imo the gun looked stubby, so it’s gotta be the 105mm. Also, on the second image you could see a pintle MG for the loader. It looks like a water-cooled gun, and since at the time the standard rifle caliber for the Marines was .30-06, it could be a M1917 Browning. Obviously as a rifle-caliber MG, it won’t do much against ground vehicles and aircraft, but it’s still a unique modification.
EDIT: I saw an image of Indonesian Marines LVT with Vickers MG, so it could also be a Vickers MG. Tbh it’s hard to judge the model due to the grainy photo.
Spreading some love to our Timor-Leste friends, meet the NRTL Jaco-class Patrol Gunboat - serving with distinction in the Timor-Leste Defense Forces Naval Component since 2010. She is essentially a Type 062 class gunboat of the PLAN (NATO reporting name: Shanghai II) and is equipped with 2x 30mm Single Mount Guns and 2x 25mm in a Twin Mount (specific gun unknown). With a top speed of 30 knots, she actually has a different armament complement compared to the base Type 062 class gunboat.
Unfortunately, it seems that the 2006 East Timor Crisis left a deep scar on the Defense Forces and it seems the type is rusting away without access to crucial maintenance. Force 2020 still remains the blueprint and hope for the forces’ modernization to this day though.
They’ve yet to order them as far as I know but I’l include it in my Malaysian Ground Forces Sub-TT suggestion - We will also consider it in our future ASEAN Ground Forces Sub-TT suggestion.
Can the Thai F-16A also carry the AGM-65 triple launcher? I found a photo of a Thai F-16 (possibly ADF) pictured with what looks like a triple launcher
generally thats the consensus, would it hit that speed? probably not, do I think its feasable? ehh… maybe.
I mean it could be, since its mainly supposed to be for recon, it’s very light and relatively small compared to its contemporary +the rubber tracks as well, and it’s supposed to be airdroppable
@BalticSAS fsir enough got deleted cause ground talk in air thread.
U got any sources for a 2a8 in Singapore?
Because until it happens it is not set in stone.
Look at italy ,everyone expected them to get 2a8s, just for it to fall into water and them getting KF51s instead.
You missed the point, I was speaking about the potential of their vehicles in a future subtree and there is a hugely mysterious amount of contradicting evidence, half claims they did receive 2A7 standard tanks and half claim otherwise, however they are in talks with KMW to purchase more of the 2A8 spec regardless of if they received any 2a7s or not, and italy declined the 2a8 because they got too greedy and wanted to make huge changes to it.
Back on topic I still believe that Malaysia and Vietnam/myanmar belong in china, as a bare minumun for as far as southeast asian nations go, the rest can go to japan besides singapore, which is a black sheep. Although my overarching opinion is that ASEAN should be divided between china and japan so then neither side misses out
sooo you dont got any sources but just rumours etc
and italy wanted to keep capability to build tanks and to have parts from their own country / knowledge transfer. It is not greedy. Norway gets to build theirs as well.
It is that the overall planes werent able to fit together.
Still end of the day right now overall thailand propably is a better addition compared to SG.
While SG has a lot of great stuff, it still has potentiell left which isnt proven
I’d actually say Singapore is the most clearly “western” ASEAN nation next to maybe the Philippines.
They only operate a single vehicle with easzern tech, that being their own modernized M113A2 with license produced Igla missiles.
I hope so as well, though arguably China has options outside of ASEAN as well, such as Bangladesh, Pakistan and North Korea.
So I hope Japan would receive the 5 founding ASEAN nations, while China can still receive other ASEAN nations like Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar.
Vietnam already is in the Chinese tech tree. The ASEAN project really is only meant for the original 5 founding members of ASEAN which were Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines, Malaysia, and Singapore. If we remove one, it is my opinion that it might ruin the integrity of an ‘ASEAN’ tree.
Its not also really necessary to add everything. Much more ‘REDFOR’ vehicles might be discarded in favor of more ‘BLUFOR’ ones just like the UK only has a single T-90.
Given gaijin’s attitude to adding subtrees, the fact that japan got thailand in the way the have demonstrates the fact that there likely won’t be an ‘ASEAN subtree’ as the post suggests, it will likely be focused on thailand with a few individual additions from other nations to boost japan’s competitiveness in certain elements, although I am firm in my belief that Malaysian flankers belong in the chinese tree
They aren’t happy with the current VT-4 implementation, so they would probably find it funny if Japan got the even worse Thai variant.
And having it in multiple nations also makes more players aware of the tanks issues, which might mean more of a push to have it fixed and can benefit Chinese tanks in game quite a bit.
