Singapore to acquire Leopard 2A4s

MG 3

New Member
Good point. Unless Singapore plans to use them as fixed guns against potential amphibious invasions (a bit like the British tried to do in WW2 in Singapore... with the advantage though that you can turn around and shoot 360° :D )
Seriously, Singapore doesn't need such heavy MBTs to protect its small island. Though it could make good use of them in overseas peacekeeping/enforcing missions. Given the excellent training and equipment of the SAF, they should help more in peacekeeping !
cheers
Buying Leo's for peacekeeping still not a good enough reason. But that coastal guns ideas sounds fun. Tank Armour Vs Ship Armour, so if any one wants to invade Singapore they better fit their ships with reactive armour;).

I think a lot of people here underestimate the effectiveness of heavy armour in Jungle terrain. Australia used tanks with great success in Vietnam in supporting infantry and Singapore would be equally as effective.
Never doubted it. We also have a patch of gungle in northern punjab and tanks work fine there.

I don't think Singapore has any intention of fighting on its own territory if it's at all possible to avoid. I believe they would expect to be fighting to defend Singapore in Malaysia, probably assisting the Malaysian armed forces. Or in Indonesia. Fighting in the the streets of Singapore itself would imply that the heavy armour had already been lost.

Wow! Malaysia and Ina allowing the Singaporian army on their land to protect Singapore. These countries amongst each other dont get along verywell so there is little chance of that happening. BTW if someone has the capability to defeat Malaysia and Ina then I dont think Singapore will have much of achance.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
Wow! Malaysia and Ina allowing the Singaporian army on their land to protect Singapore. These countries amongst each other dont get along verywell so there is little chance of that happening. BTW if someone has the capability to defeat Malaysia and Ina then I dont think Singapore will have much of achance.
No, to help them protect themselves, which would also protect Singapore. What was the British army doing in France 1914-18 & 1939-40? Charity work? The French accepted it because it helped them fight the Germans, but it wasn't there because we liked the French or they liked us. It was there to keep the German army as far as possible from England.

One doesn't have to postulate an enemy able to defeat both Malaysia & Indonesia. Consider this: an enemy capable of defeating Malaysia, if Malaysia fights alone, but if you add the Singapore armed forces on Malaysias side, the enemy is outweighed.
 

MG 3

New Member
No, to help them protect themselves, which would also protect Singapore. What was the British army doing in France 1914-18 & 1939-40? Charity work? The French accepted it because it helped them fight the Germans, but it wasn't there because we liked the French or they liked us. It was there to keep the German army as far as possible from England.

One doesn't have to postulate an enemy able to defeat both Malaysia & Indonesia. Consider this: an enemy capable of defeating Malaysia, if Malaysia fights alone, but if you add the Singapore armed forces on Malaysias side, the enemy is outweighed.
But what if Malaysia is the enemy. My point is that the Malay do not concider singapore their friends. Would they be able to defend themselves from Malaysia.
 

FutureTank

Banned Member
Use of Singaporean forces

Where would the Singaporen Army use its tanks seems to be the question.

The answer may be Kra Isthmus, Thailand, a narrow neck of the Malay Peninsula, c.40 mi 60 km wide, Sw Thailand, between the Bay of Bengal and the Gulf of Thailand. It has long been the proposed site of a ship canal that would bypass the congested Straits of Malacca.

Kra Canal feasibility study contract splits Thai government
Reports that the authorities in Thailand have commissioned a feasibility study into the controversial Kra Canal project, awarding the $25 million contract to Phuket Pas Project, a Hong Kong company whose investors are drawn from Japan, Australia, Singapore and Malaysia. I have not been able to confirm these investors, but note that all the countries mentioned are those that would benefit least, and have most to loose from the canal building.

"Announcing the award of the study contract, deputy prime minister Chavalit Yongchaiyutdh said the 100km long canal would benefit the Thai economy, as China is keen to use Thailand as a gateway for quicker and smoother access to South-East Asia and the Indian Ocean," said Fairplay.

"According to the local paper Matichon, the agreement with Phuket Pas was signed in secret with 12 members of the Canal committee refusing to approve the award. Phuket Pas, however, stated that there were a hundred people present at the signing and expressed optimism that it could raise the $20 billion for the project," noted Fairplay in its report.
http://www.sandandgravel.com/news/news/news_928.htm

This is old news from 2003, but the consequences of building this canal will mean significant redirection of shipping from Singapore. Shipping is one of significant reasons for Singapore's commercial success. Singapore is also a significant employer and investor in Malaysia.

In August 2006 it was reported that "The three-year preparatory feasibility report by the Senate Ad-hoc Committee on the Kra Canal Project that was finished and approved last year by the Cabinet recommended that a complete feasibility study be carried out as soon as possible. Yet somehow there has not been any follow-up. This inertia prompted the Royal Naval Academy to take up the issue and brought all concerned authorities together to discuss the pros and cons of the Thai Canal Project. Captain Soonpuen Sommaphi, the spokesman of the Naval Academy, pointed out that it would be a huge project that needed to be thoroughly debated by think-tanks and public forums.

Kamnuan Chalopatham, chairman of the ad-hoc committee, has said outright that the future of Thailand and its economic development depend on the digging of canals in the South. He said he believed that canals would alleviate the lingering effects of the economic crisis and turn Thailand into a regional commercial and financial hub.

He and his committee chose the A9 route out, one of 10 under review. To those in the know, the 120-kilometre A9 route is the most feasible path, cutting through the provinces of Krabi, Phatthalung, Nakorn Si Thammarat, Songkhla and Trang."

From Wikipedia (but available elsewhere):
In the 20th century the idea resurfaced several times again, now changing the preferred route to somewhere in Southern Thailand, to connect the Bandon Bay near Surat Thani with Phangnga. A Japanese plan for a canal in 1985 would have used over twenty nuclear devices each roughly twice the explosive energy of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima. The latest proposed site is across Nakhon Si Thammarat and Trang provinces. If finished, it is believed that the canal would bring an economic boost to the nearby area and the whole country. The canal would compete directly with ports in the Strait of Malacca area, including Port Klang and Singapore.

The idea is still entertained by a few Thai politicians today, however the high costs as well as ecological problems make it unlikely to be realized in the near future. Instead currently the construction of a railroad connection between Surat Thani and Phuket is discussed. In 2005, however, an internal report prepared for U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was leaked to The Washington Times, spelling out China's strategy of underwriting construction of the canal across the Kra Isthmus complete with Chinese port facilities and refineries, as part of its "string of pearls" strategy of forward bases and energy security. The Chinese plan called for construction over ten years employing roughly 30,000 workers and costing between 20 and 25 billion American dollars.

This is also a reason for recent interest in the canal. The Straits of Malacca, just under 1000 kilometres long, are narrow, less than 2.5 kilometres at the narrowest, and a depth of 25 meters at it’s shallowest. It is heavy used by oil tankers and bulk carriers. Some 80 percent of Japan's oil supplies pass through the Straits. Any planned canal in Thailand would mean that large ships could travel through the region from India and on to China and Japan without passing through the heavy pirate regions of the Straits of Malacca.

In case anyone needs reminding, the Kra Ishtmus is how the Japanese invaded Singapore in WW2.

If the canal is built, the Thai and Burma are likely to receive considerable income from the venture. This may explain why Thai government has been trying to find a iolence-free solution to its Southern provinced. Apolitical strategy would remove a pretext for opposition group support from other Muslim countries in the region, Malaysia and Indonesia. Burmese migrant workers account for 80% of Thailand's migrant workers.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
Where would the Singaporen Army use its tanks seems to be the question.

The answer may be Kra Isthmus, Thailand, a narrow neck of the Malay Peninsula, c.40 mi 60 km wide, Sw Thailand, between the Bay of Bengal and the Gulf of Thailand. It has long been the proposed site of a ship canal that would bypass the congested Straits of Malacca.
...
And how does building a canal lead to a war? Or do you think Singapore believes in zero-sum politics, & would invade Thailand to stop construction?
In case anyone needs reminding, the Kra Ishtmus is how the Japanese invaded Singapore in WW2.
...
No it isn't.The Japanese launched an invasion of Malaya & southern Thailand (south of the Kra isthmus!) from the sea. The Kra Isthmus is far away from Singapore, & the roads were bad. They landed closer, in more developed (better roads!) British-ruled Malaya, in the far south of Thailand close to the Malay border.
 

FutureTank

Banned Member
Kra isthmus

And how does building a canal lead to a war? Or do you think Singapore believes in zero-sum politics, & would invade Thailand to stop construction?.
I don't know what they believe in, do you? How would they react to as much as 60% of shipping going North? Wuld India pay China for passage of Kra Canal? Would Iran pay? I don't know....just suggesting.

No it isn't.The Japanese launched an invasion of Malaya & southern Thailand (south of the Kra isthmus!) from the sea. The Kra Isthmus is far away from Singapore, & the roads were bad. They landed closer, in more developed (better roads!) British-ruled Malaya, in the far south of Thailand close to the Malay border.
The Japanese landed in the North and moved south defeating the III Corps in the process. I was just pointing out its not a new area for combat.
 

Ths

Banned Member
To me 66 Leo's sound like an armoured infantry division - which would be a match for an army corps landing with tanks.

The AMX would do splendid against a simultaneous airborne invasion at another place.
 

FutureTank

Banned Member
To me 66 Leo's sound like an armoured infantry division - which would be a match for an army corps landing with tanks.

The AMX would do splendid against a simultaneous airborne invasion at another place.
Singapore army has British style armoured regiments of 3-4 squadrons (US battalion in total), so 66 sounds like 2 regiments (battalions) worth.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
Weasel,

well said! A couple of minor points . . .

...
The Kra isthmus is a defensive chokepoint that SG probably takes into account for defensive purposes. It was estimated in WW2 that 4 divisions can hold the isthmus indefinitely. That is the principle behind op matador.
....
The Japanese army went round it, as would Allied armies if they'd fought their way through there at the end of the war. It's only defensible if you control the sea.
The loss of revenue from a canal is not likely to spark a war with SG or an SG invasion.
More than not likely. Not a casus belli by any stretch of the imagination, especially not to a pragmatic, legalistic, commercially-minded leadership like that of Singapore, in charge of an economy closely linked to those of its neighbours.
 

Whiskyjack

Honorary Moderator / Defense Professional / Analys
Verified Defense Pro
Singapore army has British style armoured regiments of 3-4 squadrons (US battalion in total), so 66 sounds like 2 regiments (battalions) worth.
More likely one Battalion/Regiment, NATO standard for a Tank Battalion seems to be around the 44 mark, which leaves 20 odd for training and spares.
 

Whiskyjack

Honorary Moderator / Defense Professional / Analys
Verified Defense Pro
Yup and that should be 3 combined arms Armoured Infantry Btns. Roughly equal to a div.
Brigade, would be 3 combined arms battalions. 1 Tank, 2 infantry. Assuming a 3 battalion brigade.:)
 

FutureTank

Banned Member
More likely one Battalion/Regiment, NATO standard for a Tank Battalion seems to be around the 44 mark, which leaves 20 odd for training and spares.
Singapore also purchased 30 spare tanks, so the 66 are for serving units. 20 are too many to use for training of one battalion, so I think they will use a Russian-style 31 tank org given the L2 is a far more capable tank then the Centurion :)
 

Whiskyjack

Honorary Moderator / Defense Professional / Analys
Verified Defense Pro
Singapore also purchased 30 spare tanks, so the 66 are for serving units. 20 are too many to use for training of one battalion, so I think they will use a Russian-style 31 tank org given the L2 is a far more capable tank then the Centurion :)
Not really, as the Australian Army have 59 for a two squadron regiment. Plus I don't see the Singapore military as using Russian TO, but then again I have been wrong before. :)

66 it two few for two battalions IMO.
 
Top