AARM-24 in Hanoi: ASEAN Armies Rifle meet - Pictures

[Reashot Xigwin]

It'll be generations before infantry becomes 'obsolete'. Stop playing so many video games.

1 generation to be precise you are seeing an extinction of the infantry species. Also I'm a futurist I spit on conservative thinking such as the bullshited notion of "revering the infantry."

 

[alaungphaya]

1 generation to be precise you are seeing an extinction of the infantry species. Also I'm a futurist I spit on conservative thinking such as the bullshited notion of "revering the infantry."

You think infantry will be obsolete in one generation? Right...

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

You think infantry will be obsolete in one generation? Right...

They already obsolete right now. In Asymmetric warfare like today they still have some use, but in Actual warfare they are without doubt obsolete.

Today Infantry faces "the question" of its uses just like the cavalry of the late 19th century.

 

[alaungphaya]

They already obsolete right now. In Asymmetric warfare like today they still have some use, but in Actual warfare they are without doubt obsolete.

So Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine, Syria etc. is not 'actual' warfare? So what is 'actual' warfare according to you? Call of Duty?

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

So Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine, Syria etc. is not 'actual' warfare? So what is 'actual' warfare according to you? Call of Duty?

The first two are "police action" & the last 2 are civil war. Actual War are like the Falkland, Desert storm, Georgia & etc.
Actual War are when 2 country or more clash with one another.

 

[alaungphaya]

The first two are "police action" & the last 2 are civil war. Actual War are like the Falkland, Desert storm, Georgia & etc.
Actual War are when 2 country or more clash with one another.

Iraq and Afghanistan were no more police actions than the Falklands or Georgia. And in all cases they required boots on the ground. Infact, all your examples required boots on the ground. Unless the objective is to wipe out everyone on the other side, fighters and civilians included, you will need infantry to carry out your objectives. If you do want to wipe the other side out, there are far more efficient methods such as WMDs.

No, you cannot fight and occupy countries without infantry. All the tech you pointed out are all set up to help infantry rather than replace it.

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

Iraq and Afghanistan were no more police actions than the Falklands or Georgia. And in all cases they required boots on the ground. Infact, all your examples required boots on the ground. Unless the objective is to wipe out everyone on the other side, fighters and civilians included, you will need infantry to carry out your objectives. If you do want to wipe the other side out, there are far more efficient methods such as WMDs.

No, you cannot fight and occupy countries without infantry. All the tech you pointed out are all set up to help infantry rather than replace it.

I don't know the Talibans has an Armed Forces? War is between state entity & not non-state entity like Al-Qaeda or the Taliban. For example a war is clearly defined with Objectives & Targets in mind. During Desert Storm the infantry only does "mop up" jobs while the actual battle was fought by the Airforce & the Armored company. Which beg this question what's the point of having an infantry if drones can does their jobs for a fraction of the cost? Beside I'm not taking potshot at an infantry. I believe in replacing things that are or will be obsolete.

The US already fielded a successful fighter drones because as its turns out the "human part" of the plane (pilot) was the thing that actually held back innovation. Drones is not also a cost & time saving measure, but also live saving. Today's infantry cost 18k & years to train. Also its to be expected to cost more in the future. While a Drone you can just buy them off the shelf & just let it rip after a few spin.

Fighting war has become so expensive that the infantry itself will be the first on the cutting block, its organization restructured to be smaller and inevitably more meaner as result and most of its role will be supplanted by drones. That's not me that is just the entire military think-thank has been saying for years.

Just look at the SAF plan for the future you will realize that is the reality of modern warfare:

Drones are the future whether you like it or not.

 

[alaungphaya]

I don't know the Talibans has an Armed Forces? War is between state entity & not non-state entity like Al-Qaeda or the Taliban. For example a war is clearly defined with Objectives & Targets in mind. During Desert Storm the infantry only does "mop up" jobs while the actual battle was fought by the Airforce & the Armored company. Which beg this question what's the point of having an infantry if drones can does their jobs for a fraction of the cost? Beside I'm not taking potshot at an infantry. I believe in replacing things that are or will be obsolete.

The US already fielded a successful fighter drones because as its turns out the "human part" of the plane (pilot) was the thing that actually held back innovation. Drones is not also a cost & time saving measure, but also live saving. Today's infantry cost 18k & years to train. Also its to be expected to cost more in the future. While a Drone you can just buy them off the shelf & just let it rip after a few spin.

Fighting war has become so expensive that the infantry itself will be the first on the cutting block, its organization restructured to be smaller and inevitably more meaner as result and most of its role will be supplanted by drones. That's not me that is just the entire military think-thank has been saying for years.
View attachment 156249

Just look at the SAF plan for the future you will realize that is the reality of modern warfare:
View attachment 156252
Drones are the future whether you like it or not.

The first two points you made are irrelevant so I will ignore them.

As for your last point, I fully agree drones will supplement the infantry but the emphasis is on supplementing abilities than supplanting. You cannot occupy cities and countries with drones so infantry will always be there well past the next generation. Simple as that. It has nothing to do with my preference. I have no preference. And that pretty SAF infographic has no bearing on anything.

 

[BoQ77]

Hell yeah we have a good rifles , and what i mean is i will waiting the times when Vietnam Army order SS-2. As we are learning so much from our experience to combating rebels in jungle and mountains area, so we need an assault riffle which is good at accuracy and have a decent stopping power at long range distance. I think Vietnam has similar landscape like us



pigtaker is notorious trolls paid by PRC government no need to give him an attention

Ms. Madokafc : if you know that Viet soldiers mastered of AK-alike rifle. And the domestic rifles was tested 1 month in advance of the competition, right in the same field.

But that type still use powerful 7.62 x 39mm ammunition, like AK.
Vietnam soldiers always like a compact rifles for jungle, suburban battles and fit well to Asian appearance. M16 is not their choice.

Galil ACE 31 / 32 ( Ak-100 was lost to this type in Vietnam contract )

SS-2 Pindad

ACE 31 same length as ACE 21
ACE 32 same length as ACE 23

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

The first two points you made are irrelevant so I will ignore them.

As for your last point, I fully agree drones will supplement the infantry but the emphasis is on supplementing abilities than supplanting. You cannot occupy cities and countries with drones so infantry will always be there well past the next generation. Simple as that. It has nothing to do with my preference. I have no preference. And that pretty SAF infographic has no bearing on anything.

UGV can occupy cities just as their human counterpart can do & my last post was to show the redundancy of infantry in Modern Warfare.

 

[Established_1965]

Singapore Armed Forces makes me PROUD!!

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

Ms. Madokafc : if you know that Viet soldiers mastered of AK-alike rifle. And the domestic rifles was tested 1 month in advance of the competition, right in the same field.

But that type still use powerful 7.62 x 39mm ammunition, like AK.
Vietnam soldiers always like a compact rifles for jungle, suburban battles and fit well to Asian appearance. M16 is not their choice.

Galil ACE 31 / 32 ( Ak-100 was lost to this type in Vietnam contract )

View attachment 156286 View attachment 156287

SS-2 Pindad View attachment 156288

M-16 was created with the Vietnam's jungles in mind. It's short, lightweight & the Grunts can carry more 5.56 bullets than they do with the 7.62. Also their bullets does more damage than the soviet one. Even the sovy ditch their 7.62 for the 5.45 so they can carry more ammo in battle. Granted the earlier version suck, but not its later model.

 

[BoQ77]

M-16 was created with the Vietnam's jungles in mind. It's short, lightweight & the Grunts can carry more 5.56 bullets than they do with the 7.62. Also their bullets does more damage than the soviet one. Even the sovy ditch their 7.62 for the 5.45 so they can carry more ammo in battle. Granted the earlier version suck, but not its later model.

M-16 was proved uncomfortable in Vietnam battlefield, the good and bad is barrel length at 508mm. Total length: 990mm - AK-47 870mm ; Later Galil ACE 32 : 890mm

During 1966-1970 XM177E2 ( or Colt Commando ) with shorter barrel ( 292mm ) was tested and later armed to Southern side instead of M-16A1
After the end of Vietnam War, VPA collected hundred thousands of M-16 and XM177E2 and mainly arm M-16 to local militaria.

And XM177E2 was modified to so-called M-18 and still arm to some forces.

XM177E2 for Vietnam battlefield

modified XM177E2, under the name M-18

Production lines

 

[Aepsilons]

M-16 was proved uncomfortable in Vietnam battlefield, the good and bad is barrel length at 508mm. Total length: 990mm - AK-47 870mm ; Later Galil ACE 32 : 890mm

View attachment 156315

During 1966-1970 XM177E2 ( or Colt Commando ) with shorter barrel ( 292mm ) was tested and later armed to Southern side instead of M-16A1
After the end of Vietnam War, VPA collected hundred thousands of M-16 and XM177E2 and mainly arm M-16 to local militaria.

View attachment 156340
View attachment 156331
View attachment 156332

And XM177E2 was modified to so-called M-18 and still arm to some forces.

XM177E2 for Vietnam battlefield
View attachment 156319

View attachment 156327

modified XM177E2, under the name M-18
View attachment 156320

Production lines
View attachment 156322

@BoQ77 ,

On the third picture down, are those Vietnamese soldiers wearing slippers?

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

@BoQ77 ,

On the third picture down, are those Vietnamese soldiers wearing slippers?

Yep. Those are safety hazard waiting to happen. Sorry can't help to point that out. I work as a safety inspector.