US Gives Over 100 Military Vehicles to Philippines

[GS Zhou]

Yet some of the Chinese members in this forum (which is an international forum) are getting angry when a Japanese member posts news about Japan.

Back to the topic, those 100+ APCs are only for one purpose - troop transport. The only modified M113s the PH military received were from Israel. And besides, we are also looking for other vehicles from other countries... because we Filipinos are not that stupid, despite trhat you Chinese always perceive Filipinos as "stupid" every time in this forum.

As for the question of modification issue, I am going to throw back that question to you; are those old Type 59 MBTs are still fit for heavy modifications? Are those "Type 59G" still cost effective in the long run?



Not sure, I only know that the PH Marine Corps uses LAV-300 with 90mm gun, and the only armored vehicle in Philippine service that has a 105mm gun is the LVTH-6.

I don't know what happened to the Japanese news discussion and I'm not involved in it. So please don't bring this to the conversation between you and me.

I never made any comments that the PH people are stupid. Again, please don't bring this to the conversation between you and me.

59G MBT? It is for export business. It is designed for the developing countries that could not afford more expensive MBTs, e.g. Type 96 or Type 99. The Type 59G upgrade includes Type 96G welded turret, redesigned armor on the rear and sides, improved side skirts, new night vision equipment, new engines and new transmissions. If PH army feels interests on this stuff, I don't see any issues for China to export it to Philippines.

For the remaining 59 MBTs that sill in service in PLA, PLA will make them gradually replaced by Type 96 or Type 99. Given the big inventory number, it needs time for a complete replacement. But the good news for China is that 59 MBT is a China-made stuff. So we can guarantee the supplies of all parts at reasonable prices, plus prompt delivery time. Is it something that PH could guarantee for M113?

Let me show you how serious the PLA Army treats its own equipment. A Nov. 2015 news shows PLA has retired its Type 89 tank destroyers. Type 89! I.e. developed in 1989!

 

[pr1v4t33r]

Let me show you how serious the PLA Army treats its own equipment. A Nov. 2015 news shows PLA has retired its Type 89 tank destroyers. Type 89! I.e. developed in 1989!

PLA have hundreds billion dollar defence budget each year, they can afford those luxuries. PH in other hand can only muster few billion dollar each year for their defence budget. Hence they will accept every help offered by any friendly countries.

 

[Cossack25A1]

For the remaining 59 MBTs that sill in service in PLA, PLA will make them gradually replaced by Type 96 or Type 99. Given the big inventory number, it needs time for a complete replacement. But the good news for China is that 59 MBT is a China-made stuff. So we can guarantee the supplies of all parts at reasonable prices, plus prompt delivery time. Is it something that PH could guarantee for M113?

By reading your question, it seems that you are trying to compare China's infrastructure and military budget to that of the Philippines. We do not make our parts for the M113, thus of the 100+ APCs, some of those will be used as spare parts, unlike China that can make their own spare parts.

You are trying to compare apples and oranges.

 

[GS Zhou]

If you are talking about facts then why are you forcing your opinion which is an uneducated assumption as a fact and specialy when you don't bother to do basic research which is 5 minutes or less...



You can't claim such a thing without any context of in which conditions are stored without also considering the design of the machine and material that is made of in the first place to determine.



Or in a desert with barely any rain if any and dry air due to extremely low humidity...



Your conclussion is based on few photos of original M113's(and M113A1?) thus you believe that they discarded all M113's?

Then how do you explain these?

Thousands upon thousands of M113's family vehicles being in long-term storage and are maintained in Sierra Army Depot and still being used by United States and a lot of other countries.

Also US Army won't phase out M113A2's and M113A3's until somewhere in 2020's...

US Army: Vietnam-Era M113 Won’t be Replaced until the 2020s

Here's a kicker...


Philiphines didn't get original M113's nor M113A1's, but they got M113A2's that are being used by United States Armed Forces won't be replaced until somewhere in 2020's thus M113A2's and M113A3's have at least 4 to 5 years of use and maximum of 14 years in US Armed Forces.



They you can blame US, they can blame US, but here are the facts...

1. Ukraine does not have infrastructure for maintenance of equipment that they got from US.

2. Their mehanics should have inspected the equipment, yet they didn't thus they are surprised.

3. Remember Sierra Army Depot? US armed forces are using equipment that is restored and maintained there!



You should ask United States Armed Forces, they won't phase out these babies until somewhere in 2020's!

So much for your fact-based comments.


Your ignorance is over 9000!!!

US could maintain the M113 properly, does it mean other countries, e.g. Philippines, that lacking of industry capabilities and financial resource, could do the same? US could make F22 and ICBM, does it mean Philippines could do the same?

M113 is a US-made stuff, so US could fully guarantee the supplies of all parts associated with the vehicles. The defense spending of US is 200x of Philippines, so US also has sufficient financial resources for a proper maintenance. Does Philippines has any of the two advantages?

According to you, Ukraine could not maintain the US equipment because of lacking of supporting infrastructures and machinery expertise. But why are you so confident that Philippines could perform perfectly in both dimensions? Ukraine anyway gets extremely rich defense industry legacy from the Soviet Union, but what Philippines has?

For the US M113s that you are bragging, according to you, these vehicles are in perfect status now. But what is the real attitude of US Army? Take a look at an article post at the official webpage of the US Army:

- The chassis of an M113 "is basically an aluminum box," he said. "During Vietnam, Soldiers put sandbags on the floor and sides because even then they didn't provide much protection. Yet we still have them 50 years later."

- In other words, he said, "you really don't want your son or daughter to go to war in that thing."

- A study was conducted, as is done on every piece of gear, to see what is feasible, Ferrari said. The study indicated that those M113s serving on the front lines should be removed as soon as possible.

Army's 2014 modernization plan prioritizes Soldiers in fight

By reading your question, it seems that you are trying to compare China's infrastructure and military budget to that of the Philippines. We do not make our parts for the M113, thus of the 100+ APCs, some of those will be used as spare parts, unlike China that can make their own spare parts.

You are trying to compare apples and oranges.

Come on, it is you that bring the question of Type 59 MBT to this thread. You want lead us to believe that since Type 59 MBT is still in service in PLA Army, so the M113s could be in the same good condition in the PH army as well!!

Now, after I point to you why China could maintain the 59 MBT well, you told me it is an "apples vs. oranges" comparison. Come on, why you raise the Type 59 MBT topic first?

 

[Cossack25A1]

Come on, it is you that bring the question of Type 59 MBT to this thread. You want lead us to believe that since Type 59 MBT is still in service in PLA Army, so the M113s could be in the same good condition in the PH army as well!!

Now, after I point to you why China could maintain the 59 MBT well, you told me it is an "apples vs. oranges" comparison. Come on, why you raise the Type 59 MBT topic first?

The reason why I brought up the Type 59 is because you keep posting about how old the M113 that it may not last long once pressed into service just because it was stored for 20 years, adding to that is you "complained" that M113s cannot be modified despite others posted pictures of M113s with different weapons! Even if the M113s were put into storage for 20 years, it was stored in an American army depot and is maintained in case of a war or to be given to friendly countries.

We acquired those M113s to boost the PH Army's capability and with the ubiquity and good relations with the US, we could get technically spare parts from them.

Also, you keep posting and posting pictures of M113s being dumped into the sea as if you are saying the Philippines only got trashed. Other people here already explained that what we is NOT A FIRST-GENERATION M113 yet you keep insisting that what we got are trash and re-post that picture! What are you trying to point with the picture anyways?

 

[GS Zhou]

The reason why I brought up the Type 59 is because you keep posting about how old the M113 that it may not last long once pressed into service just because it was stored for 20 years, adding to that is you "complained" that M113s cannot be modified despite others posted pictures of M113s with different weapons! Even if the M113s were put into storage for 20 years, it was stored in an American army depot and is maintained in case of a war or to be given to friendly countries.

We acquired those M113s to boost the PH Army's capability and with the ubiquity and good relations with the US, we could get technically spare parts from them.

Also, you keep posting and posting pictures of M113s being dumped into the sea as if you are saying the Philippines only got trashed. Other people here already explained that what we is NOT A FIRST-GENERATION M113 yet you keep insisting that what we got are trash and re-post that picture! What are you trying to point with the picture anyways?

Sorry, no offensive to you or to the country Philippines, but the M113s are trash indeed. Just look at Americans' own comments on M113s: "you really don't want your son or daughter to go to war in that thing", or "The study indicated that those M113s serving on the front lines should be removed as soon as possible". Plus US to dump M113s into the sea. How could you deny the facts with such strong evidence?

Just imagine a close friend of yours, who gives you a cake as birthday gift. You feel very happy about the cake and the great friendship between you and your friend. But later, your friend made a comment on his Twitter account that "I really don't want my son or daughter to eat this cake". What would you think? Would you still think this is a true friendship?

 

[Cossack25A1]

Sorry, no offensive to you or to the country Philippines, but the M113s are trash indeed. Just look at Americans' own comments on M113s: "you really don't want your son or daughter to go to war in that thing", or "The study indicated that those M113s serving on the front lines should be removed as soon as possible". Plus US to dump M113s into the sea. How could you deny the facts with such strong evidence?

Just imagine a close friend of yours, who gives you a cake as birthday gift. You feel very happy about the cake and the great friendship between you and your friend. But later, your friend made a comment on his Twitter account that "I really don't want my son or daughter to eat this cake". What would you think? Would you still think this is a true friendship?

If the M113s are really crap, why is it that many countries still use that APC, with the US military still using them despite having the Bradley? Even if there is one study about how unsafe the M113, a study is different from experience. And for a counter-insurgency operation, an M113 is enough for such operations, better than being transported via a truck that offers zero protection.

As for the M113s being dumped, I believe some people here already posted that those were first-generation M113s.

America may have some "issues" regarding surplus weapons transfers, but as what you have said earlier, we Filipinos are just "beggars".

Thus, your comment of "no offense" has no value now.

 

[Zero_wing]

If you are talking about facts then why are you forcing your opinion which is an uneducated assumption as a fact and specialy when you don't bother to do basic research which is 5 minutes or less...



You can't claim such a thing without any context of in which conditions are stored without also considering the design of the machine and material that is made of in the first place to determine.



Or in a desert with barely any rain if any and dry air due to extremely low humidity...



Your conclussion is based on few photos of original M113's(and M113A1?) thus you believe that they discarded all M113's?

Then how do you explain these?

Thousands upon thousands of M113's family vehicles being in long-term storage and are maintained in Sierra Army Depot and still being used by United States and a lot of other countries.

Also US Army won't phase out M113A2's and M113A3's until somewhere in 2020's...

US Army: Vietnam-Era M113 Won’t be Replaced until the 2020s

Here's a kicker...


Philiphines didn't get original M113's nor M113A1's, but they got M113A2's that are being used by United States Armed Forces won't be replaced until somewhere in 2020's thus M113A2's and M113A3's have at least 4 to 5 years of use and maximum of 14 years in US Armed Forces.



They you can blame US, they can blame US, but here are the facts...

1. Ukraine does not have infrastructure for maintenance of equipment that they got from US.

2. Their mehanics should have inspected the equipment, yet they didn't thus they are surprised.

3. Remember Sierra Army Depot? US armed forces are using equipment that is restored and maintained there!



You should ask United States Armed Forces, they won't phase out these babies until somewhere in 2020's!

So much for your fact-based comments.


Your ignorance is over 9000!!!

Amen to that

 

[GS Zhou]

If the M113s are really crap, why is it that many countries still use that APC, with the US military still using them despite having the Bradley? Even if there is one study about how unsafe the M113, a study is different from experience. And for a counter-insurgency operation, an M113 is enough for such operations, better than being transported via a truck that offers zero protection.

As for the M113s being dumped, I believe some people here already posted that those were first-generation M113s.

America may have some "issues" regarding surplus weapons transfers, but as what you have said earlier, we Filipinos are just "beggars".
View attachment 278945

Thus, your comment of "no offense" has no value now.

1. The 2nd-gen. M113 was developed in 1979. Ok? 36 years from now! I guess that's exactly the age of the M113s PH gets: ~15 years in service in the US Army; retired after the cold war ended and be stored for 20 years; delivered to PH in 2015.

2. US stopped the M113 procurement in 2007. Ok? 2007! Much newer than the grandpa M113s PH gets.

3. US is using the M113s for counter-insurgency operation as well, e.g. in Iraq. Similar situation to Philippines, yet the Americans still don't want "sons or daughters to be inside the vehicles"

4. There're lots of pre-conditions for making a proper maintenance on old M113 or Type 59 MBT. US and China could handle the tasks properly, because they both have strong manufacturing capabilities, plus lots of money on hand. You could argue that Philippines could achieve these one day as well, but it needs time. Time! Lots of time. While the M113s are aging and aging!

5. Lets imagine Bill Gates gives a guy a piece of cake. This guy is feeling thrilled about the cake, and telling others this is the best cake he ever eats. But later, Bill Gates said to other people that "I really don't let my son or daughter to eat this cake". Let's imagine this is a real-life story, how would you comment the guy that gets the cake?

6. I apologize for the word "beggar" I used previously. I'll try to avoid using this kind of words in PDF.

7. Need sleep now. Very late my side. Good night!

 

[Zero_wing]

1. The 2nd-gen. M113 was developed in 1979. Ok? 36 years from now! I guess that's exactly the age of the M113s PH gets: ~15 years in service in the US Army; retired after the cold war ended and be stored for 20 years; delivered to PH in 2015.

2. US stopped the M113 procurement in 2007. Ok? 2007! Much newer than the grandpa M113s PH gets.

3. US is using the M113s for counter-insurgency operation as well, e.g. in Iraq. Similar situation to Philippines, yet the Americans still don't want "sons or daughters to be inside the vehicles"

4. There're lots of pre-conditions for making a proper maintenance on old M113 or Type 59 MBT. US and China could handle the tasks properly, because they both have strong manufacturing capabilities, plus lots of money on hand. You could argue that Philippines could achieve these one day as well, but it needs time. Time! Lots of time. While the M113s are aging and aging!

5. Lets imagine Bill Gates gives a guy a piece of cake. This guy is feeling thrilled about the cake, and telling others this is the best cake he ever eats. But later, Bill Gates said to other people that "I really don't let my son or daughter to eat this cake". Let's imagine this is a real-life story, how would you comment the guy that gets the cake?

6. I apologize for the word "beggar" I used previously. I'll try to avoid using this kind of words in PDF.

7. Need sleep now. Very late my side. Good night!

Oh man can you people just stop posting like this is just other insult really seriously how stupid do you think people in this forum are? your troll who just got caught and told off so just don't post crap or don't post at all or get ready to be ignored

 

[yugocrosrb95]

US could maintain the M113 properly, does it mean other countries, e.g. Philippines, that lacking of industry capabilities and financial resource, could do the same?

Another sentence in which you showcase your own ignorance and you keep underestimating Philippines due to your ignorance, you are unaware that Philippines is fourth largest shipbuidling nation since 2010 and automotive and aerospace industry are well developed too, also Philippines has launched satelites since mid-late 1990's and Philippines economy is growing and their debt is below 50% of GDP thus from financial standpoint they fine.

Philippines operates M113A1's since 1967, they know how to maintain the thing they use for nearly 50 years!

US could make F22 and ICBM, does it mean Philippines could do the same?

Are you really that desperate? Where did I mention F-22 and ICBM's in this thread? I didn't and now you went off-topic.

M113 is a US-made stuff, so US could fully guarantee the supplies of all parts associated with the vehicles. The defense spending of US is 200x of Philippines, so US also has sufficient financial resources for a proper maintenance. Does Philippines has any of the two advantages?

You keep oversimplifying to avoid as much facts as possible and turn this discussion in your favor.

Anyway, US allocates 3.5% of its GDP to their armed forces compared to 1.2% that Philippines does for their armed forces, if Philippines allocated 3.5% for their armed forces then it would be 1/60th of US armed forces or over 10 billion USD or 1/13th of PLA's budget.

According to you, Ukraine could not maintain the US equipment because of lacking of supporting infrastructures and machinery expertise. But why are you so confident that Philippines could perform perfectly in both dimensions? Ukraine anyway gets extremely rich defense industry legacy from the Soviet Union, but what Philippines has?

Philippines primarily use equipment that is based or from USA and they have experience with M113's since 1967 when they got M113A1 and they can maintain M113's if they want too, remember that there is a thriving automotive industry in Philippines and most if not all cars use aluminium.

Yet making parts for M113 in Philippines does not make sense due to Philippines army only having around 450 units, if they had 1500-2000 units minimum then it would be more affordable to maintain then import parts for it or if they want to locally produce M113A3 variant and upgrade M113A2's.

For the US M113s that you are bragging, according to you, these vehicles are in perfect status now.

I am not bragging, you're delusional and where did I said that they are perfect condition? Because I refuted your incorrect claim that those M113's are "trash" you think that I think that they are in perfect condition? How is according to me? You simply want to force an idea of yours that I have claimed that yet I didn't.

But what is the real attitude of US Army? Take a look at an article post at the official webpage of the US Army:

- The chassis of an M113 "is basically an aluminum box," he said. "During Vietnam, Soldiers put sandbags on the floor and sides because even then they didn't provide much protection. Yet we still have them 50 years later."

- In other words, he said, "you really don't want your son or daughter to go to war in that thing."

- A study was conducted, as is done on every piece of gear, to see what is feasible, Ferrari said. The study indicated that those M113s serving on the front lines should be removed as soon as possible and replaced by the Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle, a much more lethal, versatile and protected vehicle.

Army's 2014 modernization plan prioritizes Soldiers in fight

During Vietnam... A lot has changed since then...

1. The 2nd-gen. M113 was developed in 1979. Ok? 36 years from now! I guess that's exactly the age of the M113s PH gets: ~15 years in service in the US Army; retired after the cold war ended and be stored for 20 years; delivered to PH in 2015.

M113A2 was produced from 1979 to 1986... M113A2 is 3rd-gen, M113A1 is 2nd gen...

2. US stopped the M113 procurement in 2007. Ok? 2007! Much newer than the grandpa M113s PH gets.

US stoped buying them because they have over 16000 of them!

3. US is using the M113s for counter-insurgency operation as well, e.g. in Iraq. Similar situation to Philippines, yet the Americans still don't want "sons or daughters to be inside the vehicles"

As expected, you are taking it out of context...

4. There're lots of pre-conditions for making a proper maintenance on old M113 or Type 59 MBT. US and China could handle the tasks properly, because they both have strong manufacturing capabilities, plus lots of money on hand. You could argue that Philippines could achieve these one day as well, but it needs time. Time! Lots of time. While the M113s are aging and aging!

Is 6 months to 1 one too much for you?

 

[Zero_wing]

Another sentence in which you showcase your own ignorance and you keep underestimating Philippines due to your ignorance, you are unaware that Philippines is fourth largest shipbuidling nation since 2010 and automotive and aerospace industry are well developed too, also Philippines has launched satelites since mid-late 1990's and Philippines economy is growing and their debt is below 50% of GDP thus from financial standpoint they fine.

Philippines operates M113A1's since 1967, they know how to maintain the thing they use for nearly 50 years!



Are you really that desperate? Where did I mention F-22 and ICBM's in this thread? I didn't and now you went off-topic.



You keep oversimplifying to as much facts as possible and turn this discussion in your favor.

Anyway, US allocates 3.5% of its GDP to their armed forces compared to 1.2% that Philippines does for their armed forces, if Philippines allocated 3.5% for their armed forces then it would be 1/60th of US armed forces or over 10 billion USD or 1/13th of PLA's budget.



Philippines primarily use equipment that is based or from USA and they have experience with M113's since 1967 when they got M113A1 and they can maintain M113's if they want too, remember that there is a thriving automotive industry in Philippines and most if not all cars use aluminium.

Yet making parts for M113 in Philippines does not make sense due to Philippines army only having around 450 units, if they had 1500-2000 units minimum then it would be more affordable to maintain then import parts for it or if they want to locally produce M113A3 variant and upgrade M113A2's.



I am not bragging, you're delusional and where did I said that they are perfect condition? Because I refuted your incorrect claim that those M113's are "trash" you think that I think that they are in perfect condition? How is according to me? You simply want to force an idea of yours that I have claimed that yet I didn't.



During Vietnam... A lot has changed since then...



M113A2 was produced from 1979 to 1986... M113A2 is 3rd-gen, M113A1 is 2nd gen...



US stoped buying them because they have over 16000 of them!



As expected, you are taking it out of context...



Is 6 months to 1 one too much for you?

This is why many hate these guys arrogant and stupid and belittling Sobs

 

[Cossack25A1]

1. The 2nd-gen. M113 was developed in 1979. Ok? 36 years from now! I guess that's exactly the age of the M113s PH gets: ~15 years in service in the US Army; retired after the cold war ended and be stored for 20 years; delivered to PH in 2015.

2. US stopped the M113 procurement in 2007. Ok? 2007! Much newer than the grandpa M113s PH gets.

3. US is using the M113s for counter-insurgency operation as well, e.g. in Iraq. Similar situation to Philippines, yet the Americans still don't want "sons or daughters to be inside the vehicles"

4. There're lots of pre-conditions for making a proper maintenance on old M113 or Type 59 MBT. US and China could handle the tasks properly, because they both have strong manufacturing capabilities, plus lots of money on hand. You could argue that Philippines could achieve these one day as well, but it needs time. Time! Lots of time. While the M113s are aging and aging!

5. Lets imagine Bill Gates gives a guy a piece of cake. This guy is feeling thrilled about the cake, and telling others this is the best cake he ever eats. But later, Bill Gates said to other people that "I really don't let my son or daughter to eat this cake". Let's imagine this is a real-life story, how would you comment the guy that gets the cake?

6. I apologize for the word "beggar" I used previously. I'll try to avoid using this kind of words in PDF.

7. Need sleep now. Very late my side. Good night!

1. Yes, those old M113A2s were developed during the late-70s, but those vehicles were maintained by the US and stored in an Army depot, yet the Americans used that vehicles in Iraq aside from Bradleys, Strykers, MRAPs and Humvees. The US military stored those M113s for future purposes or to be given to friendly countries. I don't know which is worse, American old-but-reliable equipment or the Soviet "monkey-model" equipment.

2. The US had stopped procuring the vehicle, but nowhere did they say that they had decommissioned the vehicle, even up to now the Americans still use the M113, and a number of countries also use the M113s despite replacement models had appeared.

3. Better an M113 than a Humvee or unarmored truck for counter-insurgency

4. That is why the PH military train with the US military; do you think those military exercises is only about "shooting terrorists"? NO!

5. Again with this question that shows how cheapskate US is...

6. Apology rejected; I had enough of you Chinese being insensitive.

 

[Nike]

Aside from this grants, how many m113 currently in service with ph.army?

 

[Cossack25A1]

Aside from this grants, how many m113 currently in service with ph.army?

Around 120 M113A1s in service, though not all may be functioning due to age.