IFV v APC

[eckherl]

After rereading Simon 9s post#151 in response to chinos post regarding Mike
Sparks as well as other contributors including Col Hackworth also a hero of mine who i felt had the nads to speak up for what he felt was most effective both in terms of weaponry and tactics.

Have i misudged whats really going on here /That in effect this is really an argument about wheeled vs tracked vehicles and the trend for the future of US weaponry> will the light/med armor be tracked or wheeled which is why
this Mike is so reviled as is these other guys among them milt sparks ,Carlton meyer and apparently no less a personage than Col David Hackworth Who aparently advocates tracked vs wheeled lighty armor?

This is a site diametricaly opposed to tracked light armor instead believing
wheeled vehicles superior am I on the right TRACK here?Which is why in spite of my initaial attempst to have a friendly discussion was called Mike?I get it!

By the way i am indeed a tracked vehicle diehard for the following reasons.
Mobility and survivability.I wont get stuck and immobile and easy target for the enemy.If my wheels on a wheeled vehicle are shot to pieces as they will be by even LMGs. With a tracked vehicle,particularly the modernizd tracks of the M113 solid rubber tarcks with interior stel cables which are as close to permenent as is posible and very resistant to kinetic energy weapons as well as explosives which wheeled vehicles arent no matter how sophisticated you clsim they are against damage the still cannot afford the same traction mobility

s much s i know this forum despis the m113 i will repeat wht the israelis have done with thier m113s while we and to a lesser extent the Canadians have ignored at the peril of our troops.

All over the internet just google a site for yourself if you must have referencs
As your aware the israelis encounter a very similar situation to own nevery day as we do in irag/Iran.So as a result
IMI developed a nw passive hybrd armor designd to counter common iEDs and the sophisticated EFPs allegedly supplied by Iran.The Hybryd pasive armor is supllied in modular form for add on M113 armor w/replaceble modules if damaged.The passive armor dssipats cemicl energy weapon and kinetic energ weapons such as gnfie and efps incliding multiple hits providing 45-60mm equivalent homogenous rolled armour plate.

At a cost of $100,000 including automotive upgrades the armor i in kit form and can be applied in the field in a few days.IMI is calling thir upgraded M113 theUrban fighter.Retaining the cross country mobility tracked vehicles are known for as well as deep water fording capability in an APC/IFV w/superior ant-ied/efp/RPG protecton s well as MRAP (Mine resistant ambush protection)
in a 60mph mobile platform unlike a wheeled platform offroad.And with 360degree visibility for the commander and crewman/gunner.The US and canadian Military are slowly relearning old lesons.

I think this should quiet most of the vociferous criticism of the M113 s an effective upgradable lethal /survivable vehicle for far less $$ tha an armored humvee.I fail to understand the hostility towards the weapons system.it isnt often the Israrelis waste $$ on junk and since the palestinian insurgency virtually mimicks that of iraq xcept on intensity.

So please answer me in concrete terms why the m113 is such an inferor vehicle for its size an d cost and what IS the answer at these prices or similar.
i know a reply will be $$ isnt important live s are but Im afraid there isnt enough $$ or armor to ensure zip csualties or prove me right that this site is simply an anti tracked vehicle site when it comes to IFVs /APCs light armor as I know suspect. I wasa asked for concrete answres ive given them now return the favor on the economy and suitability of the stryker and Humvee
paticularly the survivability of the humvee and the moblity/ amhib of the stryker.

Also Ive ben infomd that all the negativs ive encountered on the net are somehow almost completely under the control of This Mike and retired group of Mil officers etc.

It would cost a heck of alot more that $100,000.00 to upgrade the M113A3 to a standard level of current IFVs and newer APCs. I have my doubts about the armor level of protection found on IDF M113s like the Zelda 2 series, they claim that it can take a hit from a AT4 Spigot or AT5 Spanderel anti tank missile, to me that is a tall order because of reasons that I posted earlier. Also you have to keep in mind that the IDF is using basically tank hulls for troop haulers now with even a newer designed one called the Namer. I am not biased against the M113 series vehicles, again I will state that they are useful in secondary roles and our military feels the same way, it is not a conspiracy to field the Stykers like some of the Yahoos in our country may think.

 

[Chino]

Agreed - AMX - 13 is getting up there in age and with the Oscilating turret you are minimized on what you could accomplish, France also made this model with a 90mm gun though. I have heard this before that you guys have Centurions warehoused but I did not realize that it was that many, they would not happen to be for your IDF friends would they.

More like, they are from Israel, not for Israel.

Not many people has seen them, not even a picture of them. And those that are crewmen are probably vouched to keep mum about them.

SAF neither denies nor admit to their existence. They are supposed to be in our arsenal since the mid 70s when no one else in the region had MBTs.

One uncle who was in Armour in the 70s when I was a kid said that he's a TC of one of these MBTs. His older brother confirms this.

Said uncle referred to them as Centurions and not "Tempest" as they are supposed to be called in SAF.

He said that they did some training in Israel. One of the training he described was his whole crew was made to sit in a dis-used tank. Another tank then fired a dummy round against their tank. This was to let them experience the impact of a tank round. He said they were all quite concussed and some threw up when they exited the target tank.

You're from Armor, so is this training scenario a plausible story?

...

The AMX-13 also had a 105mm model used by the Austrians, I think.

However, a powerful, high velocity and accurate 75mm gun is very useful to have.

Right now you've got 25mm on IFV and the next up is 120mm. In most western armies there isn't much direct fire weapons of a calibre in between these 2.

DO you see a need for such a calibre or you feel things are pretty covered by the 25mm and the 120mm.

 

[Waylander]

I find it hard to believe that in a conscript army one can hide 100 centurions in a country of the size of Singapore.
One needs a lot more than just flying to Israel from time to time to remain an operational tank force.
Are simulators involved? Does simulators for Centurions even exist?

But if you have secure sources for this it is ok.

As for your criticism of Kato.
He brought up Sparky because there is a very high possibility that you stumble over one of his articles when one searchs the net about this topic.
Especially when it comes to criticism of the current vehicles used in Iraq by the US.

 

[Chino]

Also you have to keep in mind that the IDF is using basically tank hulls for troop haulers now with even a newer designed one called the Namer.

I think that with so much experience in armour, they have paid dearly to learn some lessons about armour protection - you can never have enough.

Jordan, one of the most capable but smallest of Israel's foes, have also turned their Centurions into APCs like IDF's Nakpadon.

The Jordanian version is called Temsah. However the Jordanians were quite clever to turn the chassis around front to back so that the formerly rear-mounted engine is now in front. This allows a rear exit door to be built.

(In the IDF Nakpadon the troops exit through a hatch on top due to the engine being in the rear.)

I am not biased against the M113 series vehicles, again I will state that they are useful in secondary roles and our military feels the same way, it is not a conspiracy to field the Stykers like some of the Yahoos in our country may think.

The employment of wheeled APC/IFV is definitely useful for urban combat.

But I wouldn't let the success or failure of one vehicle model - the Stryker - determine the entire future of wheel armour.

 

[Chino]

I find it hard to believe that in a conscript army one can hide 100 centurions in a country of the size of Singapore.
One needs a lot more than just flying to Israel from time to time to remain an operational tank force.
Are simulators involved? Does simulators for Centurions even exist?

But if you have secure sources for this it is ok.

As for your criticism of Kato.
He brought up Sparky because there is a very high possibility that you stumble over one of his articles when one searchs the net about this topic.
Especially when it comes to criticism of the current vehicles used in Iraq by the US.

I have with me 2 issues of Jane's Tank Recognition Guide, the 2nd and 4th (2006) editions. Both issues list Singapore as a Centurion operator - "based in Taiwan for training".

 

[Waylander]

Thanks for the book reference.

As for the criticism.
I just wanted to show how one can easily think of Sparky during these discussions...

 

[swerve]

I find it hard to believe that in a conscript army one can hide 100 centurions in a country of the size of Singapore.
One needs a lot more than just flying to Israel from time to time to remain an operational tank force.
Are simulators involved? Does simulators for Centurions even exist?

But if you have secure sources for this it is ok.
...

Are any of the Centurions in Singapore? I know only the standard rumours, but they suggest that the Centurions were bought mainly for training & development of tactics, & kept outside Singapore, at foreign training grounds. If correct, that implies that the Leopard 2s will be Singapores first fully operational MBTs.

 

[swerve]

...

The AMX-13 also had a 105mm model used by the Austrians, I think. ....

That's an Austrian designed & built vehicle called the Kuerassier, though IIRC it used the AMX-13 turret. Definitely the same style of turret - see here -

http://www.bmlv.gv.at/download_archiv/photos/panzer/images/kuerassier_6.jpg

 

[Chino]

Are any of the Centurions in Singapore? I know only the standard rumours, but they suggest that the Centurions were bought mainly for training & development of tactics, & kept outside Singapore, at foreign training grounds. If correct, that implies that the Leopard 2s will be Singapores first fully operational MBTs.

Those people who know about the Centurions aren't talking and those who don't aren't supposed to try and find out.

Media cannot write about defence matters without censorship and jail sentences are handed out for much lesser offences.

So we don't actually have to hide the tank, we just suppress the information.

IF we have do have 100 Centurions as rumoured, it is not inconceivable that for example, half are used for training overseas, and the other half preserved as war stocks somewhere in Singapore. Hiding 100 tanks underground, for example, is a piece of cake even for a country our size.

So...

If SAF Centurion MBTs exists, then the policy of denial in the 70s was so that we don't spark an arms race in the region. We already had hundreds more light tanks and APCs back compared to the few dozens owned by Indonesia and Malaysia combined. And publicly announcing the further arrival of Centurion MBTs would be really bad manners.

If the SAF Centurions never existed and it was all a hoax, then this deception is a clever one and must've worked to our advantage also.

 

[kato]

That's an Austrian designed & built vehicle called the Kuerassier, though IIRC it used the AMX-13 turret. Definitely the same style of turret - see here -

Chassis is a modified Saurer IFV, turret is a standard FL-10.

 

[Waylander]

IMHO the major problem with getting anything bigger into the Puma was the A400M requirement.
It is not about weight but about size. The unmanned turret is already very cramped and for a 35mm you may had to make it bigger which would interfere with the internal loading volume of the A400M.

Without the A400M requirement one would have seen an even bigger beast for which the Marder 2 mockups give good hints.

 

[kato]

Without the A400M requirement one would have seen an even bigger beast for which the Marder 2 mockups give good hints.

Nah, money was the decisive factor. The MK30/2, even with the added ABM Setter, is far more of a mature product (already built into Pizarro, Ulan and other IFV series), and also far cheaper, than the Rh503 planned on the Marder 2.

 

[eckherl]

IMHO the major problem with getting anything bigger into the Puma was the A400M requirement.
It is not about weight but about size. The unmanned turret is already very cramped and for a 35mm you may had to make it bigger which would interfere with the internal loading volume of the A400M.

Without the A400M requirement one would have seen an even bigger beast for which the Marder 2 mockups give good hints.

It will be interesting on how the vehicle commanders take to observing the battlefield while constantly being under armor/buttoned up.

 

[Waylander]

@Eckherl
I think I described the improved situational awareness of the Puma in the Puma-Thread (TIs, periscopes, active squad in the back,...).

But I am also looking forward to the first experiences out of the units.

It is going to be a very different way of commanding than what they are used to from the Marder.

@Kato
They envisioned the Marder 2 to be an extremely big beast. With the whole IFV being that big I really doubt they would have used a 30mm in it even if it would have been cheaper.

 

[eckherl]

@Eckherl
I think I described the improved situational awareness of the Puma in the Puma-Thread (TIs, periscopes, active squad in the back,...).

But I am also looking forward to the first experiences out of the units.

It is going to be a very different way of commanding than what they are used to from the Marder.

@Kato
They envisioned the Marder 2 to be an extremely big beast. With the whole IFV being that big I really doubt they would have used a 30mm in it even if it would have been cheaper.

Yes - you did explain this, it will just be interesting to see the viewpoint of the crews on it. Germany has raised the bar level on future IFVs and MBTs for that matter by introducing a vehicle with a unmanned turret and I would think that even though the turret seems cramped that they would be able to perform a upgrade in gun size if needed.

 

[gary1910]

They are rumored to be kept in Taiwan.

Not true, only a small number were there for training.

Just because they were not seen publicly and on training ground in SG, most people thought that there were none in SG.

Btw, we did develop a 75mm APFSDS for our AMX-13 which should give it a respectable anti tank capability, estimated ( by tanknet members)to have a penetration power about 310mm RHA @ 0-deg @ 1km, which should be able to handle older tank like T-55 , M48 etc.

 

[eckherl]

Not true, only a small number were there for training.

Just because they were not seen publicly and on training ground in SG, most people thought that there were none in SG.

Btw, we did develop a 75mm APFSDS for our AMX-13 which should give it a respectable anti tank capability, estimated ( by tanknet members)to have a penetration power about 310mm RHA @ 0-deg @ 1km, which should be able to handle older tank like T-55 , M48 etc.

Does anyone really know where they are located or were they given back to the IDF. That is a respectable penetration level for that size of projectile.

 

[gary1910]

Does anyone really know where they are located or were they given back to the IDF. That is a respectable penetration level for that size of projectile.

I knew where they were located but I heard rumours that a lot has changed.

And since it is still classified and also based on rumours, I will not say much about it.

As for the penetration level , there is other who have developed 76mm APFSDS rd that have similar penetration level , so it is very conceivable.

As for 90mm gun, I believe ST Engg did tested a 90mm version of AMX-13SM1, but SAF did not adopt it.

 

[eckherl]

I knew where they were located but I heard rumours that a lot has changed.

And since it is still classified and also based on rumours, I will not say much about it.

As for the penetration level , there is other who have developed 76mm APFSDS rd that have similar penetration level , so it is very conceivable.

As for 90mm gun, I believe ST Engg did tested a 90mm version of AMX-13SM1, but SAF did not adopt it.

Top penetration level that I heard was around 185mm @ 0 degrees from same distance with the POT - 51P round. Do you have a designation for the round that you mentioned, I would be most interested in doing some research on it.

 

[gf0012-aust]

They are rumored to be kept in Taiwan.

No, they're local. Agra might be able to provide some comment on guestimates, but I was under the impression that they had low triple figures.

As an aside, I had a meeting with some people from DSTA last year (Singapores equiv of DARPA) and they referred to them as Tempests - not Centurions. Either way, they are not bog std Centurions ......