Malaysian Army/Land forces discussions

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[weasel1962]

Article:

Deleted

 

[qwerty223]

Well, as i mention earlier, MA air wing is in its growing age. The 1st ever robust air wing is now going to the 3rd stage before having all its strength.

pril 09, 2008 18:51 PM

Army To Integrate Weapons On Board Agusta Choppers

By Umi Hani Sharani

KUALA LUMPUR, April 9 (Bernama) - For the first time in history, the country will have dedicated armed light observation helicopters in the form of the Malaysian Army's fleet of Agusta-Westland A109H aircraft.

In confirming this however, Chief of Army Tan Sri General Muhammad Ismail Jamaluddin told Bernama that their status would remain as light observation helicopters, and not as attack choppers.

"Weapons will be fixed on the Augusta for defence purposes but it will not be an attack helicopter," he said when met at the recent event of 'Tentera Darat Bersama Media' at the Syed Sirajuddin Army Camp in Gemas.

Muhammad Ismail, however, declined to elaborate which party would receive the deal to furnish the rockets and integrate the weapons system on board the Agusta and when the programme would be completed.

According to defence industry sources, the deal initially worth about RM44 million to add on weapons on board the Agusta helicopters, is expected to involve local firms -- NAR Aviation Sdn Bhd for weapons integration while SME Ordnance Sdn Bhd will manufacture the rockets via transfer of technology from FZ Belgium.

"It is an open secret that the 11 Agusta helicopters bought by the Army will be armed.

"The choppers are expected to be furnished with FN Herstal heavy machine guns and 2.75 inch FZ Belgium rockets that have already been tested and deemed qualified on the Agusta," an industry insider told Bernama recently.

SME Ordinance has previously signed a memorandum of understanding with FZ Belgium for technology transfer and for the promotion and marketing of the rockets.

Eventually, he said, the Agusta helicopters used by the Army's Air Corps for reconnaissance, transport and search and rescue missions, will have a secondary purpose in providing limited form of fire and self-defence from ground forces when entering hostile territories.

As for the general purpose machine gun to be mounted inside the cabin, he said the Army had decided to use the current FN Herstal 7.62 mm GPMG in service for budget purposes.

-- BERNAMA

 

[weasel1962]

Article:

Deleted

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[DavidDCM]

I suppose the 120mm they are talking about is the Ruag Bighorn? They trialed it some years ago.

I'd like to know what versions of the Adnan they purchase.

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[qwerty223]

Malaysia to export its 1st Hovercraft

Yesterday's DSA 08 highlight, not sure if Hovercraft is categorize as an army asset. Malaysia to export its 1st Hovercraft. The vehicle is power by Proton engines. Although it is still in the test and on trial stage, but already secured 3 unit order from the Philippines.

April 22, 2008 14:55 PM

Malaysia's Flying Hovercraft Woos The Crowd At DSA 2008

KUALA LUMPUR, April 22 (Bernama) -- Malaysia's first locally-manufactured "Flying Hovercraft" was a crowd puller at the 11th Defence Services Asia 2008 (DSA 2008) Exhibition.

The hovercraft fitted with Proton engines is produced by GIG Technology Holdings Sdn Bhd at its plant in Kampung Baru Subang, Shah Alam.

GIG Technology executive director Megat D' Shahriman said the idea to build the hovercraft was hatched in April last year.

"Since the government had never purchased any hovercraft then, we thought it was the best time to produce one and it turned out that Malaysia became the first Asian country to manufacture the vehicle.

However, the flying hovercraft had not been officially launched because it was still at its test and on trial stage.

"But we are looking forward to launch it soon, maybe next year," Megat told Bernama at the exhibition.

He said the hovercraft could fly 2 metres above sea level and move at a speed of about 45 knots (60-70km per hour) on water and during flying mode the vehicle's speed is 75 knots (80-90km an hour).

Megat said the company's first client, the Philippines, bought three units.

"We will be looking at Jakarta to market our hovercraft soon, probably by year-end," he added.

Middle East and Africa will be next in the company's marketing strategy.

Participating in the DSA 2008 and Langkawi International and Maritime Aerospace exhibition last year are part of its bigger marketing plan.

Megat said the hovercraft could be used in search and rescue operations, sea inspection routines, waterway patrol, anti-piracy activities and high-speed infiltration into hostiles areas.

-- BERNAMA

 

[renjer]

Re: 120mm mortar carrier

There was a news report awhile back in Janes I think. It was from FNSS and reported about an order for 12 mortar carriers to be built in Turkey. In that report it was the stardard ACV rather than the stretched version. I wonder if that 12 from FNSS and the 8 from Deftech are two separate orders?

 

[qwerty223]

There was a news report awhile back in Janes I think. It was from FNSS and reported about an order for 12 mortar carriers to be built in Turkey. In that report it was the stardard ACV rather than the stretched version. I wonder if that 12 from FNSS and the 8 from Deftech are two separate orders?

Some quick update for the DSA 2008. MA signed contract for:
1. 48 ACV-300
2. 85 URO VAMTAC: 25 mount the IGLA, 24 mount the METIS M, 24 mount AGL 40mm grenade launcher, 12 mount 12.7mm machine gun.

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[Pro'forma]

The expected change of equipment usage, structural changes are going
within days accomplishment.

The regiment which is with the latest and newest equipment budget; seldom realize, early, where to start in accordance to reorg supporting regiment
budget.

There is always chance to new regiment.

 

[qwerty223]

Some quick updates from the DSA 08. MA signed contract for:
3. 8 units of French made TDA 120mm 2R2M rifled mortar to be fitted on ACV-S 300. The cannon worth RM55.97million, while the ACV-S 300 worth RM52.56million. To be delivered within 20months or by 31/12/09

4. Batch 2 for ASTROS II were ordered in 7/8/07, 18 units. These are ASTROS II gen 3 systems. To be delivered within 2 years. AVIBRAS may export FOG-MPM missile or ASTROS-TM to MA.


********
Some personal comment on the 85 units of URO VAMTAC. A Chinese firm Dongfeng also came closed to sign a co-develop/ local agent protocol with DEFTECH, to promote their licensed Humvee clone, code name E-Q2050. However it happened that the Spanish firm URO with their local partner Master defence Link defeated their Chinese counterpart. The same case as the Norinco lost the 125mm ammunition contract to the Pretis of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It seems that Chinese products are still having a hard time to gain trust in the Malaysia market.

 

[Mr Ignorant]

THe purchase of T72 type tanks like the Twardy was a stupid decision. A waste of money and a white elephant. I can't see the MAF spearheading an armoured assault a la Blitzkrieg.

Otherwise; what the MAF should have done was purchase several hundred Hueys and create an effective Air Assault in a Rapid Reaction Force type scale. Deploy quickly and less emphasis on conventional means to destroy any invasive force.

But the Tanks !!??? On top of that T72 types??? Man these tractors would be knocked out by Missiles; Anti Armour RPGs or even by other Tanks before getting a chance to deploy.

But

If these tanks are used in a COIN mode; I can see the relevance but only minimal.

Should have bought Leo 2s or Abrams.

 

[DavidDCM]

What again was the reason why the PT would be knocked out by all kinds of things whereas the Leo 2 or Abrams wouldn't?

 

[Mr Ignorant]

I wouldn't give that much credit to the T72 Twardy compared to the Leo 2 or the Abrams.

 

[Chino]

THe purchase of T72 type tanks like the Twardy was a stupid decision. A waste of money and a white elephant. I can't see the MAF spearheading an armoured assault a la Blitzkrieg.

Otherwise; what the MAF should have done was purchase several hundred Hueys and create an effective Air Assault in a Rapid Reaction Force type scale. Deploy quickly and less emphasis on conventional means to destroy any invasive force.

But the Tanks !!??? On top of that T72 types??? Man these tractors would be knocked out by Missiles; Anti Armour RPGs or even by other Tanks before getting a chance to deploy.

But

If these tanks are used in a COIN mode; I can see the relevance but only minimal.

Should have bought Leo 2s or Abrams.

You raised 2 points:

- The Twardy is a stupid choice for a Malaysian MBT.
- Malaysia does not need an MBT.

If, as you say: MAF don't really need a MBT in the first place, then isn't a affordable choice like the Twardy a great solution?

Besides, Leos or Abrams can also be knocked out. Even Merkavas.

 

[Mr Ignorant]

The effect is psychological more than anything. A Merkava, an Abrams or even a Leo 2 has that much more presence and assurance than a lightweight Polish Up engined (coz that's what they did) T72.

The T72 is not without it's virtue. In those great land battles the Russians envisaged and indeed experienced; The T72 was designed purely for speed and to be massed in numbers.

In your honest opinion; do you actually think 48 T72s will make that much of a difference? I thought so. No need to reply.

What the MAF should have done, was read a book on Tank warfare. They would have realised that the Defence Ministry boys were obviously spunking themselves silly over a Tank that has no or even almost nil relevance on Malaysian geography.

Indeed the f**kers weight 40 - 42 tons. That's still a lot of weight. WHy not just buy something bigger and better??? WHere was the logic on buying a tank design specifically meant to be deployed in numbers??? And I don't mean 48 T72s, I mean at least a block of 500.

Or why not buy Apache Gunships instead?? Or more Arty??? Why buy an irrelevance??? Obviously the creature would suit the Indian Army and Russian groundforces, but for Malaysia???

Shit, i still think they should have bought a few hundred hueys.

And do I think the T72 is an affordable solution??? If i based everything on costs, I would have armed the MAF with just AK47s or even better WW2 Stenguns.

I suspect the Defence Ministry is just experimenting. But what a waste of Taxpayers money to be running experiments.

It would have been cheaper for them to visit the library.

Hell, even the Polish are phasing these tanks out. You can call it a Twardy; a bardy or even My PArty; but it's still a T72.

Let's look at what WIKI has to say;

PT-91M Pendekar
(M for Malaysia) — production export variant for Malaysia with SAGEM Savan-15[1] fire control system, 1,000-hp S-1000R engine (variant with new, hydropneumatic transmission) bringing its top speed to 70 km/h, and a new communications system. Weapons have been changed to a Konstrukta 2A46MS 125mm gun, a 7.62mm FN MAG coaxial machine gun and a 12.7mm FN Browning M2 HB AA machine gun. This variant is also equipped with Sagem VIGY 15 gyro-stabilised panoramic sight optronics, a Sigma 30 laser gyro navigation system, a PCO SSP-1 Obra-3 laser-warning system, Wegmann 76mm grenade launchers and Type 570P Diehl Remscheid GmbH tracks [2]. Two prototypes made (renamed PT-91E and PT-91Ex), 48 serial PT-91M vehicles are now in production.

Pendekar????? More like Pendekar Burut.

 

[DavidDCM]

Don't forget that by the time Malaysia decided to purchase the tank, it's most sophisticated possible opponent would have been the Thai M60A3. Only recently did Singapore buy the Leopard 2, which in the A4 version is not really superior to the PT.

But it can't really be defied that the purchase of a tank (whatever type) looks to a certain extent more like a prestige project than like something really needed and vital for the country's defence.

I've recently read somewhere that the southern peninsular Malaysia (where the PT-91M are based) is not that much "thick jungle"-terrain as one might expect, but a pretty open landscape quite suitable for mechanized tank warfare. I've never been there, but can someone confirm this?

And finally, the PT has not much to do anymore with the cheap mass tank T-72. It still has a couple of flaws that can barely be eliminated, like the ever cited open ammo carousel, the overall crammed crew compartment and the limited performance of the maingun. But its FCS is pretty much on par with the Leopard 2A4 and way superior to anything else in the region. On the same note the Leo 2 is the only ground vehicle there that one would assume to reliably defeat the PT's frontal armour. So especially in the Southeast-Asian context should the PT not be viewed as a cheap mass tank but on the contrary as a pretty high-class vehicle that only few can match with.