RSAF.....
-
.....should purchase VSTOL air crafts
tat wud solve our problem of not havin runways/emergency runways
in da event of war
-
saying is easy....but maintainence wise is much more heavier than ctol ver of a/c...esp the engines......Originally posted by 35MM Gunner:.....should purchase VSTOL air crafts
tat wud solve our problem of not havin runways/emergency runways
in da event of war -
wah liew... why everyone say macam like a/c can go 7-11 buy and then throw away after a few years?
-
Actually, thats a better idea than what a lot of people think. The F-35 presents excellent opportunity to do that route and reduces the RSAFs (IMO unhealthy) reliance on hard fixed runways. Reason being the CTOL and VTOL versions of the F-35 shares a significant amount of parts commonality and would make it easier to integrate VTOL F-35s into the RSAF.
For a start, when purchasing the F-35, we'll do well to get a squadron of each (CTOL and VTOL) to replace 2 F-5 units and then follow up with another sqn (either CTOL or VTOL, decided by doctrine/costs). Having a mix will lower purchase costs (rather than a all-VTOL purchase), although it might bring up maintenance costs (I haven't done the math of that)
The one VTOL sqn will ensure that, in the event of the runways being put out of action temporarily in a war, there will be still some offensive and defensive air capabilities available.
-
Originally posted by Viper52:
Speaking of this, even Taiwan also considering F-35B in the future.
Actually, thats a better idea than what a lot of people think. The F-35 presents excellent opportunity to do that route and reduces the RSAFs (IMO unhealthy) reliance on hard fixed runways. Reason being the CTOL and VTOL versions of the F-35 shares a significant amount of parts commonality and would make it easier to integrate VTOL F-35s into the RSAF.
For a start, when purchasing the F-35, we'll do well to get a squadron of each (CTOL and VTOL) to replace 2 F-5 units and then follow up with another sqn (either CTOL or VTOL, decided by doctrine/costs). Having a mix will lower purchase costs (rather than a all-VTOL purchase), although it [b]might bring up maintenance costs (I haven't done the math of that)
The one VTOL sqn will ensure that, in the event of the runways being put out of action temporarily in a war, there will be still some offensive and defensive air capabilities available.
[/b] -
I opt to disagree...
av-8B has the lowest serviceability during th GWII among all USAF aircraft type. VTOL although appealing, but it has its own shortfall. by looking at the pros and not the cons is not a good idea. -
Might as well compare apples with oranges...Originally posted by kanzer:I opt to disagree...
av-8B has the lowest serviceability during th GWII among all USAF aircraft type. VTOL although appealing, but it has its own shortfall. by looking at the pros and not the cons is not a good idea.
Taking the statistics of a 25 year old design that pioneered jet VTOL flight and using it to trash all VTOL designs and an aircraft that is literally at the cutting edge of aerospace design today hardly seems fitting. I'm prepared to give the F-35 a chance before dismissing it as rubbish based on the record of a design that has almost nothing in common with it other than by taking off and landing in a similar fashion.
Besides, what has the servicability record of the Harrier have to do with how good/bad the F-35, or even VTOL is?
And BTW, the AV-8B is used by the US Marine Corps. -
F-35 got the adv of being commonality with the CV and CTOL ver....that's the difference between AV-8 series.
-
Not the mention the advantage of 25+ years worth of technology improvements and experience of VTOL operationsOriginally posted by duotiga83:F-35 got the adv of being commonality with the CV and CTOL ver....that's the difference between AV-8 series. -
to have a VTOL version of F35 is a plus to the SAF..especially gaining lotsa pros in the forward defence doctrine...i think the main problem is money...but still i bet its alot cheaper den the present generation fighter plane off the shelf...n F-35 is has all the pros a Singaporean want..becos it is "you pi you chi you dua liap ni"(its cheap its fresh n have big boobs)
-
in wartime we can base each plane on top of a hdb multistory carpark...
-
Alrighty then...so we're talking abt VSTOL aircraft.... in that case, we might as well go the whole hog and get one of these..... of course, it will mean we will have effectively the whole navy tied up in one group, and nobody left to do anything else!
-
by the way, when i said "group", i meant something like an amphibious warefare group which is a large group of ships.... a chopper carrier like this cannot survive by itself, u see... In any case, i was just joking.... dun take too seriously, yah?
-
anyone ever thought of the carrier based version? it won't be as expensive as the vtol one...but if short roads can be made to house catapaults or arrester gear....can be quite good as well.
-
It is still expensive...even for RN version of carrier......Originally posted by branzzz:anyone ever thought of the carrier based version? it won't be as expensive as the vtol one...but if short roads can be made to house catapaults or arrester gear....can be quite good as well. -
Aint this 1 of the versions??the STOL version which is a bigger version of the VTOL?I remember they wanted to come out with 3 different versions of the F-35 right??Originally posted by branzzz:anyone ever thought of the carrier based version? it won't be as expensive as the vtol one...but if short roads can be made to house catapaults or arrester gear....can be quite good as well. -
F-35A (CTOL) for USAF
F-35B (STOVL) for USMC/RN/RAF
F-35C (CV) for USN
-
The F-35 has a LOT more capabilities than stated. Its not a "state of the art" fighter for nothing.
Its a definite must buy in terms of cost/capabilities. -
Aiyah...just build some transformable aeroplanes...just like Macross!
-
yes and watch our fuel reserves go bye byeOriginally posted by SingaporeMacross:Aiyah...just build some transformable aeroplanes...just like Macross! 
-
runs on newaterOriginally posted by |-|05|:yes and watch our fuel reserves go bye bye -
In fact, I read reports that the avionics of the F-35 will be more advanced than F-22 (in terms of its corperative engagement and data link). F-35 will not carry a full blown AESA radar like the F22, but its "half-bake" AESA will be used in conjunction with other F-35 in a coperative engagement mode to form "1 giant radar".Originally posted by Shotgun:The F-35 has a LOT more capabilities than stated. Its not a "state of the art" fighter for nothing.
Its a definite must buy in terms of cost/capabilities. -
No. Runs on nuclear energy.Originally posted by kopiosatu:runs on newater -
then later got Nuclear jammer.....then nuclear jammer cancellor.....Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:No. Runs on nuclear energy. -
Like I have always said... keep our GUNDAMS a secret.