Fire Order Battery, Take Post!

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_we.../slwh/home.html

shoot and scoot.....

see the link for the factsheet


pegasus factsheet

Still prefer the LWSPH shown at the last aerospace. ....wonder why this was chosen instead. Hmm.....mabbe bcos the LWSPH can't shift the firing arc easily? Can't see clearly from the pic below, if this one can shift the firing arc. (Doubt so, looks mated to chasis)

Hmm....not exactly the shoot and scoot I prefer in the LWSPH. Also if I recall, LWSPH is around 4-5 man. This one is 6-8 man...more labour intensive leh.

A bigger pic found on the STENG website.

The LWSPH weighs 7 tons vs the 5.4 tons of the SLWH. Perhaps the heli-borne range penalty of that extra ton or so brings it below SAF requirements? Anyway, what do you think is the exportability of the Pegasus?

Video links.

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_..._newsvideo.html

56k
Broadband

:wacko: still no new tank. All the $ went to arty.

HOnestly, the components and applications does looks reasonably ideal but the design of the chassis has been undermine.On the first look, Potential export customer might have a relatively negative psychological influence on this machine.

IMO, a successfully weapon export doesnt just solely base on it general capability. An extra investment in her overall design might paveway for greater export opportunity.

ie. at a moment during the intensive competition between Creative and IPOD Mp3. It clear that creative does have better functions and programs but pple still choose IPOD reason: IPOD looks cool. eye pleasing!! :huh:

Yeah!! Where issss...the tankee!! :huh: so sad now the fighter jet has been selected where is our tankee

I think looks dont matter as much as the ability to fulfil operational requirements.... though the LWSPH definitely looks much better.

:D!! IMO.appearance wise Mmm...its still rather important at least for an export!

:blink: So from the video, it is not a towed gun.But, do u folks notice the crew is pretty exposed, don't they need some form of protection considering they are in enemy territories

It can be towed....according to the specs.....looks like be towed faster than the FH-88(not 100% sure).......It is not logical to task the chinnooks to fly the guns around everytime we need to move the guns. Easier to tow them around after dropping them in the area of ops.

As for protection, yeap.....pretty exposed. It is bare bone....but then....one would assume you don't do airlift operations in a unsecured sector. Very likely other friendly units in the area has secured the immediate perimeter.

Shouldn't it be time we get ourselves a couple of MLRS...??? I mean after all, one MLRS launcher alone is equivalent in fire power to four battries (16 Artillery Units) of 155mm or 205mm howitzers. Other than the costs of purchasing and maintaining the MLRS launchers, the advantages of fielding the MLRS far outweighs that of the Artillery/Howitzer.

Personally going for the M270 MLRS... or maybe we can make our own MLRS based on the "failed" Israeli MAR-350 and TAM VCLC MLRS.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


~~ Projection-ION Phoenix ~~ ~~ Op. Iceberge ~~ ~~ Iowa_BB61 ~~ ~~ xxKuZNetxx ~~


--------------------

If I am not wrong, the 7 tons LWSPH is already reached the weight limit of the CH-47, thus it would not able to carry much ammo, unlike the Pegasus of weight of only 5.4 tons !!! B)

I speculated that is why SAF has chosen to spent & design a further weight reduced Heli-capable howitzer.

saw in mindef's pics that the crew were still having m16 rifles... hope that the reason why they are not using the sar21 yet is not due to formation rivalry... maybe i'm just looking too much into this

the overall mechanical system is too expose..
seems to me the design was done by couple of gorups and it does not quite matching in some area.

IMO..It will work but it won't last.

Why tank? I still can't understand Singaporean military enthusiasts fixation with tanks in this region...

Just can't understand.

errr... actually its the army's fixation with artillery, every 5 to ten years there is a new type introduced.

I appreciate big guns, especially when they mop up the enemy before the infantry advances. it's always nice to know that the king of the battlefield makes it a bit safer for the queen to move about.

I think its because Tanks give people a visible sense of power-projection in any battle field whereas the kiasee Singaporeans prefer to use the fire-power of the big guns to obliverate the enemy to minimize the number of letters they have to send out with the military counsellors. :lol:

Nobody care to ask:

How SAF has spec a system where no one else in the world has thought of?

Unique military needs?A combination of what heli-lift capability we have and the size of our forces ..

That it must be made in SG? :lol:

No - seriously, I wld venture to say:

- Needs to be heli-lifted (weight-imposition)
- Self-propelled as aux
- Crew to be no more than ___ pax
- Ready to fire within ___ min.
- Tropicalised.

Find me wan that cld....

Southpark
The Dude

"Borrowed" design from the M777A1 with an added APU?

The similarities do seem to be there..a hidden JV with BAE?

Is that an innocent question or what? "You know who" is from artillery, you know?

Comparison bewteen the The Singapore Light Weight Howitzer Pegasus and the XM777 Lightweight 155mm howitzer (M777A1).


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Technical And Performance Specifications For The Singapore Light Weight Howitzer Pegasus Availvable HERE.

Technical And Performance Specifications For The XM777 Lightweight 155mm howitzer (M777A1) Availvable HERE.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





WINS

Pegasus - Design & Self-Propelled Cababilities Only

M777A1 - Weight, Crew-Capacity, Firing Range, Rate Of Fire, Towed Speed





-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


~~ Project-ION Phoenix ~~ ~~ Op. Iceberge ~~ ~~ Iowa_BB61 ~~ ~~ xxKuZNetxx ~~


--------------------

More likely with Vickers Shipbuilding and Engineering Limited (VSEL) for a proposal, before they became part of BAE. Current production standard is the M777A1, there might be a M777A2 in future (with APU too??).

Once fielded, the XM777 will be designated the M777A1. The M777A2, the following upgrade, will feature further software enhancements. BAe Systems is already working on a self-propelled howitzer based on the proven XM777.

The US Army and the USMC needed approximately 650 XM777s, 273 and 377 respectively. The first USMC XM777-equipped unit will achieve initial operational capability in 2004. Italy and the United Kingdom might become the first foreign customers of the XM777 towed howitzer, according to some reports.

BAE Systems was awarded a $834 million contract for the full rate production of the M777A1 howitzer on March 24, 2005. Under this contract BAE will manufacture 495 howitzers to be delivered to the US Army Stryker Interim Brigades and the US Marine Corps Air Ground Task Forces from 2005 until 2009.

SOURCE: deagle.com


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


~~ Project-ION Phoenix ~~ ~~ Op. Iceberge ~~ ~~ Iowa_BB61 ~~ ~~ xxKuZNetxx ~~


--------------------

Tough for tanks of any size to roam about in the terrain of this region. Ever been to the rubber plantation at Tekong? The trees are so closely spaced that even a SM-1 with it's 75mm will have trouble transversing that terrain. And that was supposed to be the most suitable ground for tanks aside from open terrain.

The fact remains that any tank heavy force in the region would have it's strength seriously dislocated fighting in this region.


I guess the SAF is taking the right step by employing heavy artillery and speedy APCS in its ORBAT.

hmm.... standoff warfare huh? Pound them half dead b4 closing in for the kill.

Makes for a safer environment for our occupying forces like me mah. :D

I hope pound them enuff and we don't even need to do most of the killing.

I wonder why we didn't get some CBU-105s... That is one power weapon which won acclolades in OIF. 2 of those decimated an armoured column. Get just enough CBU-105s for like, hmm, 48 tanks? haha.....

Hmm... just now surfing the net, chance upon tis Chinese website discussing on the new artillery....
:D :unsure: :angry: :(


http://comment4.news.sina.com.cn/comment/s...sid=27-1-328859

Lol, bunch of Chinese students who probably dun even know what the military's about. :lol:

No point being angry with them coz they may have the biggest army in the world but they can't even "invade" their own "breakaway province" so whats the use of such a big army? :lol:

Btw, how does our artillery in general compare to the west, China and Russian? In terms of fire power, accuracy. Do u notice there is this guy who quote Singapore is the pride of China--wat make them think so? Tat guy is writing F@#KING NONSENSE!!!!!!! :angry: :( :( :angry: :( :ph43r: :( :angry:

Singaporean artillery development has always been one of the best in the world. Our guns have achieved many world firsts. The FH88 was the first operational howitzer with a flick rammer, which is needed if you want to get a good burst rate of fire and is standard on howitzers around the world now. The FH2000 was the first operational 52-cal 155mm howitzer. The Pegasus is also a world first for a few reasons which have already been mentioned.

Artillery is the big force multiplier in jungle warfare, along with airpower. In an environment where you can usually only engage targets with direct fire at less than 500 m, and where moving 5 km per day on foot is considered good progress, being able to reach out and touch someone 40km away at any time is a huge advantage. Unlike rocket artillery and airpower, the artillery can always be there to support the troops due to its range and persistence. The artillery is vulnerable to counterbattery fire, but since we have so much artillery, a duel of attrition with our artillery would be a bad idea for a potential aggressor.

When PEGASUS re-deploy using it's own APU, how much AMMO can it carry with it?

So once emplaced, it'll need another load of AMMO? If yes, why not use the same helicopter to move to new emplacement.

I dun think the doctrine for the employment of these guns are cast in stone yet. Its up to the Artillery Doctrine Staff to work all the details out.

Hi folks, I posted an article, on the pegasus on the Sinodefence forum and managed to get some response. The folks there seems not so assuring on the howitzers and many pointed out some some problems. Any Arti guys care to explain some of the issues they point out? Btw, the poster, Gollevainen is a Finland reservist man and is an Artillery CPL (Finland practise 1yr 3 mths NS according to him). Maybe his suggessions may be of great use in discussions. :blink: :unsure:



http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/showthread.php?t=794