Singapore's new Anti-Armour Weapon

[Aussie Digger]

Since 1999, the Army together with Defence Science & Technology Agency (DSTA) and Dynamit Nobel Defence of Germany embarked on the development of a Short Range Anti-Armour Weapon to meet the needs of the modern battlefield, especially of that in an increasingly urbanised environment. This weapon, which has been named MATADOR, will eventually replace the ARMBRUST Light Anti-tank Weapon which has been in service since the 1980s. The rapid pace in which this weapon was developed is a shinning example of the close tri-partite effort. This being significant as Dynamit Nobel Defence is a continent away from Singapore.

MATADOR is the first weapon in the world which has both anti-armour and anti-brickwall capabilities that is suited for operations in confined spaces. With enhanced penetration, this weapon is able to defeat all known Armoured Fighting Vehicles and Light Tanks in the world. The warhead when acting in the delay mode creates a hole of 450mm diameter in a double brickwall and offers a non-conventional entry point for the soldier when fighting in built-up area. The increased range of the weapon over our ARMBRUST allows the soldier to engage targets beyond small arms effective range and therefore increasing the survivability of our soldiers.

In the development, special attention has also been given to ensure that the European designers understood the anthropomorphic profile of our soldiers. There were numerous human factors trials involving our National Servicemen (NSmen) with the aim to improve the ergonomics of the weapon. In addition, many of the useful features found in the ARMBRUST were incorporated in MATADOR. Improvements have also been made to the sighting system to enhance target acquisition. Furthermore, the carriage of the weapon has been made more comfortable with better padding, a feature useful for long matches. Taken together, these easy to use features will help our soldiers achieve proficiency in using the weapon within the shortest possible time.

The introduction of MATADOR in the Army will greatly enhance the firepower of the Infantry Section. It will give the Army the added capability to fight in built-up areas. With the improvements to make the weapon user friendly, our soldiers will find the weapon easy to operate and will spend less training time to achieve proficiency.

Obtained from: http://www.mindef.gov.sg/weapons/matador/ Here's some pics...

 

[Aegis]

Looks damm bulky!

 

[gf0012-aust]

They're good operators the Singaporean DSTA. There's a number of things that they do well.

 

[neel24neo]

how does it compare with other anti armour weapons like carl gustav 84mm?

 

[Aegis]

how does it compare with other anti armour weapons like carl gustav 84mm?

I think it is a one-shot and throw anti-armour weapon while carl is reusable!

 

[neel24neo]

how does it compare with other anti armour weapons like carl gustav 84mm?

I think it is a one-shot and throw anti-armour weapon while carl is reusable!

yes,you are right.they are lighter too.just about 9kgs.

 

[berry580]

9kg is not in anyway a light thing even for a well built man when you need to carry it run around mountains. But considering its purpose, it's pretty good already, back in the 50's, you'll need to f---ing tow an artillery!!

 

[Awang se]

I used to carry Carl Gustav recoilles rifle during my time in reserved officer training unit. That thing is damn heavy, especially on rugged terrain

 

[neel24neo]

carl gustav m2s weigh 14.5kg empty and 18.5kg loaded.compared to that this MATADOR is light.but then carl gustav is not use and throw...

 

[Aussie Digger]

The Singaporean weapon looks re-usable to me. The firing and sighting mechanism would be re-usable at any rate. You'd simply clip another pre-packaged round onto the firing/sighting mechanism in my view, like the Javelin. Carl Gustav's are heavy and have a massive blackblast. They're fun though...

 

[neel24neo]

why call it "disposable"then?are AT-4s reusable too?

 

[Aussie Digger]

True it's a strange description, but the actual weapon looks like a tube clips onto the firing/sighting mechanism. The tube once fired is disposed of and replaced with a new tube. The tube's normally come pre-packaged with a missile enclosed. Once fired the tube is useless. This is what they're referring to perhaps?

 

[berry580]

Well that's a waste.
Don't an anti-tank unit (whatever its called) consist of 2 people? One carry the tube with 1 or 2 ammunition and the other carry even more ammunitions (e.g 3-4), one person is to track & attack, other to reload?

 

[Aussie Digger]

Normally for heavier anti-armour weapons they do, but this system is designed for sole operator use, like the LAW90, AT-4 or M72 LAW rocket. It's a waste of what exactly? A useless metal tube? Single shot anti-armour weapons are normally designed for the firer to throw away the entire weapon after it's been fired, sightin/firing mechanism included...

This is done to help try and reduce the burden of the poor infantryman who has to carry the damn things. What's the point of carrying around a now useless object? If it's stil bothering you, maybe you could petition the Singapore Army to recycle the tubes? :

 

[neel24neo]

Well that's a waste.
Don't an anti-tank unit (whatever its called) consist of 2 people? One carry the tube with 1 or 2 ammunition and the other carry even more ammunitions (e.g 3-4), one person is to track & attack, other to reload?

what exactly are you calling waste here?
you are right about the team composition.usually two soldiers make one team.one operates the weapon and other covers the operator with suppressive fire on the enemy infantry,besides carrying spare rounds.but mujahideen anti tank RPG teams consisted of many number of RPGs in a massed attack,because simultaneous RPG attacks were found to be more effective in killing tanks.

 

[berry580]

"This is done to help try and reduce the burden of the poor infantryman who has to carry the damn things. What's the point of carrying around a now useless object? If it's stil bothering you, maybe you could petition the Singapore Army to recycle the tubes? Grin


what exactly are you calling waste here? "

The tube can be used again if you have more ammunition, how is it "useless"?
So what's this? You'll carry 10 tubes + 10 ammunitions within it to kill 10 tanks or would you carry 1 tube + 10 ammunitions instead?

"you are right about the team composition.usually two soldiers make one team.one operates the weapon and other covers the operator with suppressive fire on the enemy infantry,besides carrying spare rounds.but mujahideen anti tank RPG teams consisted of many number of RPGs in a massed attack,because simultaneous RPG attacks were found to be more effective in killing tanks."

As far as I'm concerned, RPG's and anti-tank rockets are in a total different league. RPG's are practically useless against modern MBT's, but very affect against lightly armed vehicles (e.g IFV, APC, etc)

 

[Aegis]

"This is done to help try and reduce the burden of the poor infantryman who has to carry the damn things. What's the point of carrying around a now useless object? If it's stil bothering you, maybe you could petition the Singapore Army to recycle the tubes? Grin


what exactly are you calling waste here? "

The tube can be used again if you have more ammunition, how is it "useless"?
So what's this? You'll carry 10 tubes + 10 ammunitions within it to kill 10 tanks or would you carry 1 tube + 10 ammunitions instead?

"you are right about the team composition.usually two soldiers make one team.one operates the weapon and other covers the operator with suppressive fire on the enemy infantry,besides carrying spare rounds.but mujahideen anti tank RPG teams consisted of many number of RPGs in a massed attack,because simultaneous RPG attacks were found to be more effective in killing tanks."

As far as I'm concerned, RPG's and anti-tank rockets are in a total different league. RPG's are practically useless against modern MBT's, but very affect against lightly armed vehicles (e.g IFV, APC, etc)

Mujahideen anti tank RPG teams need the element of surprise! Or else,dozen of them will be uselss against a modern tank too! By the way,how gd is the penetration of this anti-tank weapon.It's sharp point suggests a tandem warhead!

 

[Aussie Digger]

Berry, as I explained, "disposable" anti-armour weapons and "clip on" anti-armour weapons, come pre-packaged. The round is encased within it's own tube and is ready to fire. Disposable weapons include AT-4's, M72 LAW rockets and the Predator SRAAW. Clip on type weapons include Milan, Javelin and LAW 80.

Only older weapons such as the 84mm Carl Gustav and RPG type weapons require you to load the actual round into the weapon. Waste as you call, is more relevant to these weapons. The rounds for the RPG or Carl Gustav still have significant packaging and protection or else they will suffer from exposure. This packaging becomes useless waste when you want to use the warhead, it cannot by design, be reused.

In addition the warhead has to be manually loaded into these types of weapons, costing you potentially valuable time on the battlefield. Disposable weapons are ready to fire at a moment's notice, thus they have a tactical advantage, in terms of speed of operation.

Weapons such as the Carl Gustav are in addition relatively expensive, due to the need to withstand repeated firings. This sturdiness also makes them heavy. The AT-4 (which uses exactly the same warhead and has the same range, anti-armour capabilities accuracy etc, weighs a fraction of the weight of a Charlie G)...

Both systems have advantages and disadvantages. They are designed by people who put a lot of thought into their construction and are funded by people who generally want as little spent as possible (ie: Politicians). Disposable single shot anti-armour weapons are not a waste. They are an extremely valuable capability.

 

[neel24neo]

As far as I'm concerned, RPG's and anti-tank rockets are in a total different league. RPG's are practically useless against modern MBT's, but very affect against lightly armed vehicles (e.g IFV, APC, etc)

maybe you are talking of the RPG-7.later versions of the RPG ie;RPG-16/22/27/29,etc,are very much like western,mordern anti-tank rockets.many of them are disposable(RPG-16,22,...).if you are concerned about the penetrating ability of RPGs,the "mystery"weapon than pierced through the abrams tank in iraq is believed to be a RPG-29.all RPGs are SRAAW.so they are pretty much in the same league as other SRAAW like AT-4,ARMBRUST,M72LAW...

 

[|||]

sorry im not familiar with rocket launchers. :help whats that thing sticking out of the tube with the arrow on it ? is it a safety of some kind or what :?