Future RSN
-
Apologize in advance for my poor grammar, trying my best in sharing my views.
I refer to one topic posted some time ago concerning the RSN's needs on aircraft carrier / mini version of aircraft carrier alike the Thai version.
Indeed the RSN are moving toward a fleet (or blue water navy) from coastal-based operation. This is especially clear when the RSN transfer all its CPCs in the 90s (costal patrol Craft – with capability for Gabriel missile to be fitted during war time), along with this transfer, naval personnel were also reassigned to the marine police (MAPO) division. RSN training institution retrains MAPO officers to operate the CPCs at the same time.
In my opinion, the SAF has never placed their emphasis in the RSN till the first Gulf war occurs in the early nineties, together with another incident / dispute over the horse-berg light house has causes the SAF think-tank to re-strategize the RSN. Hence, the building of the modern RSN begins in the early nineties.
From the early missile gunboats (MGBs –70s), to the corvette (MCVs-90s), till the recent petrol vessel (PVs-90s), the backbone of the RSN missile platform remains to be within a boat size –nothing more than 80 meters, low superstructure with only side fitted exhaust funnel instead of vertically fitted. All these requirements are essential and sensible as the RSN is expected to fight a sea battle confines to Malacca striate, at max the early part of South China Sea. All these area are considered as narrow path and shallow water. Hence, big ship means easy target, cause no place to hide.
Given the geographical concerns as describe above, it make no senses for the Navy to acquire the new generation of stealth frigate (replacing the MGBs), these frigate are just to BIG to fight around our waters. In fact, the RSN announcement to acquire the frigate has taken the Naval world by surprise! Everyone has assumed the MGB replacement will be another version of corvettes – below 90 meters of platform!
Obvious to me, the RSN is not only moving towards a fleet formation, but something far larger than we have all assumed!
I hope I am not boring you guys, new here anyway. Will continue part II tomorrow, gotto finish my tender by tonite. Cheers. -
rogee you are totally wrong !
Singapore navy did the right thing of go for smaller craft when in its youth. However from experience gain, it is now ready to grow. That is why it is now buying stealth frigate.
For small size craft, you are limited by the space, so in term of weapon and sensors, patrol range it is only that much. Also with that small size, your craft is not suitable for the open ocean which is very rough sea.
Your concept of stay put and just protect the port is totally wrong. Yes you must protect the ports, but enemy will be hitting at your shipping routes !!! that is what you need to go out to protect. In port area, you are still supported by aircrafts so small craft is enough.
If any war break out, we will need true blue ocean ship of a certain size like our corvette and frigate which can travel the range, weather the rough sea. Also they must have the size to mount weapon systems, that provide 3d defense - Air , sea , underwater threat to the whole fleet they are escorting, they will not have aircraft support, thus the weapon they mount must be more and better which mean more space.
In fact, the RSN announcement to acquire the frigate has taken the Naval world by surprise, why not ? Our stealth frigate is consider the 2nd most powerful warship type in capabilities after japan Agies destoryers in whole of Asia. -
er....not necessary the east asian naval forces are more superior i.e. Sovremenny Class Destroyer
. A potent adversary for the aegis cruiser and Nimitz Class, emphasizing on it onboard weaponary.SUNBURN -
You all are both wrong , they got it simply because they are moving towards 3G SAF and the whole South east asian region navy is moving towards more advanced ships.
-
Part II
The relationship between Singapore and the U.S has gained dept especially after the 911 incidents. We all know that being a small Island state, we need big / super powerÂ’s support in both economic and military arena. Personally, for Singapore (being the first few, if not, first Asia nation) to obtain a FTA (Free Trade Agreement) with the U.S takes more than meeting the eyes.
Have anyone ask ourselves why the Sing-dollars were the least depreciated currency as compare to the Malaysia dollars, Indonesia rupees and the Thai bath during the recent economic crisis? Whereas these currencies almost lost half its usual values??! This is another story / or opinion of mine to shares with all bros out there sometime later, provided I have not bore you guys out there!
Basically, our Island states act as a midway refueling center for the fighter jets from Guam and the 7th fleet (in logistic support). Located right in the middle of a Muslim region, it takes more than guts to be a host nation supporting the U.S in the middle of a Gulf war. Hence, being a target for the JI is no surprise to the SAF, it’s merely a trade off for a bigger objective – a calculated moves!
It is an open secret that Singapore has easy access to most of the advance weapon from the States that is only available to very close allies. These weapon make available to us – the firepower, are not proportional to our size, let alone the arsenal process by our neighboring countries, basically, its overkill by at lease 3 time its requirements (my opinion only)!
RSAF flies the F16s in the states way before we announced our intention to procure these machines, pack in the US before our neighboring states takes delivery of their F16A/B version and the other one, announcement on the procurement of the F18.
If I tell you guys that I saw a low flying Apache in our sky in the beginning of the 90s, will you guys believe me?
The SAF is actively supporting the UN missions; we all know who runs the UN and even though the UN objected the Gulf war II saga, together with France and Italy, does these factors deter the U.S in attacking Iraq? In another angle, are we supporting the calls from the UN or the U.S??
It is an open secret that the U.S cannot take more than two battlefronts at the same time. With the current tensions in the Gulf, China/Taiwan potential conflict and the rising tension with North Korea, the U.S is in need of more supporting allies!
Moreover, geographically, being a mid point in between the East and the West, using Singapore as a midway logistic depot and repair center is inevitable in the events of conflict – WAR in the East. Hence, to ease the burden from the U.S in protecting us, our arsenal must not only be power pack, it must be deadly, total destructive as we, Singapore, being a tiny country with limited resources, cannot fought a prolong battle (according to Jane defense journal some years back, within 7 days we will, and must reach 400KM into our enemy territory!) Being an urban state, we cannot afford to build a frontline right in our doorstep. (quote: Dr. M – a nation that put its frontline in the middle of its neighbor country call themselves a friendly nation? unquote)
But this is our past strategy. Without our current arsenal, we can perform the above-mentioned ops. Today, we are looking to play a bigger role in this region – especially for the RSN!
End of part II. (This article is entirely base on my own views and opinions.) -
I agree with the force expansion theory,especially when you take into account the Deltas, Endurance LSTs used in conjunction with the Blk52+ F-16Ds, our KC-135Rs and E2C Hawkeyes.All these point to a force able to fight a battle from our Straits up to the Hainan Island point of the South China Sea.
The Sovremenny class destroyers are a tough bunch, and I feel only our Deltas and Japan's Aegis-type cruisers and destroyers, probably with the Korean navy can deal with them.A second force to protect the Spratlys?There's some weight in that reasoning for sure
Very well put essay.
The US-Singapore relationship is a complex one, and given the right-wing Bush administration and a Republican dominated Congress,we are more valuable to them now than back in the Clinton administration.
There have been reports of the SAF seeking to procure ABM systems, probably the PAC-III Patriot system in the future, taken from ADJ.Sounds plausible enough to me. -
Singapore are moving toward a more true blue water force, that mean it have now the confident to not just defense itself but also if needed expand the area of influence to the south china sea.
The south china sea with so many countries laying claim to islands, oil and fishing rights, is a place which can easy see trouble. Singapore is totally dependent on trade, so our navy focus is to able to extend our influence to ensure merchant ships safely travel to and fro to our ports, that why frigates is needed. Without us ensuring the safetly of trade routes singapore is doom. -
Originally posted by storywolf:Without us ensuring the safetly of trade routes singapore is doom.
-
It's true.We are a nation that depends on the freedom of SLOCs and our rapid communicaton to stay useful to the world.I believe the RSN will not tolerate any attempt to close off the Straits and South China Sea by any navy, and this is the fearful reason why we might get dragged into a Spratly Conflict with the PRN.[/i]Originally posted by YI: -
You need more then RSN to challenge PLA-N....
additional 6 more frigates and submarines would be good. -
wanna sink more PLA-N. Equip more RSAF planes with Harpoon
-
We can't match them in terms of quantity , but we can do it in terms of quality.
-
The sad fact is that the ocean is just too huge. By the time the planes reach the area, they will be so short on fuel that they do not have time to search around. Also it will be too expensive , burning too much expensive fuels.Originally posted by Orcishwarrior:wanna sink more PLA-N. Equip more RSAF planes with Harpoon
It is easier to put a small battle group there, with a frigate to provide a area air defense cover, and they can remain on station for 24hrs which is more effective and they can send back data, which can be co-ordinated with planes patrols and strikes.
Without ships in the area is just like without soldiers on the ground , enemy will disappear when your plane comes , and come back when planes is gone ! -
Well,the other option is to equip our Fokkers with stand off cruise missiles.But we better be damned sure that we do not send them out too far.Originally posted by storywolf:The sad fact is that the ocean is just too huge. By the time the planes reach the area, they will be so short on fuel that they do not have time to search around. Also it will be too expensive , burning too much expensive fuels.
It is easier to put a small battle group there, with a frigate to provide a area air defense cover, and they can remain on station for 24hrs which is more effective and they can send back data, which can be co-ordinated with planes patrols and strikes.
Without ships in the area is just like without soldiers on the ground , enemy will disappear when your plane comes , and come back when planes is gone ! -
Our fokkers is already equip with Harpoons which is stand off weapon but again, they are also burning expensive fuels and they can only patrol for limit hours.Originally posted by LazerLordz:Well,the other option is to equip our Fokkers with stand off cruise missiles.But we better be damned sure that we do not send them out too far.
Also note, with everyone also having anti-missile defense, sometime it is not just shot and run. You may need to hang around use EW and other things to fight it out, to see who out wit who and who can screw up other people system before you send another missile off.
We also have to take into account of the sometime bad weather at sea, bigger ship like frigate can ride it out in the sea easily. But smaller ships or planes will not be able to hang around. -
To counter 1 of the powerful navy force is inspired , however ,I won't be that optimized...
take the situation easier, let's say somewhere in the middle of southChina sea near Spratly. so basically we rule out airborne projectile 1st.
1. PLAN's vessel got longer range ASM, their standard ASM now upgraded to C803(YJ83) supersonic/ sea skimming SAM with a range up to 250km.
( Source: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/c-801.htm )
2.PLAN vessel tonage is bigger, make it more suitable in a rough sea.
3. PLAN's DDG usually carries 2X8 ASM, more firepower than a smaller FFG.
4. The latest DDG 170 has a newer ASM which is ramjet powered, with performance generally better than Russian's "Sunburn" earlier mode
Picture link:
http://www.wforum.com/specials/articles/03/17204.html
c the ASM launcher, that's different from standard YJ8's. Bigger DDG is the RSN need for challenge the new horizon.
5, In Blue water, PLAN got help of SSN the newest type093 SSN which is expected to launch even deadly Club-S supersonic ASM and LACM. -
Fighting PLAN? Unless PLAN is willing to fight at your doorstep. If not, By the time we travel all the way up to Spratly Is, Our guys will be tired and the PLAN will be waiting there for turkey shoot. Learnt it from the movie "Kingdom of Heaven" Never move away too far from your base. Our Navy's objective is protection of SLOC. Fighting a war with China is not a very smart option. If one day, Taiwan decide to declare independent and US is involved in the war. I wonder where our smart leader will stand? Join the dark side?
-
We will remain behind to guard the SLOCs..but I foresee the PLAN launching preemptive incursions to prevent the USN from closing off the Straits to them.We nee d to be ready for this scenario.We will be screwed if we openly ally with China, for the main reason that PRC will never see us an equal.We have to stand with nations that have stood with us.Originally posted by freeman8:Fighting PLAN? Unless PLAN is willing to fight at your doorstep. If not, By the time we travel all the way up to Spratly Is, Our guys will be tired and the PLAN will be waiting there for turkey shoot. Learnt it from the movie "Kingdom of Heaven" Never move away too far from your base. Our Navy's objective is protection of SLOC. Fighting a war with China is not a very smart option. If one day, Taiwan decide to declare independent and US is involved in the war. I wonder where our smart leader will stand? Join the dark side? -
Since the birth of the dynasties, even up til the KMT / Communist rivalries..
so many civil war and killing of the civilians of the same race kept on going..
Equals ? Nah. We have a different culture from them. Taiwan? perhaps a little.
I rather we side with USA , think india will remain neutral , most will remain neutral...Singapore given it's close relationship with TW and CN , it will be interesting to see what's the outcome.
Furthermore , the textile industry issues are making both sides quite angry as well.. -
Fighting a war with China is not a very smart option. If one day, Taiwan decide to declare independent and US is involved in the war. I wonder where our smart leader will stand? Join the dark side?
For those who missed or perhaps forgot our dear leader's
speech, the following excerpt may help answer the question.
[/quote]
So I do not sense that the Taiwanese people appreciate the international strategic environment, how preoccupied the US is with Iraq and the war on terror, and how interdependent the US and China are becoming. Many do not realise how rapidly China is transforming itself, and how major powers in the world are all repositioning themselves in response to a rising China.
Many Taiwanese believe China will not use force on Taiwan, even if it moves towards independence. They are wrong. When I visited China in May, my sense was that the cross-strait issue was at the top of their agenda and that China is absolutely serious. To China, the 2008 Olympics is a small matter. But preventing Taiwanese independence is crucial to China.
The Taiwanese press speculated that I had visited Taiwan to play a mediator's role between China and Taiwan. It showed they had not understood the situation. I am in no position to play any such role and have no desire to do so. The issue between China and Taiwan is not a misunderstanding that can be resolved by the good offices of an intermediary. It is a fundamental and deep contradiction which will require great skill and restraint on both sides to manage.
There is therefore a real risk of miscalculation and mishap. If a war breaks out across the strait, we will be forced to choose between the two sides. As a friend of both sides, any decision will be painful. But if the conflict is provoked by Taiwan, then Singapore cannot support Taiwan.[quote]
Notice he said "Singapore cannot support Taiwan"; he didn't say Spore will support PRC. -
Originally posted by suntze:
And he said if the conflict is provoked by Taiwan, meaning if Taiwan fired the first shot, which of course she will never do so.The one who will fire the first shot is the PRC, as shown by their heightened urgency to reunite by force.It could change, but the onus to maintain peace lies with PRC.Taiwan cannot be accused of starting a war just for exercising freedom of speech and voicing out her ambitions, this is international law, something that PRC is still finding her way.
So I do not sense that the Taiwanese people appreciate the international strategic environment, how preoccupied the US is with Iraq and the war on terror, and how interdependent the US and China are becoming. Many do not realise how rapidly China is transforming itself, and how major powers in the world are all repositioning themselves in response to a rising China.
Many Taiwanese believe China will not use force on Taiwan, even if it moves towards independence. They are wrong. When I visited China in May, my sense was that the cross-strait issue was at the top of their agenda and that China is absolutely serious. To China, the 2008 Olympics is a small matter. But preventing Taiwanese independence is crucial to China.
The Taiwanese press speculated that I had visited Taiwan to play a mediator's role between China and Taiwan. It showed they had not understood the situation. I am in no position to play any such role and have no desire to do so. The issue between China and Taiwan is not a misunderstanding that can be resolved by the good offices of an intermediary. It is a fundamental and deep contradiction which will require great skill and restraint on both sides to manage.
There is therefore a real risk of miscalculation and mishap. [b]If a war breaks out across the strait, we will be forced to choose between the two sides. As a friend of both sides, any decision will be painful. But if the conflict is provoked by Taiwan, then Singapore cannot support Taiwan.[quote]
Notice he said "Singapore cannot support Taiwan"; he didn't say Spore will support PRC.[/b] -
Hi Lazerlordz,
LHL's speech should be read in its entire context. When he said "if the conflict is provoked by Taiwan" he meant Taiwanese provocation by declaring independence or similar acts.
I'm all for more democracy in PRC; however, Taiwanese move towards independence will upset the current status quo. The consequences will be bad for everyone, Singapore included. That's why I support maintaining status quo and leaving the issue for future generations of PRC/Taiwanese ppl to peacefully resolve between themselves. Trust you understand what is meant. -
According to sources, some of the RSAF A4s are been modified to launch Harpoons, if this is true, such plans should be a trial basis (details on part III) as our military thinkers should be well aware of a jet plane's endurance in the skies.Originally posted by Orcishwarrior:wanna sink more PLA-N. Equip more RSAF planes with Harpoon -
beside the spratly conflict, the other situation will be the cross straits conflict!Originally posted by LazerLordz:It's true.We are a nation that depends on the freedom of SLOCs and our rapid communicaton to stay useful to the world.I believe the RSN will not tolerate any attempt to close off the Straits and South China Sea by any navy, and this is the fearful reason why we might get dragged into a Spratly Conflict with the PRN.[/i] -
I agree to your views! But what if we have a cobination of both a platform and fighting jets somewhere in pacific?Originally posted by storywolf:The sad fact is that the ocean is just too huge. By the time the planes reach the area, they will be so short on fuel that they do not have time to search around. Also it will be too expensive , burning too much expensive fuels.
It is easier to put a small battle group there, with a frigate to provide a area air defense cover, and they can remain on station for 24hrs which is more effective and they can send back data, which can be co-ordinated with planes patrols and strikes.
Without ships in the area is just like without soldiers on the ground , enemy will disappear when your plane comes , and come back when planes is gone !