SAF Combat Bulldozers for FIBUA?

Aaron8209 SG

I like the Bridging Engineers..I think is COOL. Mr. Green

chino65 SG

Thr CET compliments the CEV.

And please explain why the M-60 based CEV or AVLB will be phased out? Are they not working? Why adapt the "MCM accessories" to the Leo 2?

edwin3060 SG

I suspect its for parts commonality and ease of logistics, but I could be wrong.

Shotgun SG

Ya, if u like being in water often, getting your boots soaked, getting foot rot.

bigballs11 SG

1st M60 cannot match the speed/performance of the LeoA4. The last few war already demostrate that.
2nd Not point keeping 2 sets of MBT spares. Rather get more Leo2 chassis.
3rd As you may notice, CEV role has been replaced by MBT by simply attached the accessories, mainly the trackwidth mine plough, dozer blade to MBT chassis. A lot of the CEV role has already long been replace by the nimble CET, except the mine plough which the MBT can easily take on.
4th We already has a sizable leguan bridge and spares, no point keep the old scissor bridge layer. It will be easy to deploy somthing like PBC 2 with the spare chassis we bought. One issue with the scissor bridge is exposure of position due to deployment height.
5th Ready buyer for the old M60 based assets before it lose value, mainly the Thailand and Taiwan.

Shotgun SG

I'm not aware of any ammunition for the L44 gun that can be used to demolish fortification.

IIRC, the M-60 CEV has a demolition gun.

SpecOps87 SG

Just curious…can our Leo2s be adopted by the Combat Engineers for the use in a bridge-laying role?

chino65 SG

Originally posted by bigballs11:
2nd Not point keeping 2 sets of MBT spares. Rather get more Leo2 chassis.

You are obviously from Engineers so just treat my points as questions:

We bought a mere 100 Leo 2, cannot mean we start throwing other things away.

We have at least 4 other armour platforms in operation that are much more vintage than the M60.

Besides, there may not be that many Leo 2 left for SAF to buy - selling like hot cakes.

Anyway, isn't it most armies' practice that the older equipment form up second grade units? For example, the M60 can continue to support Centurion or AMX-13 units.

tankee1981 SG

Thats true...they better secure more platforms for spares...

But then again, the numbers of Leo2A4 acquired being released may not be the actual amount. Mindef have its ways of hiding things... Cool

chino65 SG

I hope so, too. They're a steal!!! Mr. Green

MAF must feel really stupid buying Twardy. But then they paid coconuts for them or something so can't complain...

...

Fact:

In 1973, Israel's population was less than 5 million citizens - I think...

Yet, they had an armoured force of at least 1,000 MBTs, not counting thousands of AFVs of other types. Reservists units activated, of course.

So, SAF should have enough manpower for more MBTs if need be. Of course, our low risk region really doesn't justify much more than the existing 500 + gun tanks combining AMX-13, AMX-10, Centurion & Leo 2.

chino65 SG

Can anyone put up a list of what types of armoured vehicles we have and their numbers?

Thanks

khaiseng SG

It can be done and already has been done.

LEGUAN 26M ARMOURED VEHICLE LAUNCHED BRIDGE (AVLB)
The 26m long MLC 70 LEGUAN bridge can be launched from a tank chassis (MBT), such as:

Leopard 1 for the Norwegian, Belgian and Greek Armies
Leopard 2 for the Finish Army
M1A1/A2 'Wolverine' Heavy Assault Bridge (HAB) for the US Army
M60/M47 for the Spanish Army
PT91/T72 for the Malaysian Army

http://www.army-technology.com/contractors/engineering/man/

and surprisingly our dear neighbour has it for their twardy

khaiseng SG

who knows, this initial purchase of Leo2A4 may just be the introduction of MBT to SG, after the region gets comfortable with these leos, you may see Leo2A6 coming in.

storywolf SG

Yes - you can use the chassis to convert it !!!

But .... why would you want to waste an expansive leo2 ? when M60 chassic - CEV - what we using - it it cheap, good and works.

You you go for leo2 - just because hey it is cool to have all leo2 chassis ? is that not draw snake add legs !!

tankee1981 SG

I really hope you are right! But its more likely we upgrade our A4 to the A6 version. We need to be sensitive to our neighbours yar...can't have too much MBTs...at least not publicly acknowledged ones... Very Happy

sgf SG

Almond anyone? No, not almond nuts. Mr. Green

bigballs11 SG

Well, not CE Mr. Green

Those other armour platform are mostly MLC30 and below vehicle and we have more then enough leguan type MLC30 (actually it's more to MLC40) on Bionix, MLC30 on SM1 and the little bridge carry by each infrantry pioneer platoon for the job.

The built up of this heavy armour brigade/divison is meant for a very specific task unlike the usual armour formation we use to know. I forseen 100 leo2 is more than sufficient for the role not counting the 30 odd spares we keep. We can easily release 6-8 of them for to do a 1-1 replacement of the current AVLB asset we have and keep the turret as spare parts. FYI, at 1 mil a pop for an leo2, it's not really expansive compare to the price we pay for a CET.

In fact I might think we might even be getting some kind of enlarged wheel armoured vehicle for the job.

Any for those relics like centurion and M60, I say it's about time to sent them to the smelting pot and recycle for our newer and more environment friendly wheel based armoured vehicle.

BTW, the CEV demolition gun is so yesterday, we have newer, cheaper and more portable tools for the job. Need not waste an MBT for such trival work. In fact the word CEV is already consider an artifact in CE world.

OldBird69 SG

Update those unsure of our Leopard 2A4 numbers:
In addition to the 66 + 30 "spares" announced in 2006, Singapore will acquire another 36 more, following a trip to Germany by Def Min Teo earlier this year.
Found this online: "On the subject of the SAF adding 36 more Leopard 2A4 tanks to the 66 already purchased, he (Teo C. H.) said that the decision was made after the German-made main battle tanks were tested here. We are very satisfied with their performance, he said."
So we'll have 132, including "spares" at least officially ").

chino65 SG

Isn't this 32 the "spares"? Which still put the figure under 100.

chino65 SG

Well Bigballs have a point that if the M60 are slower than the Leo2, then they pose a problem.

In action both CEV and AVLB have to lay bridges or clear obstacles and mines AHEAD of the main advance for the armour to cross. So if they are slow, it is definitely a problem.

Of course you can argue that the M60 can move to objective earlier but sometimes things aren't that ideal.

But I just think the slower M60 will just be relegated to the 2nd grade armour units instead of being junked. And SAF may eventually have some Leo 2 fitted with dozer blades and a AVLB version.

« Previous Page Next Page »