Singapore At War
-
Maybe if your friends are those flying in the air or floating in the sea, these would never happen. But if they are ever walking and wearing green, you could start asking them to practice hide-and-seek in FIBUA. hahahahahaa......Originally posted by solaris:Talking about the terrain and range at which an infantryman will have to fight in the Malay Peninsular, there are a few of my friends in the army who do not believe that in a future conflict, close quarter and confined combat in which the contact range may be less than 50m will be possible.
The reason given is that with the range of modern weaponry, why would we need to close in.
Everything is possible, looking at what's happening at Jenin, it's pretty obvious, isn't it? Why would the infantry bother to go in if technology can do everything?
As for the UAV, i think tripwire have to try harder to convince me that the concept of supersonic capabled UAV is a worthy asset. Looking at the direction where the Boeing n Lockheed are moving, it's more of payload rather than speed. Anyway, it costs much lesser than a fighter and with no pilots, just makes it an expendable asset.(Although we try not to...due to the $$ involved). -
convince you that singapore need a supersonic UAV??? i think you got the wrong idea.....Originally posted by Eyezer:Maybe if your friends are those flying in the air or floating in the sea, these would never happen. But if they are ever walking and wearing green, you could start asking them to practice hide-and-seek in FIBUA. hahahahahaa......
Everything is possible, looking at what's happening at Jenin, it's pretty obvious, isn't it? Why would the infantry bother to go in if technology can do everything?
As for the UAV, i think tripwire have to try harder to convince me that the concept of supersonic capabled UAV is a worthy asset. Looking at the direction where the Boeing n Lockheed are moving, it's more of payload rather than speed. Anyway, it costs much lesser than a fighter and with no pilots, just makes it an expendable asset.(Although we try not to...due to the $$ involved).
The supersonic UAV is merely in my view a stepping stone to future supersonic surface to surface missile or land base long range anti-ship missile!!
to me... FIREFLY is merely an excuse to try out those guidance.. control and engine system.... once it pass the test..... time to load some serious FAEs into the firefly... hahahaaaa...... now that is one serious FLY thats gonna make one big big FIRE.... FIREFLY indeed!!.... those DSTA people are so imagnative.... -
About the Astros, I believe the 90km versions, have on 2 rockets on its' launcher. And I do believe it is possible to shoot down the rockets in flight, via re-programmed surface to air missiles.
As for the rifles, I do agree that 7.62mm rounds would be crazy. Considering that the Geneva convention bans hollowpoint rounds in war, I hope the Russians will cease the usage of the rounds and revert to FMJs. -
Second possibility is also having a supersonic UAV could also be a step forward towards building a supersonic UCAV. Since Singapore does not really have much stealth technology and cannot hope to acquire US UCAV in the near term, perhaps Singapore can build a supersonic UCAV to compensate for the lack of stealth.Originally posted by tripwire:The supersonic UAV is merely in my view a stepping stone to future supersonic surface to surface missile or land base long range anti-ship missile!!
to me... FIREFLY is merely an excuse to try out those guidance.. control and engine system.... once it pass the test..... time to load some serious FAEs into the firefly... hahahaaaa...... now that is one serious FLY thats gonna make one big big FIRE.... FIREFLY indeed!!.... those DSTA people are so imagnative....
As for shooting down the ASTOR rockets, it is definitely possible given a 90KM rocket signature is so much bigger than the Russian made Katyusha rockets. If the US made laser can shoot down Katyusha rockets, so it should be able to shoot down the ASTOR rocket. -
Originally posted by solaris:
it was announced some months ago (not too long). I remebered reading the news from
Here is some modification I would like to add
1. Malaysian 155mm artillery
Sometime ago, field trials for the GIAT CESAR 155mm self propelled artillery was conducted and I believe a certain quantity was purchased. The South African 155mm - when was this announced?
Defense System Daily. It was a small quantity.
Yes, RMN sub aquisition is from the French. However, the Scorpene is an Italian design. I believe the design was taken from the Italian as French no longer build SSK. Like the Americans and the British, they only build SSN. I think the RMN boats will be equipped with French sonars and fire control computer, etc.
2. The RMN submarines
I believed the winner of the submarine bid was DCN with their Scorpene submarine. I think RMN aquisition plan call for 3. The Scorpene posses a grave maritime menace. However I believe Tony Tan once made a public annoucement that the Challenger class subs are ~training subs~....
As for RSN subs, the Sjoormen class is a precurosr to most like the HDW/Kockum build ships, probably a sister ship of A19 boats or even a totally new boat. I believe RSN favour Swedish/German built boats because the baltic sea is very much like the Singapore Straits, Malacca Straits or to that extend the South China sea, being shallow - pretty much green water. The subs built by HDW and Kockums are good at operating at such shallow water, being rather quiet and stealth, but at the same time very agile. I also think that RSN will probably go with the Sterling AIP or even the German fuel cell.
Reasonable assumption. In fact Janes Defence and some other reputated defence journals have already said the same thing. A new like tank is in the pipeline, wholly built and design by ST Engg. It probably uses the same Bionix Chassis (make sense to have common parts to reduce logistic), and an 105mm gun. It is highly likely to have an Israeli made fire control computer and sights (presumedly the Thermal sight and scopes).
Upgarde for the Army
1. I am speculating that the light/medium tank will be an indigenous design based on Bionix technology with prominent Israeli influence(fire control and gunnery stabilisation etc). The gun will probably be a 105mm.
My personal wish is that the new light tank should include a commander Independent Thermal imager with the hunter-killer mode installed. The Tank commander will spot the targets and pass it to the gunner with the press of the button. While the gunner engage the target, the tank command CITV will search for another target. The gun should be fully stablized for firing while on the move. The smoke grenade launcher should also be able to launch a fragmentation grenade tto act like "claymore mines". The tank have add on armour capability and active defensive suite such as the one use on CV90-120mm.
I also wish that SAF will complement the new tank with some 60+ CV90-120mm tanks or Leo 1A5.
FH2000 itself is self-propelled. I presume you are talking about a true SP like M106 Paladin, AS90 Braveheart, G6, and PzH2000 where the gun is married into a mechanised chassis. Israel has done many of these kind of work. Perhaps SAF could use the Centurion chassis and design a turret that can carry the old M68 gun, M71 gun, the FH88 and FH2000 guns. Perhaps SAF would have true SP guns
2. As mentioned earlier, MLRS should be a technology that the SAF investigate. The introduction of true SP variants of the FH2000 is also a possibility.
This is underway. I think it might even be tied to the naval helo program. At this stage NH90 seems to be the leader for the naval helo bid. Alternatively, RSAF can also upgrade UH-1H to UH-1Z like the USN version with the new T700 engines, upgrade cockpit and 4 blades rotors.
3. Improvement in the army air lift capability. With the completion of the Chinook program, a replacement for the UHIH should be evaluated.
Well, not talking about replacing Igla or Mistral. The Linebacker Bradley and the LAV-AD ait defense system simply adopt a turret that can both launch MANPAD SAMs including Igla, Mistral and Stingers as well as firing the gatling 25mm guns. The turrets also carry integrated target acqusition radars as well as electro-optical sights for target acquistion.
4. It is unlikely that with the introduction of Igla and Mistral some years back and the fulfillment of our SHORAD requirements, a new SHORAD system will be introduced. The mounting of Igla/Mistral on IFV chassis is a possibility however? A more immediate task is the replacement of the I Hawk and Rapier 2 perharps. I am not sure of their system specifications and performance though. Should the upgrade be extensive enough then replacement might not be neccessary.
This has been an onging improvment in the SAF. I didn't mention it as we know that Mindef is at the stage of building up the armed forces ELINT, SIGINT and COMINT capabilities.
5. A low profile area - C4I. Battlefield information system and communications should be improved. By improving information transfer and dessimination, our forces will be able to outmaneurve larger enemy units. No information on this and I don't think anyone will comment on this. However with the SAF emphasis on manoeuvre warfare, there will most probably be interesting developments in this area.
Do not have to. TOW 1A is already in the RSAF inventory in the form of the missiles carried by Fennecs. However, instead of using TOW 1A, SAF could choose to integrate Spike with the Bionix 25mm turret somewhat like the M2/M3 Bradley and the latest LAV 25 turret.
6. Upgrade of AT capability. I do not think the SAF would introduce a new ATGW system currently. The Spike offers us many interesting possibilities though
Just my 2 cents -
1. Submarine. Was the Scorpene an italian design? I read somewhere that the Scorpene is an SSK adaptation of the French Rubis - a small compact SSN. The combat and sensor suite should be French as you said. Regarding the possible contender for a future RSN sub contract, I am fairly confident that the Kockum will be selected - the RSN had a successful relationship with Kockum and the RSwN in the Sjoormen project. A myth I hope to dispel is the effectiveness of SSN in south china sea waters given the current state of ASW developement in the region. An exercise was held 2 years ago involving HMAS Collins and HMS Trafalgar. 2 of the series involves the hunting of Collins and Trafalgar respectively. 2 RSN APV were hunting the Trafalgar. The outcome would not be pleasant in warOriginally posted by Joe Black:Do not have to. TOW 1A is already in the RSAF inventory in the form of the missiles carried by Fennecs. However, instead of using TOW 1A, SAF could choose to integrate Spike with the Bionix 25mm turret somewhat like the M2/M3 Bradley and the latest LAV 25 turret.
Just my 2 cents the sonar contacts were close and hopping all over the place. The crew would be swimming in war Given the imminent introduction of new SSK in RMN orbat, I think ASW doctrine and training in the RSN would be given increasing emphasis.
2. SP howitzer. Spot on regarding what you said
3. Air Defence. Is there an overlap between the role of short range missile systems and a flak system? Currently the Oerlikon 35 seems to be the only flak system in the Army and its mobility is quite low. Should a systme similar to Gepard and ZSU 34 be introduced?
4. EW. Joe Black - nothing more to add to what you say somethings are best left unsaid.
5. Naval Choppers. I am not a big fan of NH90...it may be a bit too big for the hanger of the frigates....and I think the capabilities are inferior to that of the US compeititors. Of course the professionals have a greater understanding of the systems involve and i trust their judgements. -
Originally posted by solaris:
You are right. I mistaken Scorpene for Salvatore SSK. Scorpene is wholly French made.
1. Submarine. Was the Scorpene an italian design? I read somewhere that the Scorpene is an SSK adaptation of the French Rubis - a small compact SSN. The combat and sensor suite should be French as you said.
Source: http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/scorpene/index.html
From what the Naval technology described, it is quite a respectable SSK. RSN will have a handful dealing with 3 of these...
Hope so, I hope RSN gets a modified version of the A19 sub or even the new Viking SSK. They should have the Stirling AIP installed, really good flank sonars and also tow-array sonars. A integrated fire control computer and possibly also the Kockums torpedos/weapon handling system not to mention include submerged launched Harpoons as part of the weapon suites. Alternatively, RSN could get the German made Israeli Navy's Dolphin class SSK. They are superb boats.
Regarding the possible contender for a future RSN sub contract, I am fairly confident that the Kockum will be selected - the RSN had a successful relationship with Kockum and the RSwN in the Sjoormen project.
Agreed. RSN sub hunting skills need to improve in great steps. The APV are insufficiently armed to deal with SSKs or SSNs. They lack passive sonars. Active sonars are good for chasing subs once you have gotten a general location and range of the sub but it gives away the emmitters location especially the APVs have the hull mounted sonar rather than the tow sonars like the MCVs.
A myth I hope to dispel is the effectiveness of SSN in south china sea waters given the current state of ASW developement in the region. An exercise was held 2 years ago involving HMAS Collins and HMS Trafalgar. 2 of the series involves the hunting of Collins and Trafalgar respectively. 2 RSN APV were hunting the Trafalgar. The outcome would not be pleasant in war the sonar contacts were close and hopping all over the place. The crew would be swimming in war Given the imminent introduction of new SSK in RMN orbat, I think ASW doctrine and training in the RSN would be given increasing emphasis.
I believe the new La Fayettes will address these shortfalls. Effective ASW platforms need to be of usual size to accomodate different types of sonars, plus an ASW helos. It took the Americans and West Europeans years (during the cold war) to figure out best way to hunt silent predators like the SSNs and SSKs.
They practiced mock engagement aways the Eastern Block countries and Soviets for many years.
Furthermore, Australian Collins are known to have "sunk" the USN CVNs during naval exercises of the Hawaiian coasts.
The OZs and the British are thus much more skillful submariners than RSN sub hunters and submariners. Thus being shot at during war games are not that bad. Can learn heaps of tactics from them. Afterall the Brits did sink Argentians during the Falkland wars and both the Brits and OZz have sunk tons of ships and U-boats during WW2. RSN just started learning anti-surface warfare.
Sure, but LineBacker and LAV-ADs are much better because they are armed with both guns and SAMs. I am not proposing getting the chassis of such systems, but get the turrets only and marry them to ST Engg Bionix and the new 8x8 Terrax vehicle.
3. Air Defence. Is there an overlap between the role of short range missile systems and a flak system? Currently the Oerlikon 35 seems to be the only flak system in the Army and its mobility is quite low. Should a systme similar to Gepard and ZSU 34 be introduced? -
Spike armed Bionix, not that difficult to wire up if you think of it, since the Spike doesn't have the hassel of wires or lasers.
-
Joe Black:
I share similar sentiments regarding your views on current RSN ASW developement. The inadequacy is not with the weapon - A224 is a competent enough light ASW torpedo - but rather the sensors. The active MF sonar used by the APV and MCV are useful when the general location of targets are known but suffer from a range handicaps. Having no real submarines to train with also impair ASW system and doctrine training. The Sjoormen aquisition besides developing submarine warfare capabilities in the RSN also has the dual effect of enabling us to conduct proper ASW training. Having real submarines to train with is a rare oppurtunity and one of the principal purpose of having the Lion King excercises with the Indian Navy is to have an oppurtunity to train with their submarines.If anyone has the chance to be in a public visit to RSS Valiant (P91 - MCV) and you are walking through the passageway on the main deck - keep a look out for the wall on your left, there is a plot presented to Valiant by an Indian submarine commander - It shows a plot of Valiant's track togather with that of the submarine and the generation of a firing solution on Valiant - basically telling Valiant that they are KO in war
Anyway the RSN do have passive sonar system and it is in the public domain (no security leak here ) - If you look carefully at the stern of APV 95 RSS Brave, you will notice a coil of cable which can only be a passive towed array system. It yield excellent range and, if deployed skillfully, bearing information - the trade off being that in crowded waters such as the Singapore Straits, ambient noise is too high for effective deployment. I am wondering whether the MPA has an ASW capability? Any information on this in the public domain? -
Hello correct me if I am wrong but the aiming system of the Spike allows for mid course correction and the fire system has a TV screen....I infer that this imply a fibre - optic guidance system. Am I mistaken?Originally posted by Shotgun:Spike armed Bionix, not that difficult to wire up if you think of it, since the Spike doesn't have the hassel of wires or lasers. -
Thats on the public domain too i believe so no leakOriginally posted by solaris:Hello correct me if I am wrong but the aiming system of the Spike allows for mid course correction and the fire system has a TV screen....I infer that this imply a fibre - optic guidance system. Am I mistaken? ... Yup... Its a Fibre-Optics system. How else is it possible to transmit all that graphic info? Copper is so last generation... Luurve the sighting system too... aboslutely idiot proof... practically can't miss with it 
-
I think that'll be much better put as, IF singapore ever build something that could take off in the air? Till then, we can forget about designing a UCAV, let alone supersonic, where are they gonna get the expertise to help them when even US are still trying to get it right? I think ST is still way behind in this area due to the lack of R&D and expertise.Originally posted by Joe Black:Second possibility is also having a supersonic UAV could also be a step forward towards building a supersonic UCAV. Since Singapore does not really have much stealth technology and cannot hope to acquire US UCAV in the near term, perhaps Singapore can build a supersonic UCAV to compensate for the lack of stealth. -
What exactly is a flak system and how does it differs from the short range missile systems?Originally posted by solaris:Air Defence. Is there an overlap between the role of short range missile systems and a flak system? Currently the Oerlikon 35 seems to be the only flak system in the Army and its mobility is quite low. Should a systme similar to Gepard and ZSU 34 be introduced?.
Naval Choppers. I am not a big fan of NH90...it may be a bit too big for the hanger of the frigates....and I think the capabilities are inferior to that of the US compeititors. Of course the professionals have a greater understanding of the systems involve and i trust their judgements.[/QUOTE]
Which are the shortlisted choppers to be used in the maritime theatre? And with the primary role being the ASW or??? -
The first part of the contract is the maritime helo contract. The shortlisted companies have submitted contract proposals for 9-12 naval helos to operate from the new frigates. Under consideration are the NH90, SH-60 and AS-532 Cougar. Eliminated were the Super Lynx, Super Seasprite and EH101
From the French contacts I've spoke to in charge of their weapons sales and procurement side during the recent AA, the naval and army contracts are not linked as some have suggested, though with the 3 contenders having land-based versions, the inference is quite obvious. Notice 2 of the eliminations do not have a land based utility version. In short, not linked *for now*
As for tactical AD, an SP gun/missile combo like the Tunguska 2S6 seems like a nice idea. Wonder if thats been thought of? -
Thanks for the Info Viper. If these 3 are the shortlisted candidates, I am speculating that the NH90 might just get a hunch. It has excellent endurance and payload relative to the 3. What would the operational structure of the Naval Helos be? I do not think that the RSN will have an aviation arm analogous to the Fleet Air Arm. We will probably see something similar to that of 121 Squadron (MPA) - under air force administrative control but under navy operational control.
-
You're welcome Solaris, incidentally the proposals were sumitted a while AFTER AA2002, and decision would be made later this year.Originally posted by solaris:Thanks for the Info Viper. If these 3 are the shortlisted candidates, I am speculating that the NH90 might just get a hunch. It has excellent endurance and payload relative to the 3. What would the operational structure of the Naval Helos be? I do not think that the RSN will have an aviation arm analogous to the Fleet Air Arm. We will probably see something similar to that of 121 Squadron (MPA) - under air force administrative control but under navy operational control.
My personal hunch would be the Seahawk, NH90 might just tip the scale a little too much, the endurace is definitely in it favour though payload might not be such an impt factor. and if we select the Rafale if sources I have are correct, we might need to give the Americans something a calm them down
You're probably right about the unit structure of the naval helos. Makes sense as our naval air component is quite small. It would certainly streamline matters
[This message has been edited by Viper52 (edited 26 April 2002).] -
Hi guys, try coming to this website and post yr views.
http://www.geocities.com/mindef123/index.html
This guy damn anti SAF man... -
Lack of a pressure relief valve like all normal humans do will eventually kill the anally-retentive off, just like it will eventually for the webmaster for that page.Originally posted by CenturionMBT:Hi guys, try coming to this website and post yr views.
http://www.geocities.com/mindef123/index.html
This guy damn anti SAF man...
Hmmm...sounds like some of the posters on this forum.... -
Man, that numbnuts must really HATE the SAF man...going through all that bad grammar to put up his webpage. For his effort, he should be posted to pinoneer to do his NS reservist LOL
-
Some are pretty outdated stuffOriginally posted by No Frill:Man, that numbnuts must really HATE the SAF man...going through all that bad grammar to put up his webpage. For his effort, he should be posted to pinoneer to do his NS reservist LOL -
But still, you could see he did went thru a great deal trying to get the numbers right. Wonder why a nutbrain would want to do that.. how does that help him to 'relieve' his frustration? Or is he not S'porean?Originally posted by Rudin:Some are pretty outdated stuff -
Nahh.... i dont think he is from SAF... his web page contain a few error which would not have been missed if he is indeed from SAF... all those figures are just merely lifted off magazines and books which is available in public...Originally posted by CenturionMBT:Hi guys, try coming to this website and post yr views.
http://www.geocities.com/mindef123/index.html
This guy damn anti SAF man...
Anyway... he is a no brainer... with a brain the size of a pea... -
Some of the info looks suspiciously similar from the book "Defending the lion city".
Still I don't understand people like them. If they really hated the SAF, then get out of the country, I am sure we could do without idiots like them. If they were in my team, I would personally see that they don't "stay" long. -
Totally agree... in a war, I would personally pump him fulla lead (or copper, in the SAF case) to put him outta his misery so he won't be a burden to the rest of the team.Originally posted by mfscrewu:If they were in my team, I would personally see that they don't "stay" long.
------------------
I never saw a wild thing
sorry for itself.
A small bird will drop frozen dead from a bough
without ever having felt sorry for itself.
D. H. Lawrence -
tsk tsk tsk....
Singaporeans has no idea or the military of Malaysia.
-Does Singapore has a Rapid Deployment Force? And Do Malaysia have it?
-Does Singapore have a division sizes of troops trained in specialized tactics? And do Malaysia have it?
-Has SIngapore gone to wars before? I don meant UN observing or medical mission, I mean real combat missionss or combat peacekeepering missions.
-Yes Singapore has their boinixs APC and sar rifles...but they war-proved?
-Does Singapore has MRLS?
we might be low-tech but our army can definately crush your army...all your soldiers mama boys and bullshitter thinking you know so much in you 2 years of army bullshit.
your airforce may be good now but we are catching up.
-----------------------------------
Our newspaper said singaporean are arrogant and proud, I think this place is the prove. Calling us names, chimps, pig, whatever. In war you see who laff.
-----------------------------------
let see how many cock and proud singaporean laff at my poor English. Let see.