Malaysian Army/Land forces discussions

[qwerty223]

What makes you think tanks cannot be used in jungle terrain? You might need a map lesson yourself. There is a 60km front on the east and a 40km front on the west conducive to tank movement. Even Betong provides a reasonable avenue of advance.



Don't accuse me of tergiversating just because you took longer to understand than others. I already said, tanks are not limited to flat plains or deserts.



Close? How? In terms of artillery firepower Thailand trumps Malaysia again. Asset count wise they are superior in virtually every asset type. But in my opinion, the greatest advantage the Thai armed forces have, is combat experience.

1. LOL!!! go read some history, then you know how wide is 60km. Then, go see how ppl work in a construction site, then figure how why juggle is not impossible but tanker usually dont choose them.

2.Look Back what you said before you accuse me. 7:1/10:1 is what you emphasized. Pls explain how would it be these number is later, as you claim, infantry is accompanying their tanks.

3.This is not a pc game dude. I had nothing so said about the last one... nfloorl:

I guess no point for me to cont here, since i had explained everything and you are repeating questions.VS topic is just endless...

 

[Transient]

2.Look Back what you said before you accuse me. 7:1/10:1 is what you emphasized. Pls explain how would it be these number is later, as you claim, infantry is accompanying their tanks.

Yes, the ratio was what I emphasized. But David saw the essence of what I was trying to say immediately - that the ratio mattered across the numbers of engagements. What I did not mean was that ratio of tanks in each engagement, which was what you were thinking, and which could only have happened in a mass tank vs tank engagement. As I said, if you are slow, don't accuse me of tergiversating.

 

[Pro'forma]

Sorry, but I don't get what you want to say.
Could you please elaborate it.

Disaster is not on any as wanted to say; though direct attack could use
nothing these are already carrying.
I thought Malaysia is out of fighting proclivity; out of the jungle and
print-on-demand to unilateral freedom as europe.

 

[Waylander]

Ok, is it just me or is this really hard to understand? :unknown

 

[kato]

Ok, is it just me or is this really hard to understand? :unknown

The latter. And it's not a Systran (Babelfish) translation, if anyone wonders.

 

[Pro'forma]

Ok, is it just me or is this really hard to understand? :unknown

The success of allied air attacks directly against tanks is debatable.

Above is the question, I'm asking.
You are talking success of allied attacks to tanks. Tanks moving heavily,
are these under approach as long as have moved anether location ?
Or tanks cannot move under hill, either find or get to the nearby hill.

I was asking, making another type of question, and to that written,
Malaysia is a country as print-on-demand, old country and new face. Old
camera, new print.
This is really hard to understand, Malaysia is too far-away from Europe.

 

[Waylander]

Okay, I give up... :unknown

 

[Pro'forma]

The latter. And it's not a Systran (Babelfish) translation, if anyone wonders.

It's not a Systran translation, I or you are wondering.
One making probe into to.

 

[Chino]

It's not a Systran translation, I or you are wondering.
One making probe into to.

Yoda, you is that?

 

[Pro'forma]

Yoda, you is that?

No Yoda, don't mix up with watchwords. Though motto is good point.

 

[kato]

I've asked some people who speak Bahasa Melayu, and they all say... "obviously in cipher".

 

[Pro'forma]

I've asked some people who speak Bahasa Melayu, and they all say... "obviously in cipher".

At least clandestine, and they go-on ?

 

[Awang se]

I'm sorry if my statement cause such a furor. i based my statement on several info that i gather.

The muzzle speed of the 125mm 2A46M is higher compare to the 105mm guns of the M60 and M48. the larger calibre also means it can fire a larger and heavier APFSDS. so in a direct sense, it can penetrate the armor of the M60 at a longer range, plus, the improve SAGEM fire control system. and presumably the proper tank rounds (not old or obsolete like the Iraqi T-72 carry).

PT-91 are not Iraqi T-72. the protection have been improved by the installation of ERAWA tiles. of course, were not facing an Abrams, Leos Or Challengers in the RTA inventories, so the field are pretty level here. i believe the M60 are equal in terms of armor to the T-72 and from the pictures i see, RTA did not employ any extra protection, like ERA for example.

i'm also curious about the logistical capability of the Thai Military. how well can they sustain their equipments operational level at one time. it's useless to have 300 tanks when you only have a maintainance capability for only 100.

of course, this is my view. any other suggestion on the contrary is welcome. and please don't sparred so aggresively, i feel kind of guilty you know.

 

[eckherl]

I'm sorry if my statement cause such a furor. i based my statement on several info that i gather.

The muzzle speed of the 125mm 2A46M is higher compare to the 105mm guns of the M60 and M48. the larger calibre also means it can fire a larger and heavier APFSDS. so in a direct sense, it can penetrate the armor of the M60 at a longer range, plus, the improve SAGEM fire control system. and presumably the proper tank rounds (not old or obsolete like the Iraqi T-72 carry).

PT-91 are not Iraqi T-72. the protection have been improved by the installation of ERAWA tiles. of course, were not facing an Abrams, Leos Or Challengers in the RTA inventories, so the field are pretty level here. i believe the M60 are equal in terms of armor to the T-72 and from the pictures i see, RTA did not employ any extra protection, like ERA for example.

i'm also curious about the logistical capability of the Thai Military. how well can they sustain their equipments operational level at one time. it's useless to have 300 tanks when you only have a maintainance capability for only 100.

of course, this is my view. any other suggestion on the contrary is welcome. and please don't sparred so aggresively, i feel kind of guilty you know.

Yes - the PT-91 is a better tank overall with the exception of the TTS sight on the the M-60A3, with the engagement ranges most likely being around 1200 - 1400 meters it is possible that the M60A3 or M48A5 to be able to effectively engage and destroy the PT-91 at the frontal arc. there is a good possibility that Thailand does have in their inventory the M900 sabot round which was part of the package deal when they purchased Stringray tanks from the U.S which is the most modern tank fielded by them. The armor protection level on all three of the Thailand tanks mentioned is really sub par by todays standard. Thailand does have a good logistical system in place for their ground forces that they have maintained at a good readiness level. It is my opinion that the tiles on the PT-91 are geared more towards shaped charged warheads and will offer very little protection over modern KE penetrators from 105mm to 120mm, research has shown this.

 

[paskal]

Paskal, Paskal - what can I say?

Don't you know the difference between WW1 & WW2?
And it's clear you have no notion of what actually happened in WW2. During Operation Barbarossa (the German invasion of the USSR), the Germans discovered that the USSR had better tanks than anything Germany had (not the other way round), chief among them the KV-1 & the T-34. German victories were because of superior German tactics, & despite superior Soviet tanks, not because of superior German tanks. The T-34 was not developed in response to the German invasion, but was already in service in large numbers before the invasion. Germany developed the Tiger & Panther tanks in response to encountering superior Soviet tanks, not the other way round. Go and do a bit of reading. Look up what tanks Germany actually had in 1941, & when the Tiger & Panther were introduced.

No disrespect.....
But i remember the germans were advancing rapidly city to city.....
They lost against the USSR in the winter season when the USSR used a lot of tricks to crush the germans army. They lost lots of soldiers in winter because of inexperience in that kind of warefare.
Lastly the USSR took back 1 by 1 city that the germans had tooken earlier before the winter season.They progressed with the superiour T-34 that they have that time.
The biggest reason the german lost in USSR territory is because of the winter season.

 

[paskal]

Do some research Paskal - just out of interest, what school did you go to that taught you tank tactics.

Ah sorry Waylander - I found out too late that you asked the same question about paskals armor teachings.

Yup sorry i did say some wrong things before....
Im currently studying in RMC[royal military college of malaysia]
Every saturday they will teach this kind of tactics.

 

[swerve]

No disrespect.....
But i remember the germans were advancing rapidly city to city.....
They lost against the USSR in the winter season when the USSR used a lot of tricks to crush the germans army. They lost lots of soldiers in winter because of inexperience in that kind of warefare.
Lastly the USSR took back 1 by 1 city that the germans had tooken earlier before the winter season.They progressed with the superiour T-34 that they have that time.
The biggest reason the german lost in USSR territory is because of the winter season.

If I was one of your teachers at the Royal Military College I'd be giving you very low marks right now. You need - desperately need - to read more, a lot more. And serious historical analyses, not superficial popularised accounts.

Yes, the Germans were inadequately prepared for the Russian winter (note that they did prepare for it, stockpiling winter clothing, etc, but not well enough). But it was not the biggest reason they lost. Their poor preparation cost them in the winter of 1941-42, but there were three more winters before they were defeated, & for the whole of two of them, they were fighting deep inside the USSR. By the time the winter of 1942-43 arrived, the Germans had improved their preparedness for the conditions.

They lost because they were outgunned & outnumbered, & this is as true of the Eastern Front as in the west & the Mediterranean. Except perhaps for a brief period in late 1941 when Soviet losses had been so immense that their original 5 or 6 to 1 numerical advantage in tanks, & superiority in numbers of men, had been lost, the Red Army always had more tanks, more guns - more everything - than the Germans.

Also, it was not a case of "Germans advance in summer, Russians counter-attack in winter". Go & read up. The Germans also attacked in winter, & the Russians in summer.

BTW, as I've told you already, the T-34 was in service from the start of the war (though most Soviet tanks in 1941 were older models), it was not introduced later. The Germans were using captured T-34s in the summer of 1941. Also, it did not remain superior. The Pzkw IV was upgunned & uparmoured to be able to fight it on equal terms (the German 75mm KwK 40 L/48 gun fitted to late model Pzkw IV outmatched the 76.2mm gun of the T-34), & then the Germans built the Tiger & Panther. When the Panther was introduced, it was clearly superior to the T-34.

 

[kickaflow]

first i said it's the combat experience, be straight, malaysia have money to purchase their assets in a last decade or two because of the country economy, get their hands on some technology, so the malay think they all that...now with your regiment of the PT-91M? because malaysia is not next to the aggressive nations (? thai?, singapore? malayisa seems so powerful?) doesn't mean you're all that, you still survive today, face the truth. talkin about war, has malaysia ever go to war? mmm communist branches, UN peace keeping, IF thailand was communist then, malaysia would be gone ages ago...

 

[qwerty223]

Yes - the PT-91 is a better tank overall with the exception of the TTS sight on the the M-60A3, with the engagement ranges most likely being around 1200 - 1400 meters it is possible that the M60A3 or M48A5 to be able to effectively engage and destroy the PT-91 at the frontal arc. there is a good possibility that Thailand does have in their inventory the M900 sabot round which was part of the package deal when they purchased Stringray tanks from the U.S which is the most modern tank fielded by them. The armor protection level on all three of the Thailand tanks mentioned is really sub par by todays standard. Thailand does have a good logistical system in place for their ground forces that they have maintained at a good readiness level. It is my opinion that the tiles on the PT-91 are geared more towards shaped charged warheads and will offer very little protection over modern KE penetrators from 105mm to 120mm, research has shown this.

Whats so special about the TTS sight on the M60A3?

 

[eckherl]

Whats so special about the TTS sight on the M60A3?

It is a better thermal sighting system than what is found on the PT-91M, actually it is better than what is found on the older M1 series TI sights. But with that comes a price in the size of the sighting system, its quite large. The picture quality is excellant in either white hot or black hot.