Singapore to Acquire Refurbished Leopard Tanks

last SG · 2006-12-11T19:06:02+00:00

And my point is : Nowadays, an uneducated desert insurgent can blow up a tank using IEDs......even the famed indestructible Israeli Makarva or M1 Abrams,,,,...

tek_koh SG

or better known as Strv 122, with visible difference is new smoke launchers a higher commander section.. Other A6 export versions are in this configuration

Pitot SG

those smoke launchers are french made.

anyway, since we getting the subs.. i suspect we shld be able to get something on refurbishing the tanks too. Laughing

tankee1981 SG

Originally posted by sgf:
Considering the Israelis supposedly upgraded our Tempests to Merkeva 3 standard, I wouldn't be surprised if we get them to upgrade our Leopards to almost A6 standard, or maybe even surpass that.

Friend, could you have a typo error here? Its impossible to 'upgrade' the Tempests aka Centurions to Merkeva Mk3. Very Happy

Pitot SG

because they are 2 different tanks Laughing

sgf SG

I meant upgrade to Merkeva Mk3 standard. That's what Tim Huxley claims.

tek_koh SG

anyway no point..still based in taiwan..unless we are fending off PLA

Boozie SG

I tink they only paid for the transportation fees thats why hahaha... They got the reserves in the German army too

lionnoisy SG

Glad sg no need hide new MBT from the public,like the current Centurion tanks.

Note 1. More than 60 Centurion MBTs (locally referred to as Tempest) formerly held in Taiwan now believed to be in Singapore and Brunei.

---Sources:Jean's--Jane's World Armies .Date Posted there: 11-Jul-2005.

Sg never offically admit that we have MBT.Even in the latest press release
that Only light SM--1 to replaced.

2.MINDEF has so much confidence that 66 Leoparde can replace
(sorry --amened.
The new arrivals of Leopard_2A4 will complement existing force of 300-350 AMX-13 sM1 tanks, a heavily modernized version of a 20-ton tank designed for paratroop support)read my 13.12.2006 posting.

Type........... Role ................ Quantity ......In Service
AMX-13SM-1 .....Light Tank.............. 350........... 350

!!Great.

Centurion tanks.

Centurion tanks.

The Centurion remained in service in Australia until 1977 when replaced by the Leopard Tank.

Do u know Aussie bought new or old Leopard Tank?

3.Learn more about MBT---www.fas.org is very good

Direct Fire Weapons

The entire purpose of the tank is to carry the main gun into battle. The armor is provided to ensure that the crew is protected from shrapnel (the main cause of battlefield casualties) and small arms fire. The crew exists solely to serve the main gun. The driver gets the vehicle to firing position, the tank commander selects targets, the loader ensures the weapon is loaded with the correct ammunition for the target selected, and the gunner makes sure the round strikes the target in the area of maximum vulnerability.

calvin2224 SG

I speculate that the Centurions are in Taiwan as part of a political deal. We obtained training space and Taiwanese assistance in exchange for parking the tanks there as part of their bulwark against mainland China. Probably with the concordance of the US too, I suspect. In the 70’s, ganging up with Taiwan and USA against China was quite necessary politically. We could reap the benefits of military and political assistance without become an official member of SEATO. Perhaps the Centurions were never meant to be ours to start with, but are permanently on loan to the Taiwanese by the source country through us. Many countries do not want to be seen arming Taiwan, and Singapore is quite a useful and not to say, safe conduit that won’t anger the mainland. In times of cross-straits trouble, the Taiwanese probably get access to the tanks.

calvin2224 SG

I am of the opinion that the Leopards are really going to replace the AMX13-SM1 as our main armoured punch, as stated in the press. Not a quantitative replacement, but a qualitative one. We'll probably obtain a small number of additional Leopards later, upgrade the whole lot, but never approach the number of SM1 we have. Look, each Leopard requires a crew of 4 in contrast with the 3 for each SM1. In terms of manpower, we can't be fielding Leopards in the numbers we have of SM1. Logistically a small number of Leopards is just about manageable for us. These 55 ton monsters require heavy road transporters (like Osh-Goshs or Scanias http://www.army.mod.uk/equipment/muv/muv_ttuc.htm) and also a massive support element (ammo-supply, recovery vehicles) that we do not currently have for the SM1. We will have to buy the whole lot. Tactically, it is also a departure from light-tank operations. Roads and bridges have to be accessed to be able to handle it.

I suspect as the number of SM1 is drawn down gradually with age and attrition, a new class of wheeled AFV will make up the capability gap. This would be following the trend exhibited in the Western powers. The wheeled AFV may be something like the Stryker with AGS options. The Terrex is positioned nicely for this requirement.

Reading the lines, BMS will be fitted into the Leopards as a priority, so this whole 3G armoured force is becoming a quick reality.

fallin SG

I disagree with your speculation. Personally I think its pretty far-fetched. The 1970s was a period of thawing between US-Chinese relations with Nixon's visit in 72'. So I highly doubt that the US would be interested in creating an alliance against China. If that were the case, I think they'd be shooting themselves in the foot by recognizing China officially diplomactially. Next, the Chinese mentioned before that weren't too bother by us training in Taiwan(as stated in Defending the Lion City), I don't that would be the case if the scenario you decribed occured.

gary1910 SG

Wrong!!!

Not all our Centurions was in ROC, at most abt 10+ at all time, the rest is here.

gary1910 SG

Wrong , read this:

....................Defense Minister Hean has stated that the SM1s will be kept in service even after the Leopards arrive. While the Leopard 2A4s will be significantly superior in many respects, including electronics and networking options as Singapore pursues its "3G" force, the SM1 has three things going for it. One is that numbers can still be useful on the battlefield. The second consideration is that the improvements made to the SM1 have kept it in shape as a capable combatant relative to neighbouring threats. The third consideration is that the AMX-13 SM1s' 20 tonne weight gives them mobility options that the 62 tonne Leopards can't duplicate, and make it especially useful given Singapore's environs.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2006/12/asian-tiger-ordering-leopards/index.php

So even Mindef report said that some of the SM1 will be replaced by Leo 2, Teo CH kind of give contradictory statement in the above report.

Edit for clarification.

storm_freaky13 SG

i think that the Leo2 will not replace the SM-1 again, like Teo CH said, the SM-1 is special because its light.

I think this purchase of the Leo2 may not be a one off, maybe they buy 66 to test test before committing to a larger purchase number.

In anycase im sure ST is making some space armour for the front. And i think it might be called 2A4SG Laughing

equlus84 SG

I was wondering since the centurions are more or less classified stuff. Then they position 10 vehicles in Taiwan, how on earth is the Bn pratise a Bn lvl of armoured exercise or maneuver? Or was it just a pure paper and dice style of exercise? Those remaining centurions in SG, how on earth are they going to carry out exercise here without letting other noe. I mean usually u will encounter various vocation Bn having exercise at LCK, besides, there are always some civilians sneaking in there to trap wild boars and hunt for wild fruits.
Talking abt exercise in Taiwan, I read from one of their forums that the recent Han Kwang 19 exercise, a brigade from SG was sent there to simulate the PRC army, dun they think this is a bad idea as we also use western equipments and doctrines, thus how to sim the red army? Just like wad benefits can Taiwan get by interacting with our operators using the centurions?

Pitot SG

The aussies had the leopard 1.

LazerLordz SG

Unless we have a very good aggressor force capability in terms of doctrine. Maybe we take turns there. Or it could be that the PLA tank corps operate on similar ABG concepts.

gary1910 SG

All field exe are conducted oversea. Period

Shotgun SG

Human or auto-loader. I guess that would be the eventual question.

Arguably, the human is perhaps more versatile and would not fail for no reason. The Auto-loader is (in the T-72 case) is reliable to mechanical problems and malfunctions. Loading also takes longer. (However Newer T-90s have demonstrated the ability to fire every 4.3 sec on the move, but of the same round type.)

However, if the auto-loader was to fail. The vehicle would be VOR until the malfunction is repaired to be put back into service. A human loader need only be replaced.

Personally, I am in favor of having a loader in MBTs. Being able to switch from APFSDS round to HEAT rounds without having to "cycle" the magazine is one advantage. Being able to replace the human loader rather than having a team of mechanics work on the complex loading mechanism also appeals.

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

To be fair I think he's making some rather general statements for the media, but if you think about it, tatically speaking I do not think we will be keeping the SM1... it is more likely we are keeping the concept.

In terms of systems that can offer the mobility and combat options required by the role that the SM1 plays, the SM1 is actually one of the weakest contenders in the field. It can't shoot on the move, armor's pratically a joke (even with applique), and for the same weight your typical modern LT is faster, not to mention the ground pressure. As a lot of people have pointed out, mounting a large gun on a BX would make a more capable system then the SM1, and in many roles the BX is already more capable.

I think if it really comes to it, we will trying to aquire a new LT.

« Previous Page Next Page »