A Singapore aircraft-carrier?
-
Originally posted by sgdiehard:
hahahaha.....you got to be kidding!! what does Singapore have that China wants to go to war for ??
no 1 airport. no 1 sea port lol.
-
Originally posted by Rooney9:
no 1 airport. no 1 sea port lol.
air port and sea port are part of the infra structure built by Singapore with far sighted planning and commitment from the government. a war torn Singapore will not have a no 1 airport and no 1 seaport.
Regional rivals to singapore airport include sinai airport, Bangkok and Hong Kong. The sound of war will divert all eruopean flights bound for Australia to Bangkok and Hong Kong. When war limits the supplies of the refineries here, no commerical vessels will stop over for bunkering, that alone will reduce traffic to PSA.
Our no 1 airport and no 1 seaport dont come easy, but it is not something anybody can take away by force.
-
Originally posted by weasel1962:
SG faces more threats than China. The bigger threat is from the Chinese sub fleet. What did SG have that Japan needed to travel thousands of km just to capture SG? Same rationale.
The PLAN does not threaten SG sovereignty. However it can threaten regional economic stability which is the lifeblood of Singapore thru actions in the Taiwan strait or South China sea. Hence China is still a threat, just not a direct one. Singapore has the ability to blockade China. This makes SG a threat to China but that does not mean China and Singapore aren’t friends. A strong naval presence/capability reduces conflict risk & gunboat diplomacy. Indeed, regional naval strength has reduced the risk of piracy = lower freight rates for China.
If the RSN were to put aircraft on its ships, its more to protect SLOCs ie sea escort. Without a diversification of energy, SG will increasingly rely on shipping to deliver LNG for the next few decades.
Reality is that Indonesia has a habit of threatening gas cuts to SG. Last it happened was a couple of weeks back. This won’t change even when SG diversifies to AU gas.
The first sentence says it all. So do we build an aircraft carrier to tackle all the different threat? or we build aircraft carrier to blockade china, build gunboat to handle pirates, build submarines to counter threat of an invasion from indonesian, build landing crafts in case of war with malaysia?
Aircraft carrier is for projection of force and RSN knows how far it needs and it can effectively project its forces.
Singapore does not have the capability to blockade anyone, everybody else has the capability to blockade Singapore.
Japan didn't travel thousands of KM to take singapore, Singapore was on its way to the conquest of Indonesia and Australia.
A war between the two china can affect regional economy, but how far it will affect Singapore depends on how it presents itself. During vietnam war, Singapore actually made a great deal of money out of it.
It would be stupid for Singapore to link our military procurement with identification of potential enemy, and believe that we are friends. LHL onces said " we don't identify our enemy (direct or indirect), our enemy identify themselves".
-
@sgdiehard, great quote in the final sentence. Remarkably apt.
-
Posted in the milnuts forum. The F-35B would be a pre-requisite to a STOVL CV. "Interesting news. Whatever choice is made, clearly no one can say the alternatives weren't considered. Credit first to mike for posting this on his blog (thebaseleg.com). http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/...attempt-362941/ "Meanwhile, Singapore - a security co-operation participant in the F-35 joint programme office - has launched studies aimed at considering the STOVL variant, said Gregg Pyers, lift fan programme director for UK-based Rolls-Royce." "
-
Originally posted by weasel1962:
Posted in the milnuts forum. The F-35B would be a pre-requisite to a STOVL CV.
“Interesting news. Whatever choice is made, clearly no one can say the alternatives weren’t considered. Credit first to mike for posting this on his blog (thebaseleg.com).
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/...at…
“Meanwhile, Singapore – a security co-operation participant in the F-35 joint programme office – has launched studies aimed at considering the STOVL variant, said Gregg Pyers, lift fan programme director for UK-based Rolls-Royce.” “
Error 404 on the link.
-
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pictures--video-f-35b-starts-critical-tests-in-comeback-attempt-362941/ If still can't access, try the main page at www.flightglobal.com, and look for article "trying times for F-35B".
-
I dun see the issue here, except that the moment Singapore acquires an aircraft carrier fleet, she essentially has the strongest navy in the whole of SE asia.
-
I propose to name the flat-top RSS Tin Pei Ling.
-
I am still puzzled and perplexed how on earth can people like TPL, get thru the elite PAP so called selection committee? there are so many better candidates than her out there.
-
Originally posted by Rooney9:
I am still puzzled and perplexed how on earth can people like TPL, get thru the elite PAP so called selection committee? there are so many better candidates than her out there.
Yes but none of them want to join this party. Anyway, going off topic. Back to the other flat top.
-
Originally posted by alize:
I propose to name the flat-top RSS Tin Pei Ling.
wha??where n what happened to her breasts??photo shopped?? -
A flat top is a flat top. Don't be so *cough* obvious lah. Impolite *ahem* to point out.
-
May we name a submarine for KY.
A shrewd old man who surfaces to make noise once in a while.
-
F-35Bs takeoff and land from USS WASP http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVj4vC81Ea4h
The nozzle swivels during rolling takeoff http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6r_4UM6Eso
"Noticeably, the F-35B needs only about 50% of the WASP deck to take-off, which is a clear indication that there are many ships on which this bird can land and take-off." (Wasp is 251m long)
-
Only the british can torture themselves so...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15928953
a) 2010, decided to change from F-35B to F-35C
b) No carrier capability from 2011 to 2020.
c) After 2020, only 1 CV will be operational (with an extra US$200m spent on the EMAL)
So instead of having 2 CVs capable of F-35B operations, the Royal Navy now thinks that 1 CV with F-35Cs will be more capable (after spending £6+bn).
The UK also intends to cut the order of F-35s from 138 to 50 or less. With each F-35C costing ~US$10m less than an F-35B, the aircraft savings will come to ~US$500m or less. After deducting the EMALs cost, the cost of buddy refuel tech improvements, the loss of UK production (Rolls Royce UK produces the F-35B swivel engine), other design changes to CV QE etc, would the total savings, if any, be zero or negative?
Despite having the 3rd largest defence budget in the world, the UK will likely have an air force smaller than Turkey (15th largest defence budget) for the next 2 decades.
-
The pen is mightier than the sword, but pales in comparison to economic recession. :P You want to kill an army/navy? Just tell a politician "Wow, that's expensive!" and wait one year. lol BTW, regarding this thread? "It's alive!! It's alive!!! Bwahahaha!!!...." Dr Frankenstein's sucessor you are. Yoda impressed is.
-
Oh yeah, on a slightly related topic to the complaining on British CVs, they are joining up with the French to co-share their ships, so both of them will be cutting down their carrier fleets and combining their forces. British and French forces co-sharing. It's a miracle... Another miracle would be the F-35 coming into production. I'm really starting to have severe doubts about the program. Lots of cost over runs and delays, not good. Maybe we can get Australia and India interested in designing a plane from scratch? Or even China (gag..gag..) China is currently dependent on engine imports from Russia for planes, they might be desperate enough to co-operate with us to develop some local air engine production -> aircraft production, though I suspect Taiwan and the US will pitch a fit. Side benefit is that China has stealth tech, maybe we can "steal" it from them if we have a co-op project. Australia still needs a new strategic bomber after it retired the -111s, so they might be interested too. But as I said, it'll depend on politics.
-
NATO. No action talk only.
-
News from India. Locally built CV to be delayed.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2681534.ece
India will be inducting a CV bought from Russia (Admiral Gorshkov to be renamed as INS Vikramaditya. Expected date of induction 2012) and is building 2 carriers (likely induction year 2014 and 2017).
The first 2 carriers (Vikramaditya + IAC) will be equipped with Mig-29Ks. 41 Mig-29Ks and 4 Mig-29KUBs have been ordered. 1 Mig-29KUB crashed in Russia during testing. The first order for 12 Mig-29Ks and 4 KUBs are expected to be completed in 2011. The US$2.3b Vikramaditya is expected to be able to carry 24 Mig-29K/KUBs. Its induction was marred by contractual disputes regarding cost since contract in 2004. The sister ships, Admiral Kuznetzov is operated by the Russian navy (and may also operate Mig-29Ks) whilst the Varyyag started sea trials and may operate the J-15 china produced sukhoi variant.
The India air force also uses the Mig-29 (with 63 undergoing upgrading) though several have consistently crashed. Other operators of the Mig-29 such as Malaysia are disposing of theirs.
The carriers will replace the Harrier-equipped INS Viraat (one of 2 ex-British carriers) which is due to be decommissioned in 2012. The harrier fleet is also facing serviceability issues. The US has pitched the F-35B and F-35C as possible candidates for the 3rd carrier.
-
Originally posted by weasel1962:
News from India. Locally built CV to be delayed.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2681534.ece
India will be inducting a CV bought from Russia (Admiral Gorshkov to be renamed as INS Vikramaditya. Expected date of induction 2012) and is building 2 carriers (likely induction year 2014 and 2017).
The first 2 carriers (Vikramaditya + IAC) will be equipped with Mig-29Ks. 41 Mig-29Ks and 4 Mig-29KUBs have been ordered. 1 Mig-29KUB crashed in Russia during testing. The first order for 12 Mig-29Ks and 4 KUBs are expected to be completed in 2011. The US$2.3b Vikramaditya is expected to be able to carry 24 Mig-29K/KUBs. Its induction was marred by contractual disputes regarding cost since contract in 2004. The sister ships, Admiral Kuznetzov is operated by the Russian navy (and may also operate Mig-29Ks) whilst the Varyyag started sea trials and may operate the J-15 china produced sukhoi variant.
The India air force also uses the Mig-29 (with 63 undergoing upgrading) though several have consistently crashed. Other operators of the Mig-29 such as Malaysia are disposing of theirs.
The carriers will replace the Harrier-equipped INS Viraat (one of 2 ex-British carriers) which is due to be decommissioned in 2012. The harrier fleet is also facing serviceability issues. The US has pitched the F-35B and F-35C as possible candidates for the 3rd carrier.
Very strange report.
1. The Kiev class and Kuznetsov class are not sister ships.
2. Most reports say the carrier will take 12 MiG-29K, it originally took 12 Yak 38s. I doubt 24 can be carried even after clearing the foredeck and installing a ramp there.
I don't have figures but it appears the MiG-29K even with wings folded has more wingspan than the Yak-38 with wings unfolded. For one thing they will need a bigger elevator than the original one in the middle of the deck
-
The report didn't say the Kiev and Kuznetsov were sister ships, weasel added that. And I think he meant comparable ship classes, not sister ships. Sister ships are supposed to be of the same class. As for the flight compliment, I guess they MIGHT be able to squeeze in all the planes if they totally filled it up, top deck and lower and ripped out the helo component.
-
I was referring to Adm Kuznetzov and Varyyag as sister ships. Now realised it could be mis-read.
On the number of Mig-29Ks, I should have stated up to 24. The Kievs used to carry tons of helos. Just merely citing 24 based on some reports but I think the actual complement would likely include some helos.
-
India PM raises issue of Gorshkov delay with the Russkis http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2723202.ece That's as the Adm Kutznetsov camps in UK waters. That's when, as the daily mail points out, the UK having scrapped all its maritime patrol aircraft, had to send a ship instead. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2073901/HMS-York-scrambled-Scotland-Russian-fleet-security-scare.html
-
I guess with or without MPAs all of NATO knows where the ship is. A shadowing frigate is more visible than an MPA, that's what's important for appearances sake.
The carrier is probably trailed by an unseen attack submarine which will also keep a watch on the escorting Russian submarine.