Oh man, those "KAVALERI TNI AD" markings are an eyesore.
Latest Thread
Oh man, those "KAVALERI TNI AD" markings are an eyesore.
6:30 timestamp , "part of the culture includes the food" *goes to CFC fast food restaurant ..........2013 Garuda Shield. Somehow I got the feeling most of you has never watched this documentary video
It's HOW we serve and eat them, which include the portion.6:30 timestamp , "part of the culture includes the food" *goes to CFC fast food restaurant ..........
well i guess "ayam kentaki" with rice are considered as our culture nonetheless
Just keep it as it is. No point in fixing something that ain't broken. The only interesting aspect of this light tank is its amphibious ability, and I'm quite impress seeing the stability while firing on the water
I always wish we could produce/procure a beast like this for our Airborne and marines . Maybe we should license this and make in 120 mm caliber for a commonality and logistic . Like it not 100 mm in low velocity was definitely fall in the IFV catagory and a litle lacklustre for breaking an enemy front doors should they come ever to pass ...
Well , the logistic department might want to have a words with you ...Just keep it as it is. No point in fixing something that ain't broken. The only interesting aspect of this light tank is its amphibious ability, and I'm quite impress seeing the stability while firing on the water
Well , the logistic department might want to have a words with you ...
It's about the tank balance while on the water. When you start shooting something that big, there will be a recoil. Recoil that need to be counterbalance due to the momentum. And if that momentum isn't counterbalance when floating over water, then the tank could flip (along with the crew)Well , the logistic department might want to have a words with you ...
Kav should embrace medium calibre auto canon to replace anemic 90 mm low pressure gun. on artillery, i think 105 mm would still have its merit or if they want to have a self propelled light arty, they can consider the 120 mm belrex. would good to have them in terrain like Papua
I tend to agree tbh with wekiweko's point, the risk & reward just isn't worth it IMO. I think the 90mm should already fall into individual level within weapon/support squad. The risk is too high to have "only" 90mm fire support in a thinly armoured vehicle crewed by 3 personnel that will most likely end up as bullets and artillery magnets. More bang for your buck to integrate into the weapon/support squad a two-man reloadable 90mm tube launcher for direct fire action or let the 80mm mortar take care of business for anything indirect. I think our armoured vec should only be a platform for either the 105 or 120 for large calibre and fast-firing medium calibre like 30mm bushmaster (and ideally with ATGM as a sidearm)The formula is 90 mm+105 mm + 120 mm for large gun caliber
For medium sized caliber they would like to be based on 30 mm Bushmaster II
Those "anemic" 90 mm gun still providing cheap solution for Bantem infantry roles capable of indirect fire support over 6 km range with elevation around 30 degree.
I won't argue with the "cheap" part, especially when compares to 105 mm rounds. But then again,...Those "anemic" 90 mm gun still providing cheap solution for Bantem infantry roles capable of indirect fire support over 6 km range with elevation around 30 degree.
I agree with the "obsolete" part since if we're talking about range and elevation, a 81 mm standard mortar round can reach the same distance with added benefits of, well, mortar. And if we decide to go all out to acquire something like this:still getting obsolete for today's world, modern medium calibre offer better overall performance and if range is one of the requirement then better to switch to 105 mm altogether.
The 3rd helicopter is a Bolkow with rocket pods and the 4th is a Colibri.
Honestly , i beg to differ on some of your point . While i do agree that relying on a sole suplier was beyond ridiculous . There is still a big merits when it come to a standarized consumable items . A compromising approach would be for an every item listed we are sourcing them from a 3 reliable suplier ( minimum ) . With their yearly PO's quota based on their last year satisfaction rating . So we could create a healthy controlled competition because everybody surely eager to get a bigger pies cut in the next year .Actually no, the one who dwell on logistic management is not bothered a lot by different type issued on their wares, but on how to get them effectively being delivered on the place they needed the most and making sure the supply never stopped.
There is a lot of story' commonality bring disaster to a Country armed Forces when their major supplier/OEM stopped the supply because political issue or face bankrupt issue. Indonesian Armed Forces never put all of the eggs at the same basket, even for the local supplier they never intended to depend on one supplier.
If it come to a peer to peer enggagement those 90 mm surely inadequated . But , we are still in the transition mode here .... And thing still required some time to make doctrins and paradigms to catch and latched on ...Kav should embrace medium calibre auto canon to replace anemic 90 mm low pressure gun. on artillery, i think 105 mm would still have its merit or if they want to have a self propelled light arty, they can consider the 120 mm belrex. would good to have them in terrain like Papua
Different Tool, For A Different Job. It's depend on the vehicle size and role. The bigger the turret (gun) the more weight the vehicle chassis need to accommodate, furthermore the heavier the turret the more adjustment will be needed for the vehicle centre of mass particularly when firing. It's all came down to the overall package of the vehicle.Honestly , i beg to differ on some of your point . While i do agree that relying on a sole suplier was beyond ridiculous . There is still a big merits when it come to a standarized consumable items . A compromising approach would be for an every item listed we are sourcing them from a 3 reliable suplier ( minimum ) . With their yearly PO's quota based on their last year satisfaction rating . So we could create a healthy controlled competition because everybody surely eager to get a bigger pies cut in the next year .
If it come to a peer to peer enggagement those 90 mm surely inadequated . But , we are still in the transition mode here .... And thing still required some time to make doctrins and paradigms to catch and latched on ...
For such a low intensity conflict like a papua and poso even those 90 mm were allready considered as an overkill.....