Singapore aircraft equipment?
-
Yup I had the same feeling while reading it. They reported that Singapore had the Python 4, and other stuff which were unsubstantiated were reported as true by them. (but I didn't know it actually was a Malaysian defense journal)
Then, do you think its true that RAM was really selected for the OPVs? -
I really have no idea if RAM is actually selected as the OPV's AAW system, but I won't believe anything from that rag unless I hear it from a more reputable source than ADJ.Originally posted by YourFather:Then, do you think its true that RAM was really selected for the OPVs? -
No evidence whatsoever that BARAK will be installed on Endurance class LST. In fact I find it hard to find sufficient space for the Baraks to sit. The LSTs are more likely to have the twin Mistrals like the old LST and the current Sir Lancelot class LST.Originally posted by YourFather:I was at the library just now, looking at ADJ, and there was a feature on our Endurance-class LSTs. In it, they specified that the LSTs had two 8 round launchers for the BARAK missile. Is that true?
Also, I read that the RAM was selected as the principal missile for Malaysia's next-gen OPV...
As for RAM for RMN OPVs, I thought they were going for Sea Wolfs? Funny how all these reports are inaccurate. Just wait for their first ship to arrive.. shouldn't be that long, another 2 years? I read that they were not even going to be armed with much initially cause RMN hasn't got the funds.... -
I found yet another site that hinted that RSN has purchased Aster 15 for the 6 La Fayette Frigates:
See: http://www.jedonline.com/default.asp?journalid=4&func=articles&page=0203j24&year=2002&month=3&doct=ec%20monitor&rsno=5#5
===========
MBDA (Paris, France) has successfully completed the first qualification firing of its Aster 15 Naval missile from an Italian SAAM/IT (Superficie-Aria Anti-Missile/Italia, or Surface-to-Air Anti-Missile/Italy) naval defence system. The launch was conducted from the Italian experimental ship Carabiniere at the French DGA's Mediterranean Test Center (Centre d'Essais de la Méditerranée - CEM), off the coast of Toulon, south west France. The firing resulted in a direct hit against the target from a distance of 7 km and at an altitude of 1,000 m. The latest firing follows the October 2001 qualification of the French SAAM/FR configuration, which uses an Arabel multi-function radar. A total of 200 Aster 15 Naval missiles have already been ordered to equip 11 naval defence systems, intended for the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle , the three F-1300S frigates Al Riyadh , Makkah and Al Dammal ordered by the Saudi Arabian Royal Navy, the second Italian aircraft carrier Andrea Doria , and six foreign frigates.
===========
Why I read the 6 foregin frigates are RSN ships is because the ships other than the La Fayatte produced for Taiwan, all La Fayattes are to be armed with Aster 15. Furthermore, I don't know of any current order books for "6 Foreign frigates" produced by the French..
hee -
Quite confirmed, yeah? But I still wish they had chosen Aster 30s instead. Oh well, Aster 15s should suffice.
On another matter, today, the ST reported that Singapore wanted its Apaches home early. (this is pretty dated, why do they report things late?) My question is, what is the rationale for wanting them back early? The reason provided in the report was that "after 9-11, everything has changed" doesn't really mean anything to me.... -
In time my friend.... be patient... even the French haven't got the Aster 30s yet. The fire control systems and the launchers of the Aster missiles should be the same, thus upgrading the Aster 15 to Aster 30 is only in the matter of time.Originally posted by YourFather:Quite confirmed, yeah? But I still wish they had chosen Aster 30s instead. Oh well, Aster 15s should suffice.
Probably mean that RSAF would like to have the helos onboard before our neighbour(s) start having T-84 MBTs roaming in the nearby jungle....
On another matter, today, the ST reported that Singapore wanted its Apaches home early. (this is pretty dated, why do they report things late?) My question is, what is the rationale for wanting them back early? The reason provided in the report was that "after 9-11, everything has changed" doesn't really mean anything to me.... -
Interesting....the article did mention that Pentagon will review its policy of not introducing new classes of weapons into the region. Does this mean we can start demanding for the AMRAAMs to be placed in Singapore? Apparently during the negotiations for the Longbow, the Yanks had initially offered to give us the Apaches, clear us for Longbow, train our pilots on it BUT leave the radars in US till a significant threat against developed. We said NO, and started making pro-Tiger noises. The rest is history...Originally posted by Joe Black:Probably mean that RSAF would like to have the helos onboard before our neighbour(s) start having T-84 MBTs roaming in the nearby jungle....
It is a significant review of policy though, no matter what happens with the AMRAAMs.
One last thing: Have the Malaysians really bought Russian MBTs? Or is it just one of their "wanna-have" pipe dreams? Like the Su-30s...if they haven't bought it then its not the first time Singapore has acquired countermeasures for Malaysian pipe dreams even before they realised their dreams. -
Err, they seem pretty serious this time. Mahathir seems to be on a "weapons window shopping spree" right now. He was just in Russia, watching the SU-30, and is now in Poland taking a look at their PT-90 tank. Oh yes, they are also considering the Gripen too.
Let's see... they have a fighter competition, they seem to want to be getting an AEW platform, they want tanks, they want an attack heli, they want subs, and err, can someone remind me, what's their budget? (in US dollars, of course, lol) Do they even have enuff palm oil?
Oh yes, forgot to ask, how many VLS launchers is there on their Lekiu class frigates? Is it 16?
[This message has been edited by YourFather (edited 20 March 2002).] -
M'sia seems to want to get quite a few stuffs. You are right. I read somewhere (darn, should have copied the reference, but I suspect it might have been from Janes weekly or some other western journals) that they are in fact looking at getting the MBT rather seriously. They are looking at quite a few Russian thingy other than just the MBTs. They also have been looking at getting a few South African attack helos after RSAF acquired the Apaches.
Anyway, did you guys see the Chinese J-10 at AA? Did the chinese send a copy over? Seems like the Taiwanese are quite apprehensive about this "Lavi-reborn" jet.
Secondly, US has just bought over the German HDW Sub maker. Now the americans pretty much controls the most of the conventional subs maker, including Kockum and HDW. They are also have significant influence over ASC. Man oh man, next thing you know, Singapore would have to buy subs from the Yanks.... hee hee -
Well, Singapore is in George W's good books. I can't see why we can't justify to the Yanks why Amaraams are needed for anti-terrorist operations... hee heeOriginally posted by Viper52:Interesting....the article did mention that Pentagon will review its policy of not introducing new classes of weapons into the region. Does this mean we can start demanding for the AMRAAMs to be placed in Singapore?
Ahhh... anyway, keeping Amaraams in the US is the same political ploy played by Mindef when they based the F-16 A/Bs in the US for 2 years. Anyway, the Sparrows are more than adequate for the time being and when we need the Amraams, you can be sure of they will definitely be in Singapore in no time.
BTW, RSAF can always borrow some from RAAF in times of crisis ... (just my wild thoughts)...
Back to some serious discussion, I think US is changing the export control policy now that they are considering selling some of the most advanced stuffs to friendly nation. They are looking at allowing Korea to buy AGEIS, Taiwan to get some really high tech stuffs not to mention some diseal subs. I'm sure if Mindef presses hard enuff, we would get the Amraams. The only thing is that does the govt think that it is a good thing to have Amraams at home now? Sensitive issues...
I'm sure the northern neighbours will then have more complains about Singapore. After the water treaty issue, then Tekong, what's next? Apaches, Amraams ?? -
J-10 at the AA2002? where? From what I heard, its roughly equal in capability to a F-16 Blk 30. Of course, chinese views vary greatly. Some claim that its more capable than the JSF (yeah, right), some claim that its only slightly better than the F-8II.
I support the view that its about as capable as the Blk 30. It has high foreign content, having the AL-31FN as its powerplant, giving it good TW ratio. Its avionics are Isreali and Russian, and it seems to have a quad-redundant flight system. Some articles claim that the avionics are sensor-fused, but if it is true, it qould be limited, considering that Isreal, which is better than Russia and China in software development, has still not come up with true sensor-fusion yet. In terms of the radar, they still seem to be considering a few Russian and Isreali radars, but it should be roughly comparable to early models of the APG-68.
It is a 'lo' end mix to the SU-30, and thus naturally, would not be as capable as the Rafale, Typhoon, Eagle or even the F-16 Blk 60. However, its undeniably a significant step to producing a modern plane, from China's point of view. (even though, IMO, the help gotten from the LAVI program and from the F-16s provided from Pakistan is so huge, and so much equipment is foreign, that this is not really a plane China can claim to be "100% China" )
Furthermore, the AL-31FN has to be provided by Russia, they have not agreed to let China make the engine. I have heard that a second variant of the J-10 will use the domestically produced WP-15 engine instead, which is not as good as the AL-31FN, but at least its domestically made, and doesn't come with any restrictions. -
Viper, it seems like your question to their MBT dream is partially answered in today's Straits Times....Originally posted by Viper52:One last thing: Have the Malaysians really bought Russian MBTs? Or is it just one of their "wanna-have" pipe dreams? Like the Su-30s...if they haven't bought it then its not the first time Singapore has acquired countermeasures for Malaysian pipe dreams even before they realised their dreams.
and I quote:
"Apart from the technicalities and capabilities of the tanks, the government would consider the offer in terms of what Poland could provide in areas such as counter-trade, loans and transfer of technology, he said.
As there were other countries that had also made a strong pitch to sell their battle tanks to Malaysia, the competition was quite keen, he added.
Datuk Najib said the government had not fixed the number of tanks it would buy but ''ideally we should talk about a regiment of tanks'', which would be four batteries.
"
[end quote]
4 batteries... that makes them close to 100+ tanks? No wonder RSAF want their Apaches now!!!! Some good intel from the Mindef huh.... Not only they have exercised their options to get 12 more, but they have gotten the Longbow radars as well....
Now together with the existing HelliTow armed Fennecs, plus the on the ground Spike platforms, I think SAF has quite a credible anti-tank capability. The only thing lacking is the AMX-13SM1... SAF need to have newer 105mm armed tanks.... and perhaps plus a batch of ex-German/Holland Leopard 1A5.... -
ehh..... 4 batteries... isnt 4 battalion or 4 regiment.... right?Originally posted by Joe Black:Viper, it seems like your question to their MBT dream is partially answered in today's Straits Times....
and I quote:
"Apart from the technicalities and capabilities of the tanks, the government would consider the offer in terms of what Poland could provide in areas such as counter-trade, loans and transfer of technology, he said.
As there were other countries that had also made a strong pitch to sell their battle tanks to Malaysia, the competition was quite keen, he added.
Datuk Najib said the government had not fixed the number of tanks it would buy but ''ideally we should talk about a regiment of tanks'', which would be four batteries.
"
[end quote]
4 batteries... that makes them close to 100+ tanks? No wonder RSAF want their Apaches now!!!! Some good intel from the Mindef huh.... Not only they have exercised their options to get 12 more, but they have gotten the Longbow radars as well....
Now together with the existing HelliTow armed Fennecs, plus the on the ground Spike platforms, I think SAF has quite a credible anti-tank capability. The only thing lacking is the AMX-13SM1... SAF need to have newer 105mm armed tanks.... and perhaps plus a batch of ex-German/Holland Leopard 1A5....
batteries are usually refers to 2 or more (usually up to 6) artillery guns.... (nebber heard it is used to refer to tanks... except ANTI-TANK batteries (still arti guns))
So... 1 regiment with 4 batteries.... about 25 tanks(MAX)??
anybody can help clear this up?? -
Yah, batteries usually refer to artillery pieces, sounded a little strange. I think battalion should be the word.
-
Poland is offering 64 tanks and armoured vehicles for 250 mil dollars, and up to 300 mil for additional services and support equipment.
Also, for some bizarre news, a man was arrested for walking down a street in Russia with an Igla missile on his back! When questioned, he said he found it. lol -
Looking at weapons and buying weapons is quite different from actually buying weapons. Everytime Mahathir or one of his cronies go weapons window shopping abroad, they always want to buy everything but the goddamned kitchen sink, only thing is more often than not they finally end up buying only the sink's rubber plug and nothing else. I prefer to wait till the delivery is actually made before believing anything I read about their weapons buys.
Somehow I wonder how the Malaysian Armed Forces cope, with a sudden influx of new weapons every decade or so...won't this lead to an endless cycle of training without attaining type proficiency before the weapon is phased out and replaced by a newer type. Eg their MiGs are not even 10 years old!!!!
As for the batteries of tanks report, yup batteries is not usually used for tanks. Terms which SAF uses is platoon, company, battalion, with most Western(and even Russian) armour units using the same terms to describe tank units(Russian tank battalions are called regiments I think- can someone confirm?). Batteries are used to refer to arty, AAA or SAM sub-units. Think some reporter who knows nuts about military putting foot in mouth again. -
4 Battalions of T-84s? Double check, are they the T-84UM's?
Whats the M'sian force structuring like? How many tanks per platoon, and tank per hq platoon? -
yah, M'sia likes to shoot off their big mouth saying we want this and that....but eventually, they couldn't even pay for the stuffs...
Reality checks:
1. M'sia told the whole wide world that they wanted subs long before Singapore acquired ours. Verdict... they looked at lots of options and purchase none until recently... they had to settle for ex-swedish Dakens which are not even sailing... They are used for port training...
2. Migs29 - part barter trade... apparently the price of the palm oils could not cover the actual hard currency equivalent. The palm oil were subject to commodities price index and the Russians only agree to the sales because they were desparate for hard currencies....
Secondly, spare part issues, technologies of the aircraft dated - aircrafts have to be modified to the latest avionics only after a couple years of service.
Verdict: poor choice - bad logistics, combat readiness low....
3. F-18 Ds.... only 8 planes... what are you going to do with just 8 of them given that any 2 to 3 will probably be out for service/maintainence at any 1 time....
Verdict: good plane, insufficient number to make an impact.
4. Lupo Frigates. Good ship, good radar, etc, but untested. BAe got into trouble in the weapon control system and integration.
Verdict: Good platforms but just 2 of them?
========
Of course, there will be more of these to come...
I predict their MBT purchase will have a similar logistic problem like the Migs unless they can start building spares themselves. Tank rounds are also non NATO compliance which means they have to depend on the Russians or ex Warsaw pact nations to provide them.
Su27/30 - good planes but you got to wonder haven't they learn their lessons with their Mig29s? Better still look at those countries that field Su and ask them what they think.... -
Don't forget the all time classic: They were going to get Tornado IDS and ADVs as the hi- component of a hi-lo mix with Hawks and blah blah blah...in the end? 28 Hawk 100/200 was all they got. Not to mention getting into some pretty hot shit over some improprieties over the BAe contract.
Verdict: They're full of hot air when it comes to weapons purchases. But then everyone knows that. -
Lupo class frigates? I thought it was Lekiu? Anyway, if I were them, I would go for upgrades on the Mig-29s, or if Mig-29s are that detestable, get rid of them, and buy more C/Ds second-hand. (i think C/D production has stopped) I believe money would be better used this way. (a little additional info - they have signed a contract with India to have India supply the Mig-29 spares, cos they produce it. India rejected Malaysia's initial request at first, cos India couldn't handle their own demand at first, but on Malaysia's second request, they obliged)
-
wat happens then if there is war and india decided to withold spare parts for malaysia?? is mahatir gonna bend over and recieve some ***** banana???Originally posted by YourFather:Lupo class frigates? I thought it was Lekiu? Anyway, if I were them, I would go for upgrades on the Mig-29s, or if Mig-29s are that detestable, get rid of them, and buy more C/Ds second-hand. (i think C/D production has stopped) I believe money would be better used this way. (a little additional info - they have signed a contract with India to have India supply the Mig-29 spares, cos they produce it. India rejected Malaysia's initial request at first, cos India couldn't handle their own demand at first, but on Malaysia's second request, they obliged) -
YourFather, you are rightOriginally posted by YourFather:Lupo class frigates? I thought it was Lekiu? I got it mixed up!
I have to say the Lekiu is quite a respectable warship but RMN only has 2 ... what a shame
One funny thing though.... why did RMN number Lekiu as #30 well the second ship as Jebat as #29. Is this reverse numbering common in the naval world. I don't recall seeing too many classes of warships have reverse number or name the class of warship after the second ship... -
I did some checking, and it seems that the Lekiu class has only 16 VLS cells for the Seawolf. That's only as much as our missile corvettes, which also holds 16 Barak VLS systems. Isn't that too light an armament for a frigate? Luckily our Frigates will come with 32 cells.
-
The deck area on the Lekiu class is not that big and considering that RMN wanted a huge air search radar and a helo hanger, they pretty much run out of space. Each Sea wolf canister is also not as compact as the Barak, thus they could only have 16 missile at the bow of the ships. The same area would easily accomodate up to 32 Baraks...Originally posted by YourFather:I did some checking, and it seems that the Lekiu class has only 16 VLS cells for the Seawolf. That's only as much as our missile corvettes, which also holds 16 Barak VLS systems. Isn't that too light an armament for a frigate? Luckily our Frigates will come with 32 cells.
As for RSN future La Fayattes, they are much bigger. They are at least longer by some 20 meters and wider too. Having 32 Aster 15s are reasonable for this size ships.
Come back to RSN MCVs, how I wish they add a CIWS weapon to the ship. The space where they put up a rubber dingy, between the sonar area and the structure could possible be enough to place Phanlax or Sea RAM or even a decenet size cannon. What a waste of space...
-
I came across a website which showed the specs for the Isreali Sa'ar V class corvette, and I was very surprised at the amt. of weapons it carried.
Also, while there was space where the rubber dingy was on, is there any space BELOW the rubber digny? The any CIWS system and cannon system has a pretty large space requirement below deck to store the ammo. Perhaps that's the reason why there was no CIWS placed there... I dunno about the RAM though, but the SeaRAM, which shares the same turret as the Phalanx, is out of the question.