Military Discussion : Should AMX 13-SM1 be replace ?

[Red Dawn]

The A10 is more vulnerable to enemy fighters & SAMs. At least f16s & f18s can defend themselves and hit burner to get out of dodge. Slow flying is not a requirement for CAS, a number of other attack aircraft use jet engines. (eg. A4 (also retired) & Su-25, although both cannot hit mach 1 but are still faster than the A10.)

A10s should only be used when
1) total air superiority is achieved (eg. f16s/f15s escorts overhead)
2) SAMS & triple-A are suppressed (eg. f16s/f18s taking out radar stations)
for total effect. Notice how f16s can do so many things! (Yes, I'm a '16 fan )

The problem with going slow is that it can be seen-> it can be hit -> it can be killed. The US military has evolved to developing SMART & stand-off weapons delivered by stealth/multirole aircraft. Why send 3 flights (1 flight f15 escort, 1 flight f18 SAM suppression, 1 flight a10 CAS) when 1-2 flight f16 can complete the job in 1/2 the time?

I love the A10 for the power it possesses, but to continue to fund it for 1 specific role which other aircraft can do as well is not cost effective.

i'm a great F16 fan too (falcon 4.0 was my favourite game! ) but aren't those attack choppers like the Apaches meant to take the role of the A10 instead of fighter jets like the f16?

my point was Apaches aren't any better for CAS as compared to A10s, and that's very evidently proven in the e Gulf Wars, where the reliability of the Apaches was questioned due to many technical problems. Sure they have some kind of stand off capability with Hellfire missles, particularly if the Apaches are the Longbow variant, but ultimately, it is easier to take down a chopper than something the likes of an A10, no?

i know an f16 can handle the CAS role, but ultimately, how many AGM-65e Mavericks can an f16 carry before it starts to hamper its manoeuvrability to the point of it having to jettison its missles just to defend itself? My guess is not much. You will still need to organise additional F16 flights to provide escort, and probably flights of F16s maybe carrying HARM missiles to take out SAM sites.

in the end u're still back to a multi-flight setup with an A10, you will still be able to use that nasty gun to rip up enemy tanks even after it has expended its rockets and air-to-ground missles.

 

[hwchoy]

Some have indicate in the earlier post that tanks are not suitable for Jungle terrain.
While I agree that armour have difficuities in movement in some areas of Jungle terrain, but it is a MUST to have.

During the Battle of Singapore in 1942, Japanese tanks landed in Lim Chu Kang, together with infantry, they punch all the way through Choa Chu Kang and make their way to Bukit Panjang/Bukit Timah area.
In the Battle of Bukit Timah, 50 Japanese tanks contribute to the break through against tough defensive line by British/Australian/Indian/Dalforce defenders.

Japanese Tanks at Bukit Timah

During the Battle of France in 1940, German Panzers outflank the French and the British through the Ardennes Forest.

Setting aside the issue of logistics, deployment and maintainence problems, Armour possess the firepower, the ability to perform blitzkrieg and an intangible shock waves to the enemy.

well KT, one is tempted to respond that those Japanese tanks in malaya were nowhere the size of panzers and tigers of germany. but that merely supports the point that something the size of an M1 (or a PT91 for that matter) is going to find moving around our tropical lowland terrain rather challenging.

but you make an important point. in a determined assault, nothing beats having a hoard of cheonging tanks coming at you. that's why a combined arms division is formidable, because the ground commander has the ability to cover the disadvantage of armour with a heli-assault or suppressive artillery.

 

[Red Dawn]

Hi

one thing i wanna note, it seems we have a lot of military buffs here

foxtwo's signature is very interesting too.....

"fox two... mike!"

 

[jsbn]

Might as well build a Gundam.

I'm thinking something like Metal Gear REX.

Kinda like a rail gun system with the ability to fire nuclear warheads.

 

[King Tiger]

well KT, one is tempted to respond that those Japanese tanks in malaya were nowhere the size of panzers and tigers of germany. but that merely supports the point that something the size of an M1 (or a PT91 for that matter) is going to find moving around our tropical lowland terrain rather challenging.

but you make an important point. in a determined assault, nothing beats having a hoard of cheonging tanks coming at you. that's why a combined arms division is formidable, because the ground commander has the ability to cover the disadvantage of armour with a heli-assault or suppressive artillery.

Yo hwchoy, agree that heavy tanks are rather challenging in Singapore terrain. Believe that Singapore planners are heahache on this issue too.

 

[King Tiger]

Hi
one thing i wanna note, it seems we have a lot of military buffs here
foxtwo's signature is very interesting too.....
"fox two... mike!"

OT a bit.
I just wonder how many military nuts like us in clubsnap.


I just recall a friend who have no interest in military knowledge. (He is actually an M113 commander from 41 SAR during his NSF).
When SAF introduce Bionx IFV, I told him that is the new Bionx IFV.
He told me I was wrong, it is an Bionx M113. I ask him for his reasoning, he says M113 means armour vehicle.
I ask him how about AMX-13, he says that an AMX-13 M113.
I fainted/vombit blood :mad2: :ipuke: :hung:

 

[hwchoy]

OT a bit.
I just wonder how many military nuts like us in clubsnap.


I just recall a friend who have no interest in military knowledge. (He is actually an M113 commander from 41 SAR during his NSF).
When SAF introduce Bionx IFV, I told him that is the new Bionx IFV.
He told me I was wrong, it is an Bionx M113. I ask him for his reasoning, he says M113 means armour vehicle.
I ask him how about AMX-13, he says that an AMX-13 M113.
I fainted/vombit blood :mad2: :ipuke: :hung:

wound him around the sprocket wheel and engage Drive. :devil:

 

[hwchoy]

I think for the "new generation" of M113 commanders who did not ride on the original M113 A1/A2, they cannot imagine how much improvement in firepower the M113 Ultras have. The first time I saw the Ultra conduct night firing I almost wanted to kneel down and kiss the S. Gedung mud. :bsmilie: :bsmilie: :bsmilie:

 

[foxtwo]

Hi

one thing i wanna note, it seems we have a lot of military buffs here

foxtwo's signature is very interesting too.....

"fox two... mike!"

non-military buffs usually think i'm just another 'fox'. I get that a lot.

 

[meng]

yups :thumbsup: and to think that the Bionix has 2 versions, one with the same weaponry (0.5" Heavy Machine Gun and 40mm Grenade Launcher) as the M113 Ultras and one with the 25mm Cannon that Bionix is usually associated with. The Bionix 40/50 can do a good job of neutralising soft targets and creating havoc to infantry besides the 7.62mm rounds that all the rest are pumping out.

I think for the "new generation" of M113 commanders who did not ride on the original M113 A1/A2, they cannot imagine how much improvement in firepower the M113 Ultras have. The first time I saw the Ultra conduct night firing I almost wanted to kneel down and kiss the S. Gedung mud. :bsmilie: :bsmilie: :bsmilie:

 

[reno77]

I'm thinking something like Metal Gear REX.

Kinda like a rail gun system with the ability to fire nuclear warheads.

You mean something like this ?

US has dismantled all its nuclear artillery. New breakthroughs in conventional weapons (e.g nano technology) should be able to achieve the same impact without the problems of using nukes.

"Researchers can greatly increase the power of weapons by adding materials known as superthermites that combine nanometals such as nanoaluminum with metal oxides such as iron oxide,

Superthermites can increase the (chemical) reaction time by a thousand times," Son says, resulting in a very rapid reactive wave. "


Nano Technology in Weapons

 

[TMC]

Seriously, with so much tech involved, how are they going to maintain them in the event of a real war? where are they going to find the parts to replace all that hi tech gear. **** I can't even imagine the nightmare trying to AA batteries to power the torches.

 

[singscott]

That why terrorist is using low tech war :bsmilie: :bsmilie:

 

[singscott]

I think for the "new generation" of M113 commanders who did not ride on the original M113 A1/A2, they cannot imagine how much improvement in firepower the M113 Ultras have. The first time I saw the Ultra conduct night firing I almost wanted to kneel down and kiss the S. Gedung mud. :bsmilie: :bsmilie: :bsmilie:

I have play with a real life M113 ultra 40/50, shooting the 40mm AGL (auto grenade launcher) with living rounds was one the heighlight in NSF time I will never forget.

 

[meng]

got try firing at 1km target?

I have play with a real life M113 ultra 40/50, shooting the 40mm AGL (auto grenade launcher) with living rounds was one the heighlight in NSF time I will never forget.

 

[singscott]

Some have indicate in the earlier post that tanks are not suitable for Jungle terrain.
While I agree that armour have difficuities in movement in some areas of Jungle terrain, but it is a MUST to have.

During the Battle of Singapore in 1942, Japanese tanks landed in Lim Chu Kang, together with infantry, they punch all the way through Choa Chu Kang and make their way to Bukit Panjang/Bukit Timah area.
In the Battle of Bukit Timah, 50 Japanese tanks contribute to the break through against tough defensive line by British/Australian/Indian/Dalforce defenders.

Japanese Tanks at Bukit Timah

During the Battle of France in 1940, German Panzers outflank the French and the British through the Ardennes Forest.

Setting aside the issue of logistics, deployment and maintainence problems, Armour possess the firepower, the ability to perform blitzkrieg and an intangible shock waves to the enemy.

The american think the same when that brought the M48 patton tanks to vietnam. Only to found out they are white elephant in jungle terrian where the viet-con refuse to fight in open space. So they came out mobile air lift force, which they call air cavalry. Basicly troops move by a rather new air craft back then in the 60s the "Huey" helicopter. Which did better then M48 and M113. :sweatsm:

 

[singscott]

got try firing at 1km target?

2 click and a incredible display of firepower at the target area. Real adernalin rush.

 

[hwchoy]

I have play with a real life M113 ultra 40/50, shooting the 40mm AGL (auto grenade launcher) with living rounds was one the heighlight in NSF time I will never forget.

I was overwhelmed because during night firing you can actually see where the .5 tracers land. in the old days, you will NEVER see the rounds land in the same spot, but on the Ultra with the .5 mounted to the cupola, the blinking tracers all land on the same spot, during heavy firing you can practically see a streak of tracers from the barrel to the target!

for those who don't fire 0.5 Brownings, the ammo is the largest "bullet", i.e. non-explosive type ammo (vs the 25mm cannon for example), the bullet itself is the size of your thumb, and the whole round is the length of your palm. think how much of your lungs it can suck out if it goes through your body :lovegrin:

 

[jsbn]

You mean something like this ?

US has dismantled all its nuclear artillery. New breakthroughs in conventional weapons (e.g nano technology) should be able to achieve the same impact without the problems of using nukes.

"Researchers can greatly increase the power of weapons by adding materials known as superthermites that combine nanometals such as nanoaluminum with metal oxides such as iron oxide,

Superthermites can increase the (chemical) reaction time by a thousand times," Son says, resulting in a very rapid reactive wave. "


Nano Technology in Weapons

Interesting read.

Actually I'm kinda thinking...

With the new war, war against terrorists, who are using low tech but effective methods to wage war against conventional ground troopers like us, besides spending a couple of billion on close-support aircraft, shldn't we be spending more time on FIBUA?

 

[foxtwo]

i'm a great F16 fan too (falcon 4.0 was my favourite game! ) but aren't those attack choppers like the Apaches meant to take the role of the A10 instead of fighter jets like the f16?

my point was Apaches aren't any better for CAS as compared to A10s, and that's very evidently proven in the e Gulf Wars, where the reliability of the Apaches was questioned due to many technical problems. Sure they have some kind of stand off capability with Hellfire missles, particularly if the Apaches are the Longbow variant, but ultimately, it is easier to take down a chopper than something the likes of an A10, no?

I played Falcon 3.0 last time. I also played Comanche 2 & 3 by Novalogic, arcadish but the laws of chopper combat are hugely unchanged. Like my previous post stated, if you can see it, you can kill it.

Chopper tactics as follows: Firstly the gunship flys NOE to the enemy position. The Mast Mounted Sight (MMS: the huge bulb on top the main rotor) on the AH-64D allows it to acquire targets whilst the rest of its body hides behind cover, be it a ridge, a hill or trees. When you are ready to fire, pitch up and let loose hellfires. Low detection probability until the first missile hits. :thumbsup: Need to change firing position? Just crab to the left or right, no problem.

The AH-64 Apache has no MMS. Its target acquisition unit is located at its nose. Hence they have to bob the gunship up above cover for target lock-fire. Then retreating behind cover to change positions.

Assume a flight of 4 Apaches/Longbows. They fly NOE, carefully positioning themselves NSEW around the enemy position before commencing fire. The 4 gunships change positions after every 2-3 salvos, imagine the psychological hit the enemy is reeling from. They feel surrounded, can't see the attacking force, are getting decimated, don't know who's next.... This is the standard tactic for the attack helicopter. It doesn't matter what the target is, SAM, armoured, hard/soft targets.

Were the technical problems due to the sand? AH-64s were not designed for desert warfare in mind. I did some reading, and the AH-64s with joint A-10s actually make a good team during the Gulf war.