I remember during combined arms training they showed us a photo of Sherman tanks with infantry, assaulting a Japanese bunker in Corregidor during WW2. Since it is western doctrine to have MBTs, and our neighbors are also acquiring them, why not the AFP? What do you guys think, for the best MBT or fire support AFV for the AFP?

BTW I prefer the Centauro or Rooikat 105.

YES, having a Main Battle Tank for the AFP will be great. It can be used for mobility bombardment. It is best anti tank in terms of ground equipment, especially if you are fighting hoards of enemy tank(because it is more difficult to use 1 javellin against 5
T 72'S tanks, than having around 1 or 2 M1's or Leopard 2). It brings a bigger punch against enemy lines.( just like in WW1, British tanks blew the crap out of the Germans holing in the trenches. Besides of this functions, i think the greatest use of a tank is that it can defeat an enemy, even w/o firing a shot, eg. By using fear.(force multiplier). Imagine yourself as an insurgent in the jungles of Mindanao. You were fighting against the Phil Army, then suddenly: a Leopard 2 Tank appears in front of you. What would you feel? (Di ka kaya maihi sa gulat at takot?) MBT's are really good for every major army.

But with the current state of our economy and politics. We can't afford to purchase MBT's. (ni anti tanks nga tulad ng Javelin, Strykers,at MRF's, Hindi tayo makabili)

Mas pratical kung uunahin muna natin ung mga mas kailangang gamit. Kung ok na lahat ng pangangailangan ng AFP, tsaka n tayo bumili ng MBT's.

If and only if, we have the funds alloted for MBT's, my best pick will be the LEOPARD 2.
:aberet:


:patrioticpinoy: :patrioticpinoy:

There are surpluses of MBTs out in the world markets right now from Leopard 1s, to AMX-10s to T-72s. So they should not cost much. Especially, since the AFP is facing a conventional war against the MILF with fixed positions.

Did not the Phil Marines V-300s have trouble advancing down roadways because their 90mm guns weren't strong enough to silence the bunkers along the roads, and armor to thin against RPGs, during the 2001 offensive against the MILF?

Previous tank discussions

http://pdff.sytes.net/index.php?showtopic=3475&st=0

http://pdff.sytes.net/index.php?showtopic=26&st=0

While you think big, some think small

http://pdff.sytes.net/index.php?showtopic=1220&st=0

MBTs will be a big morale booster to the troops. Very usefull indeed against the MILF (it was in 2000) but I am not sure if it will be of any help against the Communist Terrorists.

Well not a MBT pero i think Strykers will do it look like MBT with A 105mm or Stingrey

One thing I'm worried about is someone pilfering AFP bazookas or rocket launchers, that will just end up in a religious extremist's hands. At least they can't just pilfer a tank.

Zero Wing,

You'll like this comment about the Stryker MGS;

"In addition to anti-tank and high-explosive rounds, MGS can also fire anti-personnel ammunition known as canister rounds. Each canister round fires 3,200 tungsten carbide balls that resemble 00 buck shot.

When fired, these rounds turn the MGS into a giant shotgun, shredding a path 75 meters wide out to 300 meters.

“They are also good for disabling threat vehicles,” said Sgt. 1st Class Benjamin Tucker, 4th Platoon sergeant and MGS vehicle commander. “It peppers the whole thing, obliterates the windows and anybody who is inside.”
[...]
MGS crewmen here praise the effectiveness of the system but say the design needs improving." ............ air conditioning in the Iraq.

I'm in favor of assigning 1 or 2 or even up to 6 MBTs for each Area command. For example, 6 MBTs to cover Davao/cotabato, and 6 MBTs to cover zamboanga/ Sulu, Basilan. The reasons being:

1.) psychological devastation of rebels
2.) destruction of rebel bunkers difficult to destroy with 90mm guns or bunkers in hard-to-reach places by wheeled tanks.

In other words, in the Philippine setting, MBTs are more for anti-rebel operations who currently do not have modern anti-tank weapons, and more psychological/morale boosting effect. Imagine a steel monster up-armored to the max against RPGs, and rumbling in rebel territory. They'll be quaking in their slippers.

For External defense, I am not in favor of the AFP having hundreds of MBTs for cost reasons unless we suddenly became filthy rich. The other reason is that unless these MBTs have good air and anti-aircraft cover, they will be sitting ducks for enemy air attacks. its more practical to use anti-tank weapons for external defense since the assumption is that an external enemy that has already destroyed the PAF and PN must have arrived in overwhelming force and they probably already have control of the sea and air already.

Just out of curiosity...what are the Maximum Effective Ranges of MBT Guns?

Chief;

Though an MBT is a very good fire support platform, but can our infrastructure support the weight? I'm in favor of MBTs for the AFP but my only concern in the roads or bridges might be damaged.

:scared:

thats a valid point. I think some of the MBTs are lighter than others. The lighter MBTs would be more practical for us.

although our bridges are built for a certain tonnage limit, it is being violated all the time. our bridges are always overloaded. What i heard is that if you have a heavy vehicle to try to drive fast and not stop on the bridge to lessen chances of bridge collapse :lollol:

In WW2, Sherman medium tanks were ll over the place flushing out the Japs. At the end of the Vietnam War, NVA forces used Soviet made MBTs to dislodge South Vietnam forces surrounding the capital of Saigon.
Why use roads and bridges when they can be bypassed. In Normandy, Shermans improvised through hedgerows. NVA forces used quick build bridge-layers to overcome deep and wide streams and crevices for their armored push through South. I'm sure Flips are as resourceful as the Vietnamese.b

I am not sure if you've already read this...lots of info.

http://timawa.net/forum/index.php/topic,5593.0.html

sample ranges:

German Rheinmetall 120mm tank gun - 3.5 kilometers

81mm mortar - 5 kilometers

105mm howitzer - 11 kilometers

The Artillery Guns I am very much aware but not Tank Guns...thanks.

the Sherman medium tanks which operated in the Philippines weighed around 30 tons. The Thai army operates the M-60 tank which is around 46 tons and up. I assume the thai road/bridge infrastracture is not yet up to western standards?? and about the same as the philippines(??)

One of the lightest western heavy tanks is the Leopard tank at around 42 tons.
Thr british chieftain is 55 tons.

Caterpillar bulldozers:
light bulldozers - 8 tons
medium to heavy bulldozers - 50 tons
superheavy bolldozers - 100 tons

Are there still any western medium tanks?

At Ft Dix, NJ, after transiting through tank trails and roads, we would simply park our M109 SPHs off to the side so as not to damage the asphalt or concrete. Since we've seen pictures of bulldozers on Filipino roads in the South and Basilan, why not MBTs as mentioned above?

The Canadians and Australians will be getting rid of their Leopard 1s. I prefer the Canadian A5 versions with NVG capability and add on armour... for the cost. But for a MBT, I also prefer the Leo2.

Its good to keep 1 to 2 battle tanks down south.

I don't think that the Commis have much fire power on their hand the Stryker or the LAV 25 was made for our conditions so why not give it a shot ? so if ask me this type of Light will make excellent multi role factors remember just because its has its ups and downs on a product i does mean that product is useless think about about it it a a good platform it can be a MBT 105mm and armored personnel carrier /C/C mortar carrier /Anti Tank /medivac /NBC we can ask the Gen dynamics to make Variants like a Anti air /surveillance /mobile self propel artillery/ E warfare variants something with the LAV25 the marines now can fight better and add more moral to troops and its light half the coast of real MBT and many other possibilities? so don't tell me that!! even big MBT gets hit blows up! nothing in this world is Invincible ! remember that in this age and time Mobility/ Advance technology /team work /Information/Logistics. have all of this your chance of wining wars just got higher its not a sure shot win but this is the best formula so far and this the best defensive and offensive strategy known to man! U SHOULD KNOW THAT!

i can tell you guys,back to earth. Nowhere in any PA doctrine can we find today a called for role for an MBT!

Firstly, its one hell of a logistics nightmare!how can a 50 ton big ass tank going to takie on he battlefield?well they afford our foreign loaned concrete roads damage with tank marks?or can they get past our lame little bridges?

Second,for whom do we use those tanks?neps in the trees,moros in the thickets?are we crazier than the germans doing blietzkrieg on a poilsh cavalry?

Third, for what?fire support?on a jungle terrain?whose tureet cant even move past those damn trees! :fire:

Light,nimble APCs and perhaps light tanks can do one hel of a job better than any MBT in these side of the earth.

Back to earth gents :thumb:

Well i am what i want are IFV and new tech weapons system like the stryker or Lav series kasi their good in Philippine terrain plus in invasion scenario sice they are multi platforms we can jump at the enemy and keep them at bay because of their speeds
taking the role of a MBT

Hey Zero,

What do you think message of the Cannister rounds used by the 105mm Stryker MGS I replied to you earlier? Cool huh? That's one way to clear an ambush.



:aberet:


Okay, once again, remember the Sherman tanks all over the archipelago in WW2. It takes the AFP armored units about a half hour to advance and counter MILF forces wielding RPGs and bazookas. American forces quickly swept the jungles of Japanese because the Shermans had good mobility over ditches and armor that wheeled armored cars were not capable of. Also, it's kinda hard to pilfer a tank, but easy to pilfer a man portable anti-tank weapon.

I go for BMP3 or Merkava IV :ssalute:

As I said before, getting MBTs is a BAD IDEA for the Philippines, since the RP is an island archipelago nation and thus needs amphibious APCs more, such as the USMC's AAV/LVTP7s, in order to fight a counter-insurgency war against the Reds and the ASG/Muslim radical groups.

The Philippines does not need MBTs of any sort yet, since there is little when it comes to WIDE OPEN TERRAIN ideal for MBT vs. MBT combat save for parts of Luzon and Mindanao. And mainland China is not interested in occupying the larger RP islands like Luzon since it would be a logistical nightmare for the PLA and the Chinese know from the Japanese occupation of the Philippines during WW2 that the Filipino people don't take too kindly to any foreign occupier, so you'd better forget about those dreams of PA Abrams engaging PLA Type 98s on the plains of Pampanga or Tarlac. They are only interested in reclaiming Taiwan and asserting their claims over the Spratleys and other parts of the South China Sea all the way to Singapore, but not the larger land masses that surround the area.
:headbang:

Like I said before, if there is something the RP must focus on, it must first wipe out the Reds, then buy MRFs to improve its external defense capabilities.

The PA has outdated tube artillery and you want to get more American toys that would only be white elephants, like MBTs, in this current COIN war against the rebels? SHEESH!

Vermonter thats my stance its a pain arguing with you but for the sake of argument ok fine tank are Vehicles with armored right with guns right!

knowing our terrain i taken all the advantages and disadvantages so i came with the stryker and LAV series and other Multirole platforms in mind so what MANPODs or anti tank weapons its war NATURAL may Anti Tank weapons yung kalaban its a countermeasure we can't help it pero remember how the allies win buy numbers tama! but i know what your going to say knowing you! that Numbers alone can't win yes true nowadays weapons tactics etc but this is one tactic that ever gets old knowledge training knowing your weapons and experience so kahit ano gamit mo thats just an element its not a fact! in warfare its always the soldiers and the gets discipline that gets the job done and besides we be fighting on our own grounds hind na man tayo lalaban sa ibang bansa or anything so ano pa Vermonter? i can do this all day

:patrioticpinoy:

Okay naman that we take some MBTs but hindi for the role that they were originally intended to be.

What we need is an effective mobile coastal defense kasi and syempre for that occasional secondary role of fire support. For this ideal yun modified Leopards. Yun naka 76mm na gun like sa naval vessels that can do dual work as anti-air and anti-personnel/armor role. I forgot what the name they gave na but that would be ideal IF support for it is also made. Like yun mga bridges and roads. Sabagay its high time that work should be done on those. If we are to get Gripens or even F16s maganda rin naman na matibay roads natin so we can use them like what the Swedes do.

Otomatic pala tawag dun sa Leopard na may 76mm gun.



Or for those pesky hideouts of rebels and deceiving separatists ito na lang:

Its good to keep at least one to two battle tanks, why? its a good help in knocking down MILF camps and bunkers which is the V300s duty, but being wheeled and thin apc, it has limitations.

Forgot to add. Let's make them like the following instead:

IMHO, MBTs may be good fire support platforms, can definitely provide the "hard punch" when needed and can provide "shock and awe" to the opponents. However, with our country's road network and the conditions of the terrain, we may not be able to fully utilize all the benefits of an MBT.

Maybe, an IFV is more suitable in our conditions, just my opinion though and I'm not that knowledgeable about MBTs. Just basing my opinions on observations.

We should also master Armor movement in our islands by knowing the terrain, which bridge is capable, which is not, which river is cross able offroad, and by utilizing and enhancing the engineering brigade capabilities and experience. Let make rivers and bridge our advantage in using MBT. When war comes, our enemies would be awed by our use of MBT movements river to river, island to island, while external enemies would think twice using MBT because of this handicap. And preparations will results to prevention of war.

You're Right Comrade :salute:

How about the T72? There is a huge surplus of this type of tank around, therefore it is relatively cheaper than other MBT's, and because they are cheaper, we can buy t72's in numbers(let's say around 25 to 45). They can serve as a force multiplier when used against the MILF or NPA's and a moral bosster when used with our troops. It's 125 mm Smoothbore Gun is good enough in destroying rebel bunkers. It is a good fire support platform and at the same time it mobility is good. And it's weight, 41 tons(still heavy for some of our bridges, yet lighter if compared with the M1's and Leopard2's) I think that having this thing in the Philippine Army inventory will be great. But the military must make sure secure funds for tank protection whenever they decided to purchase T72's. because I think that a t72's armor w/o any reactive armor protection or etc. can be pilfered by insurgent's RPG(and that sucks). But still, considering its many advantages, T72's are good(lalo n pag nagamit ng tama). :aberet:

try to check this link
http://www.enemyforces.com/tanks/t72.htm

Basta namn, pag may political will magkakaroon talaga tayo ng magagandamg gamit para sa AFP.
:patrioticpinoy:

the MBT's primary function is hunting down enemy armor.

Any other role is secondary. That's why american MBTs carry nothing but anti-armor rounds for their main gun.

Last I checked, the AFPs persistent adversaries lack armored assets.

RPGs and LAWs will be better suited in bunker busting duties against MILF/NPAs than tanks.

It'll be awfully difficult to haul an MBTs 70ton ass up broken-up, muddy and mountanious terrain.

Sad to say Battle tanks are obsolete as Battle ships.

Im not saying im against MBT, but by the time we will buy a MBT/MRF for external defense, we no longer have enemy camps or battalion size rebels to deal with. So there is no reason to get it, another reason is the price, why get 2 MBT when you can get 3 Infantry fighting vehicles like the M3 Bradley. Its lighter its cheaper and can use missile to destroy tanks and bunkers.



"During the Gulf War, M2 Bradleys destroyed more Iraqi armored vehicles than the M1 Abrams"

Most bridges in Manila are rated for 10-15-ton vehicles. It can only be worse in the countrysides where the insurgents are.

The Sherman weighed 30 tons and the US had bridging vehicles or built their own temporary bridges. Present Western MBTs come in at 55-70 tons, and need a lot to support too.

There are many items that the AFP hope to acquire and MBTs don’t/shouldn't figure high on the list at present or in the near future. The AFP could use better or more fire support vehicles but not in the form of MBTs.

Coastal Defense? Are you kidding me? No enemy warships are going to go close enough inshore to even be in range for such coastal batteries. And last time I checked, China was not interested in larger Philippine islands like Luzon so I doubt you will see PLAN LCACs hitting the beaches at Lingayen and disgorging Type 98 tanks. :armyroleyes: