Magic
TROPHY APS
Don't need no stinking bloated armor or optimized surfaces.

Will this be used for internal problems? I just don't see them facing an external threat.

 

Needs a overhead drone with thermal that follows it around too.

Not in Singapore

Why does any country dare think it should be able to defend itself?

Kick azz on any Korean War era tank.  I'll take two.

Indeed. That’s barely two inches below the average American height. Doesn’t sound too crazy for a country that’s almost 100% East Asian.

This isn’t Denmark we’re talking about.

Looks very top heavy

I used to work for a museum that had a handful of -113s and a couple other things that were -113 derivatives. The crew layout makes me think they went with M113 drivetrain and front-end, with the remote (presumably so it's self-contained with no basket in the hull) turret over the dismount compartment.

With as much ignorance as there is on display in this thread at least you are asking a question rather than saying something as stupid as that the gun is too small regardless of if is larger than the Bradley’s or is the exact same gun used on the Stryker Dragoon or positing that A-10s are going to destroy allied vehicles because of whatever reasons.

Singapore’s defensive strategy is to meet the enemy before it reaches the point of invasion. This is why they routinely ship their vehicles to Taiwan and Australia for exercises and why they operate things like their versions of F-15Es and Airbus tankers. As for why they have this approach open the Japanese army’s Malaya campaign and capture of Singapore wiki pages.

I'd drive it down the 805 and then the 163...

Wish we had that turret on our 113s.

Deterrence

The last time when we didn't have the ability to defend ourselves, things didn't work out so well for us.

You have the patience and temperament of a saint.

Were he to persist, I was ready to post a picture of a guy with a head up his ass and a caption, “nope, can’t see much from here.”

Your methods may be more... diplomatic.

It's worst is when Singaporeans question the need for the military, saying we have experience peace for the past 50 years, there will never be war.

Don't underestimate need for strong military

It is unfortunate that those who have very little knowledge of military history and defence matters have made general comments on Singapore's defence policy ("Open debate needed on defence policy" by Dr Paul Tambyah of the Singapore Democratic Party; yesterday).

Singapore veterans who have been through World War II and Konfrontasi would remember their experiences during those difficult periods.

The former period, in 1942, showed how unprepared the armed forces were to face the onslaught of the Japanese troops.

However, the latter period proved that, with a strong military that included modern naval, air force and army assets, the British and Commonwealth forces could successfully defend Malaysia and Singapore, and deter then Indonesian President Sukarno from carrying out his expansionist plans.

A strong military is a strong deterrent, which is important for Singapore's defence.

We should never be so naive as to think that all will be well in the region in future years.

Jealousies and aggressive policies could develop.

But such adversaries would be deterred by our strong and modern military that can not only protect, but also reach out to targets in potential enemy territories.

There are some who think that the years spent in national service should be further reduced, but this is unhealthy thinking.

As our population dwindles in numbers, we also need to train our military with the most advanced military technology to ensure an active and robust deterrent force.

This priority includes the possible purchase of the F-35 jets or whatever advanced aircraft is finally chosen for the Republic of Singapore Air Force.

We have our defence experts and scientists to make the necessary assessments wisely for future needs.

It is important not to believe in hearsay.

It is naive to think that the situation could not change in neighbouring countries, and that we will always have peace in the region.

As for the question on amphibious assets.






















The Republic of Singapore Navy (RSN) landing platform dock (LPD) vessel RSS Endurance (background) sailing with the US Navy’s DDG 51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyer USS Benfold, during Exercise ‘Pacific Griffin’ off Guam in mid-2017. Amphibious capability underlines the RSN’s ability to project power at distance, but the navy does not have a sovereign at-sea support capability. (US Navy)

No matter how well it served the procurement process was a joke.
Kind of like the F-35....

Defense procurement spending certainly has a lot of corruption involved at the upper levels. Buddy-buddy favors on who gets to provide spare parts, who gets to take credit for certain things, etc.

None of that says anything about the effectiveness of the product itself. Pentagon Wars is entertaining, but not an accurate picture of what the Bradley was supposed to be about. It wasn't supposed to replace the M113, it was supposed to compete with the Soviet BMP.

Nice RV.