elicit much sensible replies from us, then u wouldn't hear from him anymore for some time, then he would start a new topic again(which would again highlight his 'knowledge'), and the cycle goes on.
thats why i say you people shouldn't fall into his trap . . .
what he is waiting for you guys to open your mouth and criticise the MY gov and the moment some flame war starts, he will be damnm happy.
so why give him the satishfaction of a flame war?
I have great respect for malaysians . . . and i don't want the reputaion of all the malaysians to be destroyed because of one idiot here.
I have seen constant flame wars in places like the WAFF and i am always trying my best to prevent it from happening here.
I have nothing against malaysians coming here. But if it degrades into vs threads, it is something that i really hate.
So to all singaporeans, ignore this prick and get on with our lives.
Everyone here agree?
-
-
-
Originally posted by sword:i noticed a trend...everytime idwar tries displaying his 'intellectual prowess' and his 'superior military knowledge', he only manages to start the topic... then his topic would elicit much sensible replies from us, then u wouldn't hear from him anymore for some time, then he would start a new topic again(which would again highlight his 'knowledge'), and the cycle goes on.
becos he is a MY pig spy.
-
-
-
Originally posted by sword:i noticed a trend...everytime idwar tries displaying his 'intellectual prowess' and his 'superior military knowledge', he only manages to start the topic... then his topic would elicit much sensible replies from us, then u wouldn't hear from him anymore for some time, then he would start a new topic again(which would again highlight his 'knowledge'), and the cycle goes on.
because he know nuts abt military stuff
-
-
-
Like everyone else, I am perpetually puzzled by SAF's continued lack of interest in the MBT area.
The AMX-13 is obsolete. Even in the mind of the most optimistic person, surely he must hold the same opinion.
MAF's Polish tank with the silly name remains a formidable force to be reckoned with.
Someone mentioned that these days it no longer takes a tank to kill a tank. While true, there's no reason why we shouldn't get some big mother of a tank going.
Why not? We can well afford it, after all.
Furthermore, our AMX-13 offers very poor crew protection. The armour is thin and even after all the add on armour, it'll still offer only weak protection. I'm sure most handheld anti-tank weapon will have no problem killing the AMX-13 and its crew. And tank crews, after all, are more precious than tanks.
In the 80's when we acquired the huge M-60 series of engineer vehicles, I thought we were going to get the M-60 MBT as well. But good thing we didn't. At least this means we can now go out and buy something fancy.Edited by tvdog 01 Apr `05, 2:53PM
-
-
-
Originally posted by Dr Who:0.5 cal bullet can kill AMX-13 ? ( not to mention anti tank weapons)
No, it was rumoured that the SM1 armour was actually upgraded against up to certain medium calibre cannon.
What Tvdog was refering I believe was RPG type weapons.
For a light tank, AMX-13s was very popular when we got it, in fact it was one of the best light tank in the world.
As for why a light tank?
Simply becos of the tropical forest that it suppose to operate, even now, practically all SEA and South America nations still have light tanks in their inventory.
It was proven both in WW2 and Vietnam war that light and small AFVs is more tactically mobile than a heavy MBTs.
That is why Mindef is working on another light tank to replace the SM1.
Becos for a mechanised force without sufficient tactical mobility is not really mechanised force!!!Edited by gary1910 01 Apr `05, 4:25PM
-
-
-
Well,to be honest,its not the size of the tank that matters these days.I mean,its not like during WW2 or wat where by the mere sight of an approaching tank leaves the troops wetting their pants.These days the troops are thought to fight a thinking battle,and with the aid of technology of anti-tank weapons like our new MATADOR,SPIKE etc..a normal infantry man can take out a tank.Even if the infantry man does not take out the tank himself,he can call for airstrike via A-10s or AH-64 gunships etc.Besides,look at the Americans in the gulf,their almighty M1A2 tanks cannot protect them from the narrow streets where they can be shot at freely by RPGs etc.So it really defeats the purpose.
Though I'm not reccommending that SAF follow the style of the US and get something like the Stryker,but I would say that it would be most advisable if we have something like that.And at the sametime have Light Tanks and Heavy Tanks.
-
-
-
Why is being big not important? If the tank is small like the AMX-13 you can't even have enough armour to protect the tank against the lowly RPG.
And how come everyone say that SE Asia terrain and conditions is not suitable for full-sized MBT.
Heavy MBT's have fought in soft snow and sand. No terrain is too soft for tanks - that's why tanks were invented in the first place.
So a tank can't go into the jungle. But Singapore, for example, is probably less than 50% jungle.
-
-
-
Originally posted by tvdog:Why is being big not important? If the tank is small like the AMX-13 you can't even have enough armour to protect the tank against the lowly RPG.
And how come everyone say that SE Asia terrain and conditions is not suitable for full-sized MBT.
Heavy MBT's have fought in soft snow and sand. No terrain is too soft for tanks - that's why tanks were invented in the first place.
So a tank can't go into the jungle. But Singapore, for example, is probably less than 50% jungle.Well, if your main armoured divisions are used as homeland security,then I think the war has been lost.Armour is the spearhead of the advance, not the brick wall standing between your enemy and your citizens.Attrition war is something we cannot hold out on.
-
