'Endurance' Class LST equiped with long range 3D radar ????
-
According to SIPRI report , its seem that our 'Endurance' Class LST is suppose to be equiped with EL/M-2238 - a 3D long range multi-function radar .
If the report is accruate , then our 'Endurance' should be / can be armed with Barak missles.
Anyway , have anyone seen the radar
-
Following pics taken from the Singapore Navy website, and if you can digitally blow up the pics, you can check what kind of radar is being used.
About the Barak missiles, there seems to be some "blank space" infront of the wheelhouse - (and behind the Otomelara Gun) - and nicely suited for a vertical launch missiles.
Always wondered why the blank space.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
Thanks for highlighting picture, I miss radar
]Following pics taken from the Singapore Navy website, and if you can digitally blow up the pics, you can check what kind of radar is being used.
About the Barak missiles, there seems to be some "blank space" infront of the wheelhouse - (and behind the Otomelara Gun) - and nicely suited for a vertical launch missiles.
Surprising small for 3-D radar with 350 km range .
Just wondering the "blank space" can install how many missiles - 16 or 32 , any guess ??? -
I will like to see the LST with VL-cruisemissiles , the name "landing ship tank'' truely hide the offensive side of that ship . With CMs on board , it certainly will make the ship a truely intergrated strike vessel....
-
The true potential of these new LST has yet to be realised, while it is being projected mainly having a docile peace keeping role of simple transportation of troops and equipment for overseas exercises, and as a platform for rescue work.Originally posted by foxtrout8:I will like to see the LST with VL-cruisemissiles , the name "landing ship tank'' truely hide the offensive side of that ship . With CMs on board , it certainly will make the ship a truely intergrated strike vessel....
With a small squadron of VTOL aircrafts or attack helicopters, this LST can play the role of a mini-aircraft carrier to support any "aggressive" Peace Keeping Roles that the SAF is beginning to take a higher profile in supporting UN sanctioned activities. -
guys, this is a little too far fetched. The LST or correctly the LPD has not been designed with that in mind. It was design to provide greater troop lift with smaller crew as a replacement of the WWII LSTs. The heli pad was always not designed for VTOL like harriers.Originally posted by Atobe:The true potential of these new LST has yet to be realised, while it is being projected mainly having a docile peace keeping role of simple transportation of troops and equipment for overseas exercises, and as a platform for rescue work.
With a small squadron of VTOL aircrafts or attack helicopters, this LST can play the role of a mini-aircraft carrier to support any "aggressive" Peace Keeping Roles that the SAF is beginning to take a higher profile in supporting UN sanctioned activities.
If RSN & RSAF are keen to push Singapore into the "aircraft carrier" club, it would require a new class of ship like the Italian San Gorgio or a very much scaled down LHD like a small version of USS WASP or HMS Ocean, by which case, our neighbours will sure to scream that Singapore is starting an arm race in the region. Besides, having the necessary resource to firstly purchase such a vessel and then operate it, plus the crews and aircrafts are so great. I doubt Mindef can justify such a budget unless they can justify the needs. I think the new subs will probably have a higher priority. -
There are features within the LST built for our RSN that I would not discuss here.
Unless you have seen the ship during construction stage, or visit the vessel with a sharp eye during "Open House", you will not notice some of the equipment that are quite similar to those used on board the LSD owned by the US Navy.
Although our LST are termed as such, it is actually a scaled down LSD (Landing Ship Dock), and unlike a Carrier design (LHD) like the WASP, the features on board the RSN LST allow it to carry quite a "MODEST" airborne wallop.
The official photos of the LST that you see from the web site of ST Marine, will only tell a very small part of the vessel.
Others features remained classified.
http://www.stengg.com/marine/ma_shipbldg_naval_lst.html
http://www.stengg.com/downloads/mari_140LST.pdf
Compare the RSN LST specs to the LSD Harpers Ferry Class of Landing Ship Tank owned by the US Navy, the RSN LST seems to have more features for air traffic control than on the USN LSD.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/lsd-49.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/lsd-49-gallery.htm
Compare the RSN LST to the heavier weight USN San Antonio Class of LPD, there are near similarities of deck features for air traffic control.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/lpd-17.htm
Our RSN LST seems to be comparable to the USN Anchorage Class of LSD when the specs are reviewed, but with some limited features being added for deck air traffic control similar to USN LHD vessels like the Wasp:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/lsd-36-specs.htm -
I'm sure the Endurance class ships have some limited capabilties to support some air ops, but it doesn't seem to be a suitable platform for support a CAS ops like you have suggested. Sure, the ships have a good air traffic control, it must have refuelling capability. Maybe some sort of weapons might be carried onboard, but to use it for marine style CAS air ops is near impractical given such as small landing area.Originally posted by Atobe:There are features within the LST built for our RSN that I would not discuss here.
Unless you have seen the ship during construction stage, or visit the vessel with a sharp eye during "Open House", you will not notice some of the equipment that are quite similar to those used on board the LSD owned by the US Navy.
Although our LST are termed as such, it is actually a scaled down LSD (Landing Ship Dock), and unlike a Carrier design (LHD) like the WASP, the features on board the RSN LST allow it to carry quite a "MODEST" airborne wallop.
The official photos of the LST that you see from the web site of ST Marine, will only tell a very small part of the vessel.
Others features remained classified.
http://www.stengg.com/marine/ma_shipbldg_naval_lst.html
http://www.stengg.com/downloads/mari_140LST.pdf
Compare the RSN LST specs to the LSD Harpers Ferry Class of Landing Ship Tank owned by the US Navy, the RSN LST seems to have more features for air traffic control than on the USN LSD.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/lsd-49.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/lsd-49-gallery.htm
Compare the RSN LST to the heavier weight USN San Antonio Class of LPD, there are near similarities of deck features for air traffic control.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/lpd-17.htm
Our RSN LST seems to be comparable to the USN Anchorage Class of LSD when the specs are reviewed, but with some limited features being added for deck air traffic control similar to USN LHD vessels like the Wasp:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/lsd-36-specs.htm
San Giorgio is much better for the role you have mentioned, and the Endurance could be used in conjunction with a "RSN San Giorgio type" vessel to conduct a limited CAS ops while doing some beach assault if that is why you mean.
I am amazed at how good the LPDs are especially built locally by ST Marine albeit based on a scaled down US design. Their usefulness is unquestionable, their capabilities proven. But to use it as mini LHD is almost insane. If the flight deck is twice as long and 50% widder, perhaps, so.
What I would like to see (in my dreams though), is ST Marine's hovercraft being used in conjunction with the landing crafts. That would really be cool. -
I read from somewhere from the web that it could carry two Puma size helos on the decks and three similar size in the hanger.
-
Werent the LST's purchased to provide better logistics and sealift capability to depoly else where and also to improve the range of our smaller ships should they be required to train else where(namely in the Indian Ocean)??
I doubt the RSN has using it as a carrier platform in mind.Maybe limited use to support an ampihbous attack. -
erm...what is LPD?
-
For the old LST are mainly use for transport & logistics, but not these Endurance class LST , they are designed from the start to support the 21 Div , Amp Bde. The helos deck are for transport troops, LSV & 105mm light gun etc They also could be for armed Helos like the Fennecs & the Apaches for air support for these troops.Whether they could support VTOL a/c , I dunno.Originally posted by |-|05|:Werent the LST's purchased to provide better logistics and sealift capability to depoly else where and also to improve the range of our smaller ships should they be required to train else where(namely in the Indian Ocean)??
I doubt the RSN has using it as a carrier platform in mind.Maybe limited use to support an ampihbous attack.
Edit for mistakes -
Originally posted by Joe Black:I am amazed at how good the LPDs are especially built locally by ST Marine albeit based on a scaled down US design
RSN Endurance class is based on US designs -
Details ???? -
Originally posted by thomasct:
My apologies for a misquote, I should say ST Marine engaged the US Litton Ingalls shipbuilding company for design consultation on the Endurance project. I don't recall where I saw this material from, I will post this when I can find it again.....
[b]
RSN Endurance class is based on US designs -
Details ???? [/b]
Anyway, ST Marine never have any experience in building LPDs or scaled down version, so it is not inconceivable to have a design to work with and scale it down to the version RSN wants, just like the Delta frigate. -
LPDLanding Platform DockOriginally posted by SingaporeMacross:erm...what is LPD?
LST -
If your comments are correct , then ST is B-ShitingOriginally posted by Joe Black:Anyway, ST Marine never have any experience in building LPDs or scaled down version, so it is not inconceivable to have a design to work with and scale it down to the version RSN wants, just like the Delta frigate.
From ST site -
Hailed as the most versatile support vessel of her size, the Republic of Singapore Navy's (RSN) Endurance Class of Landing Ship Tank (LST), does more with less. The LSTs were ingeniously designed and constructed to meet the RSN's demanding operational requirements. -
No, it is not bullshitting at all. Look at Taiwan's IDF. They call it indigenous design, but hey, they will have no plane if not for Lockheed Martin design assistance. In many sense, the IDF looks like and feel like a scaled down F-16. Look at Japanese F2 as another example. You can further refer to Indian LCA with lots of help from other foreign countries, Chinese J-10 in fact is a copy of Lavi, not to mention Lavi itself is based on the Viper's design. There you go, as long as high percentage of the design, including the interior fit out, structural layout, and majoring of the ship is designed locally by ST Marine, then intial design based on some existing design and modifying it is NOT consider a copy or non-indigenious. I think ST Marine has done well and should be proud to call it indigenous design. Period.
-
LHA - Landing Helicopter Assualt
LST - Lau Sai Tang -
And blow up the wheelhouse, when there is a crack in the missile booster lining?Originally posted by Atobe:Following pics taken from the Singapore Navy website, and if you can digitally blow up the pics, you can check what kind of radar is being used.
About the Barak missiles, there seems to be some "blank space" infront of the wheelhouse - (and behind the Otomelara Gun) - and nicely suited for a vertical launch missiles.
Always wondered why the blank space. -
Heres a couple of detail pics of the RSS Endeavour (210) I took at IMDEX. Notice the SINBAD launcher for the 2 Mistral SAMs one deck below, and slightly in front of the Elta 3-D radar. Not too sure if the port side has the SINBAD, but I'm willing to bet that it does.
-
there's one more on the other side
-
Well, Thailand didn't seem to get much flak when they got their carrier, altho it hasn't been doing much the past few years. I would say the political implications if singapore was to get a small carrier would be manageable, especially if there is a second-hand one available. One can always argue that we can use it for humanitarian missions as such since carriers are essentially multi-mission capable. Some carriers, such as the Invincible class, can even act as floating hospitals.Originally posted by Joe Black:If RSN & RSAF are keen to push Singapore into the "aircraft carrier" club, it would require a new class of ship like the Italian San Gorgio or a very much scaled down LHD like a small version of USS WASP or HMS Ocean, by which case, our neighbours will sure to scream that Singapore is starting an arm race in the region. Besides, having the necessary resource to firstly purchase such a vessel and then operate it, plus the crews and aircrafts are so great. I doubt Mindef can justify such a budget unless they can justify the needs. I think the new subs will probably have a higher priority.
However, i do agree with u, Joeblack, in that the biggest obstacle is manpower and cost. I also agree with the fact that we have no need for such a ship as yet. Besides, the creation of a carrier task group is a huge undertaking requiring new doctrines, procedures and equipment. In other words, it would be overkill. The money can be better spent elsewhere.
My 0.5 cent worth. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
Don't think the area is reserved for Barak VLS - there are port holes on either side of that area. Also there are two doors leading to the 76mm gun.
About the Barak missiles, there seems to be some "blank space" infront of the wheelhouse - (and behind the Otomelara Gun) - and nicely suited for a vertical launch missiles.
Always wondered why the blank space.
So that area is not 'stressed' to take the VLS.
But it could be fitted with the same 'CIWS/or ASW rocket lauchers' as on the Deltas though.
I would hazard a guess to the forecastle and the last time I look the area underneath is not utilized at all.
The Endurance class is designed to be the Italian Vittorio Venetto or Russian Moskva. So station it in South China Sea it can clear the area of submarines and maintain control over it.
Also my bet is it is also a re-supply ship with the right plumbing installed. Those cranes by the side of the hangers can be gyro stabilised for at sea re-supply. -
I beg to differ. If you look at the MCVs, it has pretty much the same issue as you have just said, but the Baraks are still mounted on the deck. When and if RSN wants Barak, I am sure that necessary reinforcement beams will be added inside the area to support the weight of the VLS. Furthermore, the two front doors just provide access to maintain the VLS systems even better.Originally posted by Fairyland:Don't think the area is reserved for Barak VLS - there are port holes on either side of that area. Also there are two doors leading to the 76mm gun.
So that area is not 'stressed' to take the VLS.
But it could be fitted with the same 'CIWS/or ASW rocket lauchers' as on the Deltas though.
Having said all these, I still reckon the LST needs not just the Baraks, but also a CIWS. Love to see a couple of 20mm or 0.5s pint mounted to hit anything that speeds towards the LST in an unfriendly way, or floating sea mines, not to mentioned as AA guns as well. -
Can a Chinook land on a LST? Is the deck big enough?
Some crazy idea here.... possible to deploy long range SAM missle like our I-Hawk on the LST helo deck?