Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Army & Security Forces

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence


Made in Singapore Equipment

This is a discussion on Made in Singapore Equipment within the Army & Security Forces forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by Tavarisch No discounts for your neighbors? Only if Dr M will allow your guys to buy anything ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old August 31st, 2009   #16
Super Moderator
General
OPSSG's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3,299
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tavarisch
No discounts for your neighbors?
Only if Dr M will allow your guys to buy anything from us. He's already enraged enough that your current government is trying to improve bilateral ties.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duffy View Post
Looks like its the BIONIX Recovery vehicle with a cab and the drum in place of a crane. Very nice
Yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duffy View Post
The engine spec states a 2 cycle diesel, I assume that a typo.
One35th.com is a modeling website run by a Singaporean enthusiast and he has got that bit wrong. I link it because of the line drawings and the trouble he takes to gather the various pixs.

Here's an old pix of the Bionix at the US Interim Armored Vehicle contest (in which the ST Kinetics vehicle lost to the Stryker). [H/t to Iowa BB61 for the old pix]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duffy View Post
I really like the Spider LSV on the ST Kinetics site that would be fun to have for a weekend
With a 2.8 litre engine, it is fun take off-road but in its basic configuration, it has got zero protection against small arms fire or IEDs (as compared to a vehicle like the RG-31).

The Spider LSV was initially developed for our Guards Formation, which is a light infantry, rapid deployment, heli-mobile force. The Spider LSV is used by our Spike ATGM equipped anti-tank teams (click here and here for pixs of NZ live firing) and also to carry a ST Kinetics 120mm SRAMS low recoil mortar (see SRAMS brochure) (click here for the SRAMS mounted on the Spider pix). In fact, our Chinooks regularly sling load 2 Spider LSVs at one time. Since the Dec 2004 Tsunami, the Guards Formation has also been additionally tasked to be the planning group to any regional humanitarian crisis.

Fyi, ST Kinetics' 120mm SRAMS has been sold to UAE as part of AGRAB (Scorpion). The 3 man operated AGRAB (click for pix) is a 120mm SRAMS mounted on a BAE Systems RG-31 (10-ton 4x4 armoured and mine-protected vehicle) and it carries 46 mortar rounds in two carousels and has 2 further racks for another 12 rounds. UAE bought 48 AGRABs and associated ammo from a local manufacturer, International Golden Group in a deal worth 390 million dirham (US$106 million).

Last edited by OPSSG; September 1st, 2009 at 05:15 AM.
OPSSG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 1st, 2009   #17
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 116
Threads:
No Tanks Jets .. something Shiny ??
Almaleki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 2nd, 2009   #18
Super Moderator
General
OPSSG's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3,299
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Almaleki View Post
No Tanks Jets .. something Shiny ??
No. Since our independence on 9 August 1965, the SAF has always been willing to shop for good deals and if a good deal happens to be 2nd hand equipment, we are happy to buy them. Our main focus is developing our people and not shiny equipment. Let me explain.

One, the newest tanks that we have are refurbished Leopard 2A4s from Germany and we bought them 2nd hand. In fact our first tanks, the AMX-13 were also bought 2nd hand in 1969. Today, these modernized and refurbished AMX-13 SM1 tanks are still in service. Therefore, we have some very old equipment.

Two, it took Singapore 20 years before we placed our first order for brand new, top of the line multi-role fighters. We only placed our first order for 8 F-16A/Bs in 1985, under Peace Carvin (the first of which was delivered in 1988). However, we no longer operate these F-16A/Bs, as we have given these A/Bs to Thailand (to thank them for allowing the SAF to use their bases and to train there). Today, Singapore operates over 60 F-16C/Ds and have placed an order 24 F-15SGs.

Three, currently, Singapore does not make tanks or jets. And this thread is about made in Singapore weapons, which would include infantry weapons (SAR-21, Ultimax 100, and the Matador to name a few), the Bionix range of infantry fighting vehicles and Bionix derived support vehicles, the Bronco (see Warthog UOR win thread) and Singapore's own range of artillery pieces. Keep in mind, local weapons are a means of developing our own engineering expertise (in weapons design and manufacturing). Singapre's defence eco-system employs over 2,000 engineers and we intend to occupy a few specific niches - not bad for a small country.

Finally, people and countries make choices and Almaleki, you, as an individual have to choose. If you and your country choose wrongly, no amount of defence spending will be enough. For example, in relative terms, Oman (~11.4% of GDP), Qatar (~10% of GDP), Saudi Arabia (~10% of GDP), Iraq (~8.6% of GDP) and Jordan (~8.6% of GDP) all spend a larger percentage of their GDP on defence than Singapore (in absolute terms, Iraq and Saudi Arabia spend more on defence than Singapore). Yet, all of the above countries get less security than what we enjoy in Singapore (~5% of GDP). The Arab League countries need to figure out a way to get along with their neighbours and I don't just mean peace with the Jews in Isreal. I also mean the Persians in Iran too. As long as your leaders fail to choose peace, you and your country will be at war. Be it with an external enemy or with another ethic group within your own country.
Likewise, did you think it was easy for Singapore to make peace with Indonesia after the Konfrontasi? The answer is no.
Iraq under Saddam Hussein chose to go to war with Iran, war with Kuwait and finally war with the US. What has war done for Iraq? Some of these choices are hard but if you do not make the right choice - you and your future generations will continue to suffer. Understand that choosing peace is also a choice and your defence spending on shiny weapons are a small sub-set of your country's choices.

Last edited by OPSSG; April 11th, 2015 at 08:06 AM.
OPSSG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 2nd, 2009   #19
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,569
Threads:
Interesting Subject

OPSSG this can be an interesting subject. How much a country should invest on the defence industries. As a Banker I'm interest on this since my banks and several other government owned banks in here also being challenge to financed our own Defence industries.

I'm not going to hijack this thread, perhaps should open another thread on the need for countries to maintain her own defence industries, and how big realistically it can go.
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 2nd, 2009   #20
Super Moderator
General
OPSSG's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3,299
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ananda View Post
...on the need for countries to maintain her own defence industries, and how big realistically it can go.
It is hard to talk about the size of a country's defence industry, in part because it's size should be determined by:
(i) the size of domestic defence market for products made by these companies in their relevant market segment (which is affected by a country's defence spending levels); and

(ii) the export potential for the product made (which is determined by how much tech is inside the product).
For example, Indonesia has a fairly big army, so the defence companies should focus on making things for the army (and not the air force or navy). Given the size of Indonesia's army, ammo and rifles should be the next obvious areas (which is also how Singapore got started in defence manufacturing).

It could be high end stuff or even low end stuff. IMO, it is a mistake for Indonesia to focus only on high tech end alone (like the aircraft industry) because your country's low technology base and your country's investment levels in R&D is low - which results in uncompetitive products. They would be so uncompetitive that it would affect your army's capability development if the bought that local made product.

With Indonesia's low cost of labour army clothing, shoes, boots, bullet proof vests and other personal equipment should be an area of research focus. Once you have done it, your country would own the technology and make money from licensing the technology or even better, you can produce the product in Indonesia. Most importantly, Indonesia can manufacture labour intensive products at a competitive price. All technology invested in this area can also be applied to camping equipment and be sold as outdoor gear. However, such unsexy areas are likely to impress politicians and generals.

Alternatively, Indonesian companies should JV with more established defence companies and be a parts manufacturer. This means that Indonesia manufactures a part of a bigger weapons system instead of the whole thing by yourself.

Don't try to compete head-on. Instead seek to carve successive niches of increasing complexity. If you want to take a giant leap, you are more likely to fail. Let's face it, Indonesia can make military transport planes thanks to Habibie's vision and support. But today, which other country would like to buy made in Indonesian military planes (with cash and not just barter trade)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ananda View Post
How much a country should invest on the defence industries.
Perhaps the wrong question.

The main problem with a company focusing on defence alone is the feast or famine business model - it is the inconsistency of defence demand in the economic downturns that destroys the company's ability to retain a capability. Your defence companies must seek to carve niches in complementary civilian markets where the staff can also be employed in, when there are no local defence contracts to be found. For example, ST Marine actually builds tankers, cargo containers and RoRo vessels as well when they are not building navy ships.

ST Kinetics started out in automotive repair but Indonesia has more than the automotive business. You have a vibrant construction, logging and mining market. Your defence industry should look at giving contracts to re-engine your tanks/IFVs/APCs to successful Indonesian companies like PT Trakindo Utama, who are competitive in their respective industry niches. Batam has quite a few ship building companies (who do tug boats very well). Maybe you should be looking there for future companies to groom into defence industry leaders, rather than the existing corrupt bunch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ananda View Post
As a Banker I'm interest on this since my banks and several other government owned banks in here also being challenge to financed our own Defence industries.
BTW, Singapore allocates 4% of our defence budget to R&D (or ~S$400 million a year). Without constant R&D funding and the proper R&D organisations, you cannot build capability in your defence industry.

Last edited by OPSSG; September 2nd, 2009 at 12:27 PM.
OPSSG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 2nd, 2009   #21
Super Moderator
General
OPSSG's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3,299
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Straits Times
Sep 2, 2009 - The Terrex... can roar across rugged terrain at a top speed of 105 kmh. Also at home in water, it weighs 26 tonnes and can carry 13 soldiers. The Singapore Armed Forces will buy 45 of these for its three combined arms divisions, and troops will start training on them in February. The vehicle is the result of a two-year partnership between the army, defence company Singapore Technologies Kinetics and the Defence Science & Technology Agency.

The Terrex takes foot soldiers away from being moved in lumbering, canvas-topped three-tonners, which are less mobile and still require troops to hotfoot it, sometimes for hours, to get to their destinations... But it is more than just a 'taxi'. Its electronic brain shows troops what is up ahead: On secure touch-screens, soldiers are given updates on troop positions - friendly ones marked in blue and hostile ones in red - in near real-time.
h/t to CJ for video and text below:


First view of a Singapore Army Terrex Infantry Carrier Vehicle demonstrating its Battlefield Management System (BMS), which improves the situational awareness of the embarked infantry especially during closed hatch operations. The 8-wheeled armoured vehicle and its BMS were developed in Singapore by the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF), Defence Science & Technology Agency (DSTA) and defence contractor, Singapore Technologies Kinetics.

Note the onboard cameras which pipe images of the outside world to the colour display in the troop compartment. The gunner (seated, left, up front) shares the same view as the screen in the troop compartment.


In the above video, the vehicle is simulating an overwatch of an enemy-held built-up area. [Yes, they are speaking English]

The Terrex was unveiled in Singapore on 3 September 2009 at the Army Open House, organised by the Singapore Combat Engineers.

Notes: These videos and text are also posted in the Gen. Casey Jr. visits Singapore Picture thread.

Last edited by OPSSG; September 28th, 2009 at 12:17 PM.
OPSSG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2009   #22
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,569
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by OPSSG View Post
For example, Indonesia has a fairly big army, so the defence companies should focus on making things for the army (and not the air force or navy). Given the size of Indonesia's army, ammo and rifles should be the next obvious areas (which is also how Singapore got started in defence manufacturing).

With Indonesia's low cost of labour army clothing, shoes, boots, bullet proof vests and other personal equipment should be an area of research focus. Once you have done it, your country would own the technology and make money from licensing the technology or even better, you can produce the product in Indonesia. Most importantly, Indonesia can manufacture labour intensive products at a competitive price. All technology invested in this area can also be applied to camping equipment and be sold as outdoor gear. However, such unsexy areas are likely to impress politicians and generals.
Opssg, I would not try to hijack your thread on the subjects of developing local defense industries. That's why I'm starting another thread on the subjects. But many thanks for your repply and info.

Sritex is a textile company in Solo Central Java that's products have meet Nato standard and uses by German armed forces. It's not a sexy products in such many armed forces brass has not reallize for some time that substantial part of German Armed forces uniformed (even for specialized conditions) supply from here.

Quote:
Don't try to compete head-on. Instead seek to carve successive niches of increasing complexity. If you want to take a giant leap, you are more likely to fail. Let's face it, Indonesia can make military transport planes thanks to Habibie's vision and support. But today, which other country would like to buy made in Indonesian military planes (with cash and not just barter trade)?
In other thread, I already mentioned that banks will be very reluctant to finance that kind of ventures. However this's the thing that those dim witted in parlements trying so hard to developed again in the name of nasionalistics pride.

Quote:
BTW, Singapore allocates 4% of our defence budget to R&D (or ~S$400 million a year). Without constant R&D funding and the proper R&D organisations, you cannot build capability in your defence industry
Well that's the problem. With only less that 1% of GDP submitt to defences, the government try to coax the banks chipping in for defense industries development. Still no banks in right mind wants to finance R&D of defense industries.

Last edited by OPSSG; July 3rd, 2010 at 01:22 PM.
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2009   #23
Defense Enthusiast
Lieutenant
Firn's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 648
Threads:
Quote:
With a 2.8 litre engine, it is fun take off-road but in its basic configuration, it has got zero protection against small arms fire or IEDs (as compared to a vehicle like the RG-31).

The Spider LSV was initially developed for our Guards Formation, which is a light infantry, rapid deployment, heli-mobile force. The Spider LSV is used by our Spike ATGM equipped anti-tank teams (click here and here for pixs of NZ live firing) and also to carry a ST Kinetics 120mm SRAMS low recoil mortar (see SRAMS brochure) (click here for the SRAMS mounted on the Spider pix). In fact, our Chinooks regularly sling load 2 Spider LSVs at one time. Since the Dec 2004 Tsunami, the Guards Formation has also been additionally tasked to be the planning group to any regional humanitarian crisis.

Fyi, ST Kinetics' 120mm SRAMS has been sold to UAE as part of AGRAB (Scorpion). The 3 man operated AGRAB (click for pix) is a 120mm SRAMS mounted on a BAE Systems RG-31 (10-ton 4x4 armoured and mine-protected vehicle) and it carries 46 mortar rounds in two carousels and has 2 further racks for another 12 rounds. UAE bought 48 AGRABs and associated ammo from a local manufacturer, International Golden Group in a deal worth 390 million dirham (US$106 million).
The SRAMS seems to be an excellent mean to give light vehicles the ability to deploy a source of heavy firepower. If it is usuable mounted on the bed of the light Spider than the mitigation and management of the recoil must be truly highly effective and interesting. In an configuration like the AGRAB it seems to be a brilliant way to get a cost-effective firesupport for light units. It might find good use in places like Afghanistan, where forces sometimes are forced to operate quite far away from supporting artillery, if it all. Such a mobile piece of "artillery" could stay much closer and thus increase the intrinsic accuracy of the firesupport.
________________
"The first criterioun in war remains decisive action. Everyone, from the highest commander down to the youngest soldier, must constantly be aware that inaction and neglect incriminate him more severely than any error in the choice of means.
Firn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 14th, 2009   #24
New Member
Private
sunshin3's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 40
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firn View Post
The SRAMS seems to be an excellent mean to give light vehicles the ability to deploy a source of heavy firepower.
Yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Firn View Post
If it is usuable mounted on the bed of the light Spider than the mitigation and management of the recoil must be truly highly effective and interesting.
While the recoil management mechanism on the SRAMS is innovative, the Spider actually needs to lower an additional 'recoil damper' (I'm not sure what it is called) onto the ground before firing. With the AGRAB's heavier chasis, there is no need for to lower an additional 'recoil damper'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Firn View Post
It might find good use in places like Afghanistan, where forces sometimes are forced to operate quite far away from supporting artillery, if it all. Such a mobile piece of "artillery" could stay much closer and thus increase the intrinsic accuracy of the firesupport.
There are currently only 2 users of the SRAMS, UAE and Singapore. So we are unlikely to see this motar in action in Afgahnistan.
sunshin3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 14th, 2009   #25
New Member
Private
sunshin3's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 40
Threads:
Extract of another report on the Terrex (I've not provided a link as I need permission from the Webmaster/Mods to do so):

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strategy Page
Terrex The Terrific

September 12, 2009: Singapore is buying 135 Terrex Infantry Combat vehicles (ICV). The first infantry units will receive them in February 2010. The 25 ton Terrex is optimized for urban environments. The U.S. Army’s use of the Stryker ICV and its success on the battlefield influenced the selection of Terrex, and subsequent modifications.

Costing $1.5 million each, the vehicle is externally similar to the Stryker, with 8 wheels and a remote controlled weapons turret atop the hull. The hull has a V shape for mine protection. The vehicle is 7 meters long (22.96 feet), 2.7 meters wide (8.85 feet), and 2.1 meters high (6.88 feet). The vehicle carries 13 soldiers and 2 crewmen (driver and commander), in its armored personnel carrier (APC) role... More ballistic protection is available in the form of bolt on or welded armor (slat, cage type), which is fitted alongside the hull for defense against Rocket Propelled Grenades (RPG’s)... Top speed is 110 kilometers per hour with a range of 800 kilometers. The vehicle is amphibious, using water jets mounted on either side of the rear hull to propels the vehicle at 10 kilometers per hour in the water.

Electronics a Battlefield Management System (BMS) which permits full awareness of a battlespace providing sharable information to other vehicles or soldiers. A Weapon Detection System (WDS) is provided to spot enemy fire. All information is displayed on colored screens in the commander’s position just aft of the driver.

Indonesia expressed the desire to acquire 420 vehicles with a license to produce it locally. Turkey has also licensed the vehicle for production...

-- Mike Perry
The 135 intial Terrex order will enable Singapore to equip 3 infantry battalions and there are 7 variants in the 135 vehicle order:

(i) troop carrier,
(ii) command post,
(iii) pioneer (or armoured engineer) vehicle,
(iv) armoured ambulance,
(v) ATGM,
(vi) STORM (strike observer mission), and
(vii) RSTA (recce, surveillance, target acquisition).

This purchase will enable each of these 3G infantry battalions to get 45 of their own Terrexs. This looks to me as if Singapore is moving towards motorised infantry and seems to be following the US BCT concept closely. The Terrex is equipped with a 40mm/7.62mm RWS and there's also a 12.7mm HMG version. Here's another video from the recent Army Open House (AOH):


I like the fact that they have integrated a weapons location system that automatically turns the RWS to the approximate direction of the enemy firng. There's also a video by CJ below on Singapore's use of unattened sensors, UAVs and remote controlled vehicles


Note: The above video has not been edited for sound, and there's some irrelevant backgound noise.

Comments anyone?

Last edited by sunshin3; September 14th, 2009 at 03:52 AM.
sunshin3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 14th, 2009   #26
Defense Professional / Analyst
Captain
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Singapore, Shanghai
Posts: 653
Threads:
Ten years ago when I was still a reservist, my unit were among those used to test the concept of (returning to)* wheel AFV.

The platform we used was of course the ancient V-200 reverted back to troop carrier role.

Our training concentrated mostly on FIBUA (MOUT). So if I hazard a guess, I would say that the Terrex will be employed as a quick reaction - but mainly FIBUA - role?

* "returning to" because the V-200 were initially procured as a wheeled APC. But when it was found they sometimes topple over or cannot climb inclines etc, they were turned over to airbase security and AA roles. All armoured troop carriers, AFVs etc since then were tracks. And now the Terrex marks the return to wheels after more than 20 years, maybe more.

Last edited by Chino; September 15th, 2009 at 03:14 AM.
Chino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 18th, 2009   #27
Defense Enthusiast
Lieutenant
Firn's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 648
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunshin3 View Post
While the recoil management mechanism on the SRAMS is innovative, the Spider actually needs to lower an additional 'recoil damper' (I'm not sure what it is called) onto the ground before firing. With the AGRAB's heavier chasis, there is no need for to lower an additional 'recoil damper'.
.
Quite understandable. IIRC the suspension of the carrier vehicle can too absorb part of the recoil. There is of course a limit to that for a light platform which a corrisponding suspension, but a heavier vehicle means that the recoil must move far more suspended mass.
________________
"The first criterioun in war remains decisive action. Everyone, from the highest commander down to the youngest soldier, must constantly be aware that inaction and neglect incriminate him more severely than any error in the choice of means.
Firn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 18th, 2009   #28
Defense Enthusiast
Lieutenant
Firn's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 648
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunshin3 View Post

The 135 intial Terrex order will enable Singapore to equip 3 infantry battalions and there are 7 variants in the 135 vehicle order:

(i) troop carrier,
(ii) command post,
(iii) pioneer (or armoured engineer) vehicle,
(iv) armoured ambulance,
(v) ATGM,
(vi) STORM (strike observer mission), and
(vii) RSTA (recce, surveillance, target acquisition).

This purchase will enable each of these 3G infantry battalions to get 45 of their own Terrexs. This looks to me as if Singapore is moving towards motorised infantry and seems to be following the US BCT concept closely. The Terrex is equipped with a 40mm/7.62mm RWS and there's also a 12.7mm HMG version.
My post 123 about the best strategy to defend Singapore "validates" this transformation. Given that manpower is relative scarse compared to the other assets of the state (wealth, education, technology) mechanized infantry becomes a very efficient and suited way to achieve a high levels of military capability.


Quote:
I like the fact that they have integrated a weapons location system that automatically turns the RWS to the approximate direction of the enemy firng. There's also a video by CJ below on Singapore's use of unattened sensors, UAVs and remote controlled vehicles
I made a smiliar point in the thread about a mortar fire-support vehicle and before in the British army thread. SA and responsivness are key elements in any successful defense, especially so in ambushes. The acoustic WLS will enable the crew to supress the enemy much more quickly, while greatly increasing the SA of all members by putting the location of the attacker on the digital map, thus enabling also to call in the joint fires far more rapidly.
________________
"The first criterioun in war remains decisive action. Everyone, from the highest commander down to the youngest soldier, must constantly be aware that inaction and neglect incriminate him more severely than any error in the choice of means.
Firn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2009   #29
Super Moderator
General
OPSSG's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3,299
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by OPSSG View Post
Hi. I'm starting a new thread on designed/made/integrated in Singapore military equipment news. This will enable me to have a central place to park news such as the Warthog UOR win (as the Bronco thread is closed) for ST Kinetics' Bronco, updates on the French Army's Vehicule Haute Mobilité (VHM - High Mobility Vehicle) programme or latest developments of the Advanced Combat Man System (ACMS).
Here's an update on the Warthog UOR. It looks like the Warthog is sightly heavier and better armoured than the baseline Bronco. I like the fact that the Warthog is also equipped with a Platt Shielded Ring Mount (click to see Warthog picture). Thales will install UK-specific equipment to the vehicles, including additional armour, specialist electronic counter-measure equipment and communication tools, to bring them in line with UK theatre-entry requirements. The contract includes a support package for the Thales-supplied systems and equipment, as well as assistance to ST Kinetics as the UK point of contact for Warthog warranty support matters. Other UK suppliers include Gallay for the air-conditioning system, and Permali Gloucester for the appliqué armour. SELEX Galileo of Finmeccanica will equip the Warthog with both thermal and daylight cameras, which is already in service on Mastiff, Wolfhound, Ridgeback, Challenger II, and Viking.

According to Janes, an extract of which is cited below:

Quote:
10 September 2009 - ST Kinetics is on schedule to deliver the first three Warthog armoured all-terrain tracked vehicles later this month and all 115 vehicles are due to be delivered in 2010... The UK MoD placed the £150 million-plus contract for the Warthog programme late last year... with four versions being procured – troop carrier, command post, ambulance and repair/recovery. In order to de-risk the programme prior to production, ST Kinetics built a Warthog testbed, which incorporated many improvements. This underwent a successful 2,000km-plus trial in the United Arab Emirates this year, where it operated in temperatures of up to +47°C.

Warthog is a further development of the Bronco, which has been in service with the Singapore Armed Forces since 2001 in many configurations and has a typical gross vehicle weight (GVW) of 16 tonnes. The Warthog has a Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) of up to 19 tonnes, with a total internal volume of 13m3.

To meet the demanding UK Warthog requirement, the Bronco has been upgraded in many areas, including installation of airconditioning in front and rear units, and a new armour package that includes spall liners, appliqué armour and bar armour...

Last edited by OPSSG; September 24th, 2009 at 02:35 AM.
OPSSG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2009
Askarpencen
This message has been deleted by OPSSG. Reason: Rude Spam
Old September 24th, 2009   #30
Defense Enthusiast
Lieutenant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 523
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by OPSSG View Post
It

For example, Indonesia has a fairly big army, so the defence companies should focus on making things for the army (and not the air force or navy). Given the size of Indonesia's army, ammo and rifles should be the next obvious areas (which is also how Singapore got started in defence manufacturing).

It could be high end stuff or even low end stuff. IMO, it is a mistake for Indonesia to focus only on high tech end alone (like the aircraft industry) because your country's low technology base and your country's investment levels in R&D is low - which results in uncompetitive products. They would be so uncompetitive that it would affect your army's capability development if the bought that local made product.

With Indonesia's low cost of labour army clothing, shoes, boots, bullet proof vests and other personal equipment should be an area of research focus. Once you have done it, your country would own the technology and make money from licensing the technology or even better, you can produce the product in Indonesia. Most importantly, Indonesia can manufacture labour intensive products at a competitive price. All technology invested in this area can also be applied to camping equipment and be sold as outdoor gear. However, such unsexy areas are likely to impress politicians and generals.

Alternatively, Indonesian companies should JV with more established defence companies and be a parts manufacturer. This means that Indonesia manufactures a part of a bigger weapons system instead of the whole thing by yourself.

Don't try to compete head-on. Instead seek to carve successive niches of increasing complexity. If you want to take a giant leap, you are more likely to fail. Let's face it, Indonesia can make military transport planes thanks to Habibie's vision and support. But today, which other country would like to buy made in Indonesian military planes (with cash and not just barter trade)?


ST Kinetics started out in automotive repair but Indonesia has more than the automotive business. You have a vibrant construction, logging and mining market. Your defence industry should look at giving contracts to re-engine your tanks/IFVs/APCs to successful Indonesian companies like PT Trakindo Utama, who are competitive in their respective industry niches. Batam has quite a few ship building companies (who do tug boats very well). Maybe you should be looking there for future companies to groom into defence industry leaders, rather than the existing corrupt bunch.

.
Yes, we already make our own uniforms, shoes, boots, bullet proof vests and other personal equipment like helmets, assault rifles, pistols, revolvers, sniper rifles.
We also make armoured personal carriers.

But we also need (high-tech)stuff for our navy and airforce.
Thats why we build our own patrol boats and LPDs, transport helicopters, transport and maritime patrol aircrafts...
And of course we make aircraft parts for other aircraft manufacturers....


As far as i know the only Singaporean weaponsystems we use are a small amount of SAR-21 (i really like this rifle, its in use by Den Bravo 90 of the special forces of the airforce) and FH-2000 houwitzers (in use by TNI-AD).
Attached Images
File Type: jpeg 452650535_5_fqSc.jpeg (284.6 KB, 10 views)
File Type: jpeg 452650979_5_krSn.jpeg (246.4 KB, 6 views)
File Type: jpeg 154673640_5_AzJ0.jpeg (37.6 KB, 9 views)

Last edited by Sandhi Yudha; September 25th, 2009 at 10:52 PM. Reason: type mistake
Sandhi Yudha is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:36 AM.