Singapore's SuperSkyhawk replacement
-
120+???!!Originally posted by EXCO:Singapore has 120+ Skyhawks in active service... i will not say RSAF will replace them 1 for 1... but the number is there. Go figure.
As previously stated, numbers dun win a war. 30 superbugs and Su30s means they are a viable threat? I doubt. The more plane Malaysia has, the more burdened the RMAF will be, which only leads to reduces combat effectiveness and poor operational readiness.
I thought it was 64.
Anyway, the government's plan is for a $2b replacement and with that they are going to buy 20-24 planes with spare parts and all -
I think i made a mistake, it should not be 120 "in active service". What is the figure stated in "Defending the lion city"? I believe RSAF has more than 80.
-
there are indeed 120+ skyhawks are in singapore....however only a number is operational.........(as singapore buys the spare and frame from a bone yard and together with a assemble plant to fits thoses scooters) maybe ,i will say 30 to 70 may be the reliable amount.......(actually 70 for mi alittle big liao.....but give face to Tim Huxley)
-
there are claims that there are abt 40 to 60 F-16s in singapore.........how true is that......can anyone...account it...
-
70 for 2 sqns... why not... i do believe Singapore has that number.
-
if thats the case.....wow
.....we really have to much pilots sia....... 
-
malaysia also has 88 a-4s......alll retired or never entered service....
the number of 30 planes is for 2 sqds....
30 = 16 + 14
14 superhornet......16 flankers....
(my guess) -
hello.........with the aqquiring of the Su-30s and Super Hornets.......alot of logistic members will resign..........
-
jus to ask hor........are their hornet pilots.......being train in the US, like our singaporean pilots....or they buy it wholesale....and fly it whole sale.......
-
I personally think most probably be typhoon 1st because sg wans an aircraft tt have BVR capability. Main prioity is air defense. Rafale performance is sux although sg got a gd relation with france. F-16 block 60 also a possiblilities cos to cut cost on training. F-15e is the last possibliliites because of S.korea accquire the strike eagle tt have crusie missile capability n JDAMs.
Super hornet n Su-30 is totally out.... -
Rafale performance sux? Please elaborate, that statement seems strange especially in the light of Rafales running rings around Tomcats and Hornets during recent DACT exercises over the Indian Ocean. And thats the most basic Rafale F1 versionOriginally posted by duotiga83:I personally think most probably be typhoon 1st because sg wans an aircraft tt have BVR capability. Main prioity is air defense. Rafale performance is sux although sg got a gd relation with france. F-16 block 60 also a possiblilities cos to cut cost on training. F-15e is the last possibliliites because of S.korea accquire the strike eagle tt have crusie missile capability n JDAMs.
Super hornet n Su-30 is totally out....
As for BVR, MICA/Mirage 2000 combi slaughtered NATO F-16s F-18s MiG-29s in BVR DACT. How do you think the Rafale with its newer and more advanced systems will perform, first with MICA, and the evetually Meteor?
This topic has been discussed extensively in the "Singapore at War" thread, this is an excerpt from one of my posts on why the Typhoon is a BAD choice for Singapore
===========
Dated 26 July 2002, Page 43 of thread "Singapore at War"
Once again, the problem with the Typhoon is not even whether Tranche 3 will solve the problems of the Typhoon(too geared towards A2A, insufficient range/combat radius). It is as Joe Black has pointed out, whether it will reach that stage or not. Looking at previous multinational designs, its unlikely, everyone will get the Typhoons ordered, the countries involved will hail it as a fantastic example of multinational cooperation, then promptly each go their own way as to customising the aircraft for their own need, each heaving a sigh of relief at the sight of each others backs.
Also, development time comes into play, as I've often said before, I am impressed(very much so) by the Typhoons specs, but I've also said we must put things into perspective and realise that much of the claimed specs are just that, claims, very little exists beyond the papers and the harddrives of the consortiums offices. The basic fact is that the program is lagging, and severely so, compared to equivalent fighters of the same generation. 4 Typhoons, 3 from UK and 1 German, flew together for the 1st time recently at Farnborough. Some see it as an achievement. I say, "about damn time"
Back to integration. US has already told RoK no AMRAAM integration if it chooses non-US equipment. No doubt, they will use the same arm-twisting tactics on other nations, us included when it comes to picking our fighters. As I've asked before, what then for the non-US contenders? Skyflash/Sparrow for Typhoon until Meteor is available at the end of the decade(and that if and only if the damn Krauts stop trying to screw around with the program). Hardly cutting edge is it?
I've said this before and I'll say it again. While the Typhoon is a very impressive aircraft with a very impressive set of specs, there are too many what-ifs concerned with the state and schedule to the program for us to gamble our new fighter program on -
I agree with ur way of analysis of the typhoon program. It has indeed been delay for quite a long time liao and now the brit is considering whether shld they wan the typhoon to b in tranch 3 type in the future as a replacements for their tornardos.
I also agree with you with the typhoon vs rafale competition as both types are are a both the same class. It is not just about aircraft performance. Until now, i hardly c any countires with france aircraft equip with NATO standards of armaments. I am indeed impressive with the combi with m2000/mica performance, but time n times again, US always embargo with countries tt wanted to integrate their systems into other countries aircrafts or wat so ever equipments. 1 example is the recently aussie decide the euro tiger tt intergrade with usa hellfire.
Among the 3 types of deltas (typhoon, gripen, rafale), currently onli typhoon n gripen hav exports as both can easily integrate in NATO types of armaments easily into the aircrafts. France type of aircraft hav veri limited types of armaments, which is mainly their own types of armaments with the exception of spain F-1.
In training wise, is gd tt we hav a gd relations with usa n brits n swed n france. It is indeed a veri tough competition between typhoon/rafale to replace sg a-4su.
Somemore, although the rafale has indded involve in the afgan war in their charles de gualle carrie in their F1 config( AA now) and the demo of the mk2 version in paris air show, but still france cannot impresse most of the countries F-x replacements . Gripen on the other hand, although is small n lightweight, now hav a some exports( south africa, czech republic n hungary). Typhoon, which is soon going to be in service, although not combat proven in war , has 2 exports( greece n austria) which left rafale that hav no exports 4 now.
I am impress of the rafale aesa radar n the irst and mica combi, but the current F1 version of rafale armaments is still not a veri gd integrate with those tt have NATO standards of armaments( commonality so as to save maintainence). even if sg wans a rafale, i think the best is with mk2 version or F-3 version onwards.
I admire ur research knowledge of armed forces with j black, but in the end, it still lies with the political descision n industry cooperation reliability and many others factors. Onli time will tell when the mindef announce the RFP during the AA exhibition n the selection type. This debate between both rafale/typhoon will nvr end until the selction results. -
Originally posted by duotiga83:
>>> I also agree with you with the typhoon vs rafale competition as both types are are a both the same class. It is not just about aircraft performance. Until now, i hardly c any countires with france aircraft equip with NATO standards of armaments. I am indeed impressive with the combi with m2000/mica performance, but time n times again, US always embargo with countries tt wanted to integrate their systems into other countries aircrafts or wat so ever equipments. 1 example is the recently aussie decide the euro tiger tt intergrade with usa hellfire. <<<
Exactly, which is why the Typhoon is at a disadvantage. Should the US bar clearance of the AMRAAM to an non-NATO country who buys non-US products(ie Typhoon or Rafale), which it has already stated it would, what AAMs are the Typhoon/Rafale left with?
Typhoon - Sparrow/ Skyflash
Rafale - MICA
The crux of my argument is: which of the above combi would you rather Singapore has?
>>> Among the 3 types of deltas (typhoon, gripen, rafale), currently onli typhoon n gripen hav exports as both can easily integrate in NATO types of armaments easily into the aircrafts. France type of aircraft hav veri limited types of armaments, which is mainly their own types of armaments with the exception of spain F-1.<<<
This point would be totally irrelavent if the US refuses integration of AMRAAM/JSOW/JDAM etc on non-NATO countries that purchase non-US fighters(eg Typhoon and Rafale again). And the US has already shown the world its willing to do that duing RoK's F-X selection. Which brings us back to the original point, would you prefer Rafale with MICA, or Typhoon with Sparrows/Skyflash?
>>> Somemore, although the rafale has indded involve in the afgan war in their charles de gualle carrie in their F1 config( AA now) and the demo of the mk2 version in paris air show, but still france cannot impresse most of the countries F-x replacements . Gripen on the other hand, although is small n lightweight, now hav a some exports( south africa, czech republic n hungary). Typhoon, which is soon going to be in service, although not combat proven in war , has 2 exports( greece n austria) which left rafale that hav no exports 4 now. <<<
Gripen is in a totally different class for the Rafale, and is not in the running for RSAF's contract. Rafale lost to Gripen because the countries had
- Cost considerations
- They were looking at lightweight mainly A-A fighters in the first place. Singapore is looking for a heavier mulit-role aircraft. Comparing Rafales loss to Gripen is like comparing apples with oranges. Rafales loss to Typhoon in the Greek/Austrian contract is due mainly to politics, not capabilites. And anyway Greece has postponed its final decision to purchase the Typhoon to 2004. so Typhoon has not got that one wrapped up yet, which is why I did not include Greece as a customer.
>>>I am impress of the rafale aesa radar n the irst and mica combi, but the current F1 version of rafale armaments is still not a veri gd integrate with those tt have NATO standards of armaments( commonality so as to save maintainence). even if sg wans a rafale, i think the best is with mk2 version or F-3 version onwards. <<<
Not a problem. The version being offered by Dassault for RSAF is F2 w/ AESA and uprated M88-3 engines for hot and high ops.
>>> I admire ur research knowledge of armed forces with j black, but in the end, it still lies with the political descision n industry cooperation reliability and many others factors. Onli time will tell when the mindef announce the RFP during the AA exhibition n the selection type. This debate between both rafale/typhoon will nvr end until the selction results.<<<
Agree totally, which is why Joe Black and myself do not bring up this topic any more, but restrict ourselves to responding to others who bring up this topic
Cheers -
i am impress with ur defend with the rafale. onli time tells.
-
Just a disclaimer, I'm not getting any money or perks from Dassault to speak up for the Rafale at this forum or anywhere else, just that I've a keen interest in military aviation and feel that all things considered, the Rafale is the best option for Singapore, both in a military and political sense.Originally posted by duotiga83:i am impress with ur defend with the rafale. onli time tells.
Although the next time Dassault brings a Rafale B down to SG for an demo, I wouldn't mind a free ride on one as a token of appreciation!!
-
i hav a same interst as u: military aviation. i also not to say i fulli support EFI. each aircraft has its own capabilities. it is onli wat type we are looking at tt is best suitable to replace a-4. yes rafale hav send its prototypes here 4 demo in AA. stlll all lies in the results.
-
Agree totally, now lets just hope politics will not influence the final decsion thay muchOriginally posted by duotiga83:i hav a same interst as u: military aviation. i also not to say i fulli support EFI. each aircraft has its own capabilities. it is onli wat type we are looking at tt is best suitable to replace a-4. yes rafale hav send its prototypes here 4 demo in AA. stlll all lies in the results. -
totally agree with u. politics play with our minds 2 much.
-
Viper52 and duotigu83 that is the nicest reply both of u are give to each other
that add some bright light to this forum man!!!
SInce Harimau that malaysian came in this forum goes bonker and tons and tons of rubbish was dump here.I got involve in these rubbish dumping here also got influence -
well..if we need to talk about these topics...most important thing is tt do u hav enough info to back ur stand or juz mere tok rubbish???? btw thnz
-
Not to mention accept each others right to express their opinions, especially if they are willing to back their opinions with sound reasonsOriginally posted by duotiga83:well..if we need to talk about these topics...most important thing is tt do u hav enough info to back ur stand or juz mere tok rubbish???? btw thnz -
I put my money on Rafale as the choice for the RSAF as it one of the better planes around. Furthermore, Singapore might want to reduce reliance on US equipment and to foster better relationship with the French government
-
guys can anyone tell me why Rafale is a better choice compare to Typhoon.What specialities it have..
except it is not as new as typhoon i agree singapore is trying to be less reliance to US in fact we are already,in the way they rely more on the israelis,as a result of US weaponary restriction and regulation
,in directly singapore is also acquire US technology cause numerous israelis defence technology is an integration between US and Israelis technology.
Beside israelis,we tend to be relying Naval technology from the european countries such as swedish,british Bae system,french DCN ok israel is also in it... -
http://www.airpower.at/
This will tell more about EF2000 yoUR COMMENT PLS -
Orcishwarrior, in my reply to you in the Singapore At War thread, Page 44, I underlined what is IMO the advantages of the Rafale over the Typhoon, I will repost that here.Originally posted by Orcishwarrior:guys can anyone tell me why Rafale is a better choice compare to Typhoon.What specialities it have..
except it is not as new as typhoon i agree singapore is trying to be less reliance to US in fact we are already,in the way they rely more on the israelis,as a result of US weaponary restriction and regulation
,in directly singapore is also acquire US technology cause numerous israelis defence technology is an integration between US and Israelis technology.
Beside israelis,we tend to be relying Naval technology from the european countries such as swedish,british Bae system,french DCN ok israel is also in it...
The Typhoon is very capable aircraft. No doubts about that. On paper, everything in its specs would make it almost Rafales equal, or even surpass it slightly. However, if we look a little deeper, here's where the problems start stacking up against Typhoon for Singapore.
1)
Everythings on paper. The program has faced numerous delays and problems, brought about in part by having to sort out the kinks in the working relationships between the partners. Almost every aspect of the scheduling so far has been pushed back, again and again. The latest high profile delay is German delays over the Typhoons main armament, the Meteor BVRAAM. The CFT program only exists on paper(pretty much like everything else). The multirole version is still a few years off. Compare this to the Rafale development. It is in squadron service, has already undertaken combat missions over Afghanistan, the CFT program is on track with aircraft having already flown with CFTs, the multirole versions are ready for production once the French frees up the funding
2) Weapons
Both Rafale and Typhoon are scheduled to receive the Meteor BVRAAM. But its only scheduled to arrive in the later part of this decade(even before the Germans started their old tricks again). So whats in the interim? The American AMRAAM for Typhoon and the French MICA for Rafale. Both radar versions of the missiles are rough equivalents of each other, little to choose between each other. Which is fine and good if you're an EU/NATO operator of the Typhoon. But, as has already been demonstrated in the Korean F-X program, the US will not allow integration of AMRAAM to countries which buy non-US products, effectively relegating non-NATO/EU users of Typhoon to Skyflash and Sparrows until Meteor is ready, which are only semi-active radar homing, and at least a full generation behind AMRAAM/MICA. Of course MICA will have no such export restrictions to the Rafale.
3) Timetable.
Eurofighters order book is 600+ machines. Rafales is 200+/300. While some have taken this to mean that the Rafale is an export failure, things must be put into perspective. All except 12 Typhoons for Austria will go the the development countries. And export order of 12 units hardly makes Typhoon a roaring export success. Where the advantage of Rafale is that if Singapore does order it, we will be assured of receiving our aircraft according to OUR timetable, and not having to wait till other countries who've ordered earlier receive theirs before we get ours.
4) Training
Singapore has a training detachment set up already in France. A training detachment for Rafales in France will also make things simpler in terms to logistics, and theres no need to set up a new detachment in another country
I've heard a lot of denigrating comments about the Rafale; M88-2 engine poor in hot and high ops, RBE2 A/G modes being a joke, incompatible with American weapons etc.
Well, heres my rebuttal to these points:
M88-2: It is a non-factor. The M88-3 is already cleared for export, and it offers vastly improved thrust for almost no trade off in weight.
RBE2: Again a non-factor. This applied to the original RBE2. The A/G modes are being debugged as we speak, and export Rafale get the AESA radar anyway.
Yank weapons: Rafale has carried and dropped GBU-12s with combat load of 4 GBUs, 3 tanks, 2 Magic and 2 MICA(4 MICAs in operational service). And if US refuses weapon sales because we didn't buy American jets, whats the use of integrating American weapons anyway. And to be honest, I'd take SCALP/Apache over JSOW any day.
The link Joe Black posted in the "Singapore announcing fighter acqusition soon" is a fantastic guide to everything you need to know about the Rafale, read it. But you need Acrobat Reader though...