'Endurance' Class LST equiped with long range 3D radar ????
-
Target drones have already been fired from the deck of LSTs during exercises.
-
Can a Chinook land on a LST? Is the deck big enough?
Yes. The LST heli-deck can carry:
1 Chinook or
2 - 3 Puma or
4 Huey.Some crazy idea here.... possible to deploy long range SAM missle like our I-Hawk on the LST helo deck?
It is not crazy. Multipurpose cannons and even drones can be fitted or launch from the deck respectively. In my opnion , a I-Hawk can be launch from the LST without much problem.
However , i find that a VLS system or a light SAM such as RAM is most suitable because the I-Hawk cum the radar burn alot of space.
[/quote] -
Fox, need to ask you something, Are we banned from accessing the 54 Asia & Pacific Defence forum, keep on getting this :
Blocked Access.
CHARGE!!!
The owner of this forum has blocked access to your network address.
-
With I Hawk and also drones.......up to sea state 3?!
I think in South China Sea Sea State 5 rare.....curious to know if that's true even in Monsoon season? Anyone can verify that? -
Fox, need to ask you something, Are we banned from accessing the 54 Asia & Pacific Defence forum, keep on getting this :
My access was removed. I realli dunno why , perhaps the Forum is under restructuration. It happened before. -
To Fox,
Thanks for the reply.Sometime need to blast or rather "educate" those "ignorant fools" over there.
-
IMO , the current pool of foreigners ( u know which country lah ) are rather mild and rational except for some. The previous batch with Guro and Operation12 are relatively difficult to cope with.Originally posted by gary1910:To Fox,
Thanks for the reply.Sometime need to blast or rather "educate" those "ignorant fools" over there.
I personnaly respect some of them such as PetronasTowers ( not there anymore ) and M*** ( forgotten his nick ). -
You mean MKIA, the one who claimed that conscript army will not fight!?!, he is rather rational, but at time not objective enough.Originally posted by foxtrout8:IMO , the current pool of foreigners ( u know which country lah ) are rather mild and rational except for some. The previous batch with Guro and Operation12 are relatively difficult to cope with.
I personnaly respect some of them such as PetronasTowers ( not there anymore ) and M*** ( forgotten his nick ).
I think we better stop here b4 we hijack the thread
-
LOLx.Originally posted by gary1910:I think we better stop here b4 we hijack the thread
All right everyone , hands in the air and kick some butts over there. -
No I'm not refering to the LST's own air defence.Originally posted by foxtrout8:It is not crazy. Multipurpose cannons and even drones can be fitted or launch from the deck respectively. In my opnion , a I-Hawk can be launch from the LST without much problem.
However , i find that a VLS system or a light SAM such as RAM is most suitable because the I-Hawk cum the radar burn alot of space.
VLS or light SAM are for those purpose right?
I mean load some I-Hawk on a LST, escort by some missle frigates and move them up north through the straits of Malacca..
Range of I-Hawk is what? 40km? Can it cover up to Kuntan or the eastern coast of malay peninsula? u know what I mean? -
LoL. Take out a map and look carefully before continuing on. Must see how big is Malaysia. 40km is nothing.
-
The ship have to be very close to the shore , so close till our engineers have to build a system to defend the Ship from rounds coming from PT-91Ms.Originally posted by eurofighter:LoL. Take out a map and look carefully before continuing on. Must see how big is Malaysia. 40km is nothing. Jus kidding.
Anyway , the upcoming British T45 Destroyer was designed and intent to be one naval plateform which can provide air defensive cover for friendly troops on coastern vicinity. The system of their choice is the PAAM Aster30.
I will not susgest that the I-Hawk system to be place on the ship to provide air cover for troop on the ground. The 40km range of that system will mean that the ship have to be extremely close to shore inorder for that missile to be at any use. Being close to shore will mean that the ship is extremely vulnerable to attacks from fast boats to artillery fire.
Another negativity of the I-Hawk is that it have a high clearing to missile capacity ratio , thus not advisible to be on the ship. -
I see. So its not feasible..Originally posted by foxtrout8:The ship have to be very close to the shore , so close till our engineers have to build a system to defend the Ship from rounds coming from PT-91Ms. Jus kidding.
Anyway , the upcoming British T45 Destroyer was designed and intent to be one naval plateform which can provide air defensive cover for friendly troops on coastern vicinity. The system of their choice is the PAAM Aster30.
I will not susgest that the I-Hawk system to be place on the ship to provide air cover for troop on the ground. The 40km range of that system will mean that the ship have to be extremely close to shore inorder for that missile to be at any use. Being close to shore will mean that the ship is extremely vulnerable to attacks from fast boats to artillery fire.
Another negativity of the I-Hawk is that it have a high clearing to missile capacity ratio , thus not advisible to be on the ship.
Side track a bit. Is there any long range SAM that goes beyond 40km? -
Well , alot.Originally posted by Paladin:I see. So its not feasible..
Side track a bit. Is there any long range SAM that goes beyond 40km?
Toking abt land based systems we have the Patriot Missile system , S-400 , Arrow missile system yada yada..
On naval based systems , PAAM Aster30 is one example... -
I do not believe one can just take an I-HAWK battery, plop it onto a sea platform and expect it to work as it should while on land. It will not be able, for instance, to coompensate for the movement of the ship due to its rolling and bobbing motion. On top of that, sea conditions are a different environment from that of land : radar propogation is thus affected.
-
it's all a matter of $$$......
the LSTs are very versatile ships, with great capabilities, but they all suffer from a fundamental flaw......they r 5-10m too short.
just based on that, no matter what u arm them wif, personally, i will always consider them to be a flawed design with extremely dodgy reasons for the flaw (or mebbe i simply dun understand....)
anyway, long range anti-air capability isn't that impt, IMHO, NGFS is more impt.....ever seen the Indian LSTs? just see their rockets used for shore bombardment.......while the 76/62 is a great naval gun, something better to soften up beachheads wld be great.....
it's one of those dreams.......let's all pay more taxes (r u crazy???) so that every PV can have a Typhoon and we have more toys to play wif....haha -
wads NGFS?
oh and um can anyone explain to me the difference between LST, LSD and LPD? and are our endurance class ships correctly classified as LSTs? -
NGFS = Naval Gun Fire Support, i.e. supporting ground troops with naval guns, particularly in amphibious assaults. This is mainly a role for battleships with multiple 16" guns. We will never get a good ship for NGFS since you need big, long ranged guns and lots of ammo = giant ship.Originally posted by sgFish:wads NGFS?
LST = Landing Ship Tank = the ship sails into the beach, the front opens up and tanks drive out.Originally posted by sgFish:oh and um can anyone explain to me the difference between LST, LSD and LPD? and are our endurance class ships correctly classified as LSTs?
LSD = Landing Ship Dock = the ship has a dock which can launch smaller boats that carry ground troops to the shore.
LPD = Landing Platform Dock = LSD with a platform for launching amphibious craft.
Endurance = Rejoice 3-in-1 shampoo aka pow-ka-liao = The front is a LST, the back is a LPD, it has a naval gun, anti-air and anti-ship missiles and can launch helicopters. A very small combination of LST, LPD and frigate. Very rare and weird configuration, typical of Singaporean kiasu-ness. -
Softening up the beachhead? You got to be joking. That kind of scenario is long gone.Originally posted by Altrex:anyway, long range anti-air capability isn't that impt, IMHO, NGFS is more impt.....ever seen the Indian LSTs? just see their rockets used for shore bombardment.......while the 76/62 is a great naval gun, something better to soften up beachheads wld be great..... -
Agree. The days of landing in a protected beach are gone. With, dare I say it, new technology (sigh) it's possible to maneuver around 'fortresses'. So no real need to do those WW2 IWO JIMA stuff.Originally posted by touchstone_2000:Softening up the beachhead? You got to be joking. That kind of scenario is long gone.
Helicopter carriers is the way to go! In the form of a pentamaran hull. Ya...... RSN I dare you to try it out. -
Brudder , dun make mi excited for nothing leh. U sure the Endurance got anti-ship missiles?Originally posted by dkhoo:The front is a LST, the back is a LPD, it has a naval gun, anti-air and anti-ship missiles and can launch helicopters. A very small combination of LST, LPD and frigate. Very rare and weird configuration, typical of Singaporean kiasu-ness.