Singaporean Leopard 2A4s debut in Australia
- Thread starter winnyfield
- Start date
I have really enjoyed participating in the DT Forum and I would like to thank everyone who has contributed to this thread. 
The 2 key factors that affect effectiveness of any piece of military hardware that we buy are:
(i) technology; and
(ii) doctrine.
However, technology is a tool that is constantly changing. As such, Singapore and Australia must continually press to buy or invent better tools to provide a winning edge on the battlefield. Yet, with all the advantage that technology might provide, IMO ideas are the real key in winning any war.
Part of this battle of ideas is military doctrine, which state how a force conducts operations under ideal conditions. Hence, if there is a myopic focus on levels of protection, horse power and types of ammunition (only on certain aspects of technology) we may lose sight of the importance of the battle of ideas.
According to historian Michael Howard, no military has its doctrine entirely correct at the outbreak of hostilities. Victory goes to the force that adapts its doctrine to existing circumstances faster than its adversary. Hopefully Australia's and Singapore's investments in battlefield communications will enable us to adapt to existing circumstances faster than our potential adversaries.
IMHO, information can be a powerful agent in the prevention of war.
The "heat reducing camo system" will certainly reduce the infra-red signature of tanks- I'll also like to see Singapore buy or develop this technology.Re part 2: As a comparison, in addition to a climate control system, the Aussie MBTs have a bar fridge (for drinks and ... ice cream
The 2 key factors that affect effectiveness of any piece of military hardware that we buy are:
(i) technology; and
(ii) doctrine.
However, technology is a tool that is constantly changing. As such, Singapore and Australia must continually press to buy or invent better tools to provide a winning edge on the battlefield. Yet, with all the advantage that technology might provide, IMO ideas are the real key in winning any war.
Part of this battle of ideas is military doctrine, which state how a force conducts operations under ideal conditions. Hence, if there is a myopic focus on levels of protection, horse power and types of ammunition (only on certain aspects of technology) we may lose sight of the importance of the battle of ideas.
According to historian Michael Howard, no military has its doctrine entirely correct at the outbreak of hostilities. Victory goes to the force that adapts its doctrine to existing circumstances faster than its adversary. Hopefully Australia's and Singapore's investments in battlefield communications will enable us to adapt to existing circumstances faster than our potential adversaries.
IMHO, information can be a powerful agent in the prevention of war.
Australia's and Singapore's investments in a credible defence strategy - communicates important information. It tells those who would dare to advocate war in this region - that while we may speak softly, we also carry a big stick. After all, everything in politics and war is an effort to convince the adversary to do one’s will and a credible defence strategy is an indication of a nation's will.
On a side note (on drinks and ... ice cream). In the 1990s, as NSmen, we were deployed in the jungle on a command post exercise. During an exercise lull period, a couple of us decided to call one of our CSMs for fun (Let's call him "John" - not his real name). John who was not involved in the exercise, turned up after work, at nite and in the rain, in full army uniform (with even camo paint on his face) to deliver 20 large pizzas for us - out of friendship.
Last edited:
A large majority of SAF vehicles are air conditioned. Fans circulating the air inside an AFV also, technically, counts as air conditioning too
Okay ... using the popular definition of "air conditioning" as cooled, dehumidified air ... IMHO, that the SAF currently does not "air condition" their AFVs has more to do with most SAF AFVs not containing much vehtronics and therefore not requiring anything more than simple fan cooling.
With regards to the getting sick part, I don't quite understand why that is so. Air conditioning does not automatically imply ridiculously cold temperatures like you get in offices and some public transports.
Given that AFV crew compartment temperatures can go as high as 40C in the tropics, all that is required is to bring it down to ~29C and life will be so much better for both crew and the vehtronics.
If the ambient air is about 32C and high humidity then surely setting the thermostat at ~29C and low(er) humidity is not going get anyone sick ... or is it? Just don't let the conscript crew have access to the thermostat.
I'd daresay you'll start to see more "a/c" in the SAF's AFVs now that their newer vehicles (BX2 and Leo 2) are being equipped with more vehtronics and are already NBC ready.
btw ... isn't the Bronco air conditioned?
This ^.
And if they get thier way, they`ll probably stay in the vehicle all day long. IMHO, people tend to get sick when they move too quickly from a hot climate to a cold one repeatedly in a short duration of time. That is my own personal observation. In addition, your body still needs to acclimatize and I feel it would affect combat readiness somewhat. Ever walk or run under the hot sun from an air-conditioned room after staying there for a duration of time?
Yes, Im talking about "air-cons" as you know it in the streets and Im alluding to the average temperatures you find in offices currently when I was referring to air conditioners; an average of 20-25 degrees celsius or in some cases <20 degrees celsius if you are unlucky enough to get a boss who hibernates. But alas, this is an international forum so pardon the local interpretation.
IMHO, 29 degrees is fine if it is a constant. Not too high and not too low. Troops need to be cooled and not frozen so much so that they need to defrost later prior to combat.
The Primus is rather recent and no 'air-con' as well. Did not notice the Bronco has one. Does it?
I would also be more frightenes about the electronics than about the crew.
While a AC for the crew compartment is good to have (And yes I also think that it shouldn't be used to cool down the crew compartment to 20°C.) cooling the electronics in a very hot environment can be a lifesaver.
Nevertheless even the original Leopard 2A4 works surprisingly good in very hot environments as some of our southern NATO countries know.
IMHO the comparison between the Aussie M1A1 AIMv2 and a plain normal Leopard 2A4 is nothing to blubber about.
As if both tanks would fit into the same category a customer wants...
Somebody who considers buying an advanced Abrams is not going to look for Leopard IIA4s as an alternative but would go the way other countries like Sweden, Greece and Spain have gone.
While a AC for the crew compartment is good to have (And yes I also think that it shouldn't be used to cool down the crew compartment to 20°C.) cooling the electronics in a very hot environment can be a lifesaver.
Nevertheless even the original Leopard 2A4 works surprisingly good in very hot environments as some of our southern NATO countries know.
IMHO the comparison between the Aussie M1A1 AIMv2 and a plain normal Leopard 2A4 is nothing to blubber about.
As if both tanks would fit into the same category a customer wants...
Somebody who considers buying an advanced Abrams is not going to look for Leopard IIA4s as an alternative but would go the way other countries like Sweden, Greece and Spain have gone.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
First pics are up of the Sing Leo's at Shoalwater bay.
http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/fitzgibbon/gallery/20081110/20081025sn00000_002_lo.jpg
http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/fitzgibbon/gallery/20081110/index.htm
http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/fitzgibbon/gallery/20081110/20081025sn00000_002_lo.jpg
http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/fitzgibbon/gallery/20081110/index.htm
Thanks for the great pics!
BTW, what is the most common colour scheme for Oz armour? Ours are always singularly olive green, with few exceptions.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
The standard Australian "tri-colour" camouflage is the most common. On deployment, such as the MEA, a sand type colour is used and our M1's are still in their American "sand" colour, but are to be converted to the Aussie "tri-colour" soon(ish).
A sandy sort of colour, olive drab and a darker green as seen on this Bushmaster is the standard Aussie camouflage for Armour, as well as all other vehicles and equipment (including helos and radars!).
http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/fitzgibbon/gallery/20081107a/20081107adf0000000_0008_lo.jpg
winnyfield
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #31
Here's how the camo looks from the air (or from an elevated pistion) - http://www.defence.gov.au/media/download/2008/oct/20081028b/20081025raaf8202385_0009_lo.jpg
Thanks for the pics.
And while it may be a little bit cost effective is there a real reason for SG vehicles using this camo?
Real patterns for your area of operations should give you better performance. (Besides the fact that this green looks...mmmh...not very good)
And while it may be a little bit cost effective is there a real reason for SG vehicles using this camo?
Real patterns for your area of operations should give you better performance. (Besides the fact that this green looks...mmmh...not very good
)Actually no one is suggesting that SG use this camo. I made a remark that all SAF vehicles are of the same uniform green, and ask what is the most common paint scheme for ADF vehicles?Thanks for the pics.
And while it may be a little bit cost effective is there a real reason for SG vehicles using this camo?
Real patterns for your area of operations should give you better performance. (Besides the fact that this green looks...mmmh...not very good
Aussie DIgger described the ADF colours and Winnyfield posted a pic.
...
BTW, what's the most common paint scheme of AFV in your country?
I wonder how useful is camo paint on AFVs? And how come SAF doesn't do any? I've seen may pics of SAF AFVs covered with branches, foilage etc, but a camo scheme was never uniformly adopted. It can't hurt, can it?
I know that Singapore uses this dark green.
Because of that I asked why it is in use and not a "real" camo pattern.
As you say it makes no sense to me either. While ones needs to do more than just use some 3 color camo pattern it just doesn't hurt and works well together with other camo stuff.
Because of that I asked why it is in use and not a "real" camo pattern.
As you say it makes no sense to me either. While ones needs to do more than just use some 3 color camo pattern it just doesn't hurt and works well together with other camo stuff.
My only theories as to why ours are all un-camo could be because:I know that Singapore uses this dark green.
Because of that I asked why it is in use and not a "real" camo pattern.
As you say it makes no sense to me either. While ones needs to do more than just use some 3 color camo pattern it just doesn't hurt and works well together with other camo stuff.
- after trying several schemes, they can't find one that they like
- most of Malaysia's AFV have a standard MAF camo scheme, so ours being green may help nervous conscripts avoid FF
Could it be that they will use some type of camo netting, plus you and I know very well that after a few days of rooster tails through dirty or muddy fields that dirt does a good job of covering up those fancy paint jobs that we like to use, they look good in garrison though.I know that Singapore uses this dark green.
Because of that I asked why it is in use and not a "real" camo pattern.
As you say it makes no sense to me either. While ones needs to do more than just use some 3 color camo pattern it just doesn't hurt and works well together with other camo stuff.
All the pics I've seen including those I saw at the notoriously muddy S. Gedong armoured training grounds are still pretty green despite a heavy splatter of mud and dust. Maybe the daily thunderstorms washes some of it away?
Camo nets snag all kinds of things like branches and people getting on and off.
(Actually even our choppers, arty pieces etc are all painted the same singular green. So it must be for some kind of easy ID purposes?)
Camo nets snag all kinds of things like branches and people getting on and off.
(Actually even our choppers, arty pieces etc are all painted the same singular green. So it must be for some kind of easy ID purposes?)
I would also think that in the tropical environmant the real colour of the tanks would remain effective for longer than in NATO's usual environment (northern snow down to med climate).
And at least the turret remained "relatively" clean even aftern some weeks of operations.
And while we also use camo nets I still have the feeling, without being able to support it apart from subjective feeling, that a multi color camo pattern still works even when one uses stuff like camo nets and natural vegetation (And we put whole trees onto our tanks sometimes...).
ID could be a factor and seems to be a reasonable idea.
FF is a problem and much more so during a crisis when a conscript army has to fight for it's country.
We had our share of FF during maneuvers. I don't want to know how bad it becomes in a real war.
And at least the turret remained "relatively" clean even aftern some weeks of operations.
And while we also use camo nets I still have the feeling, without being able to support it apart from subjective feeling, that a multi color camo pattern still works even when one uses stuff like camo nets and natural vegetation (And we put whole trees onto our tanks sometimes...
).ID could be a factor and seems to be a reasonable idea.
FF is a problem and much more so during a crisis when a conscript army has to fight for it's country.
We had our share of FF during maneuvers. I don't want to know how bad it becomes in a real war.
During GW 2 they painted our tanks desert tan, when I made it back to 4 ID at Fort Carson during 1993 time frame the tanks were still painted in that same color scheme which stood out like a sore thumb during summer field exercises, I ended up customizing three camo nets to fit the turret, hull and one tube, problem solved. I guess it would all depend on what type of terrain that your tank platoon was operating in to guess what the dirt or dust factor would be for a camo paint scheme, I have always found that after a day or two of heavy movement that dust and dirt pretty much covers everything. Also with new technologies in battlefield surveillance it is becoming hard to hide tanks on the battlefield, camo nets that reduce heat signature are becoming very popular with some countries.I would also think that in the tropical environment the real colour of the tanks would remain effective for longer than in NATO's usual environment (northern snow down to med climate).
And at least the turret remained "relatively" clean even after some weeks of operations.
And while we also use camo nets I still have the feeling, without being able to support it apart from subjective feeling, that a multi color camo pattern still works even when one uses stuff like camo nets and natural vegetation (And we put whole trees onto our tanks sometimes...
ID could be a factor and seems to be a reasonable idea.
FF is a problem and much more so during a crisis when a conscript army has to fight for it's country.
We had our share of FF during maneuvers. I don't want to know how bad it becomes in a real war.