Cost of defence crippling: DSTA
-
Getting an NGF is important for us, in order to stay ahead in regional air power, which is catching up at a rapid rate. Hence we need something to leapfrong the competition and put us all the way out infront, for an effective detterence, rather then keep aquiring existing systems in ever increasing numbers.Originally posted by IAF:wonder if anyone can remind me of the rationale, if there's ever one, behind the intention to buy the NGF?
Maybe the DSTA official should look at his own house rather than bitching about it to defense contractors who have to cover their own costs and make a profit to stay in business
Has certain press reports trumpeting rsaf as one of the best air force in the region gone into the heads of our military planners ..making them believe that this is a justification to buy those exotic top-of-the-line fighters?
Wouldn't simply going for more f-16s esp the Blk 60 to replace the skyhawks (until the advent of the JSF) have been a more sound decision financially? Is it really necessary to spend more money on going thru' a whole new learning curve?
The F-16 is still effective, but it's in itself approaching the limit of it's airframe lifecycle. To use it as a replacement for our Skyhawks would be akin to replacing a 60 year old retiree with a 45 year old worker. While it may be cost effective in the short run, it will not add up in the end, when we find ourselves needing to replace our F-16s say, 15 years down the road, with what? NGFs. And of course, we would have missed out on 15 years of getting a headstart in operating ATFs in the region, and along with it, lots of technical expertise that would allow us to fight the air war far better.
Can an F-16 still be on the cutting edge in the skies of the future? No doubt it will still be high up the food chain but certainly no longer the top dog.
In hunting for an NGF, I think the RSAF is pretty justified. -
Cost is indeed a factor that we must consider...let me use an example. Lets say you go Sim Lim...buy a printer...cheap cheap...very nice, high resolution printing etc. But you did not factor in the costly ink catridges. So over time, your cost of running the printer is very high. (It is a known fact printer makers sell it cheap, sometime below cost...and earn on ink catridges sale)Originally posted by IAF:wonder if anyone can remind me of the rationale, if there's ever one, behind the intention to buy the NGF?
Maybe the DSTA official should look at his own house rather than bitching about it to defense contractors who have to cover their own costs and make a profit to stay in business
Has certain press reports trumpeting rsaf as one of the best air force in the region gone into the heads of our military planners ..making them believe that this is a justification to buy those exotic top-of-the-line fighters?
Wouldn't simply going for more f-16s esp the Blk 60 to replace the skyhawks (until the advent of the JSF) have been a more sound decision financially? Is it really necessary to spend more money on going thru' a whole new learning curve?
As to why not another batch of F16, I think is wise not to put too many eggs in one basket. If something happens, like they accident, or discover a fault.....the whole fleet will be grounded. If pure F16, we will be defenceless....unless they come up with a way to arm the E2C hawkeye / KC-135....
-
very soon we will become like malaysia. buying too much sophisticated equipment and being unable to maintain them.
-
I have always suspected this NGF buy has to do with the SU-30s coming online in SEA.........
With USD10 billion a year in military aid, Israel can afford to do alot of things to keep the lead. Eg Lavi fiasco.
Singapore don't have that aid and I hope as an independent country we will never have that aid. We don't have any natural resources to make up for it too.
The F-16 can go a long long way.......you just need to exercise the mind a little harder to 'squeeze every milli-gram of fight in them'.
Just like the TA-4S, SAF can work with Lockheed Martin to find an answer for a Singapore re-worked F16-A.......or some other 'F-16 upgrade designs' in LM's closet that's looking for a partner to get going.
That'll keep our engineers/scientists busy until the JSF comes along.
In Vietnam war, swarms of GCI Mig-15s flying in circles made the F4 pilots pissed in their cockpits.
SAF will have 500 F-16s networked to handle 30 Su 30s. With the right sensors deployed in right platform....we'll see them ( in 3D!!!)before they see us.
Got to move away from this platform centric thinking........
Sometimes Sim Lim Square does offer a steal......one has to work harder to look for it! -
Maybe the DSTA official should look at his own house rather than $&&%&ing about it to defense contractors who have to cover their own costs and make a profit to stay in business
i work with DSTA in projects. there are plenty of pple who are "jiat liao bee" one, no wonder they are crying budget tight - to feed these pple. -
I don't really agree on the 500 F16 scenario. Having 500 F16 instead of 50 NGF would mean 10 times more pilots and more importantly 10 times more ground support personnel. that is crucial in a Singapore context as manpower is scace. Also any potential conflict would likely to be short which is why attrition is not too important, so numbers are not so important. Having a sharp and decisive weapon is more crucial.
Also the "running" cost of running a larger number of less capable a/c could be also high. Again manpower is the issue.
That is why we are getting new frigates and new LSTs instead of some ex-USN hand-me-downs. Although the new ships cost MUCH more, they will need less people to run because of more hi-tech and automation.
I think getting a NGF is a good idea. I am concern about the escalting cost of the defence, but I think that phasing out the A4s would probably save some money and headcouts which can go into operating the NGF.
At the end of the day we would end up spending more on hardware. If we really need to be creative, we should look at cutting down on wastage and maybe also the salary and number of BGs instead of scrapping plans of gettting more hardware. -
Another example of manpower being the issue. I think part of the reason why we are getting the new SPH is because they only need "4" men to run. That is even lesser than a mortar carrying M113 and certainly lesser then the towed 155mm FH2000/88.
And maybe that is why we are taking so long to find a SM1 replacement. I don't think SAF is seriously looking a platform that needs 4 men instead of 3. -
yeap..i agree with u..Originally posted by spencer99:I don't really agree on the 500 F16 scenario. Having 500 F16 instead of 50 NGF would mean 10 times more pilots and more importantly 10 times more ground support personnel. that is crucial in a Singapore context as manpower is scace. Also any potential conflict would likely to be short which is why attrition is not too important, so numbers are not so important. Having a sharp and decisive weapon is more crucial.
Also the "running" cost of running a larger number of less capable a/c could be also high. Again manpower is the issue.
That is why we are getting new frigates and new LSTs instead of some ex-USN hand-me-downs. Although the new ships cost MUCH more, they will need less people to run because of more hi-tech and automation.
I think getting a NGF is a good idea. I am concern about the escalting cost of the defence, but I think that phasing out the A4s would probably save some money and headcouts which can go into operating the NGF.
At the end of the day we would end up spending more on hardware. If we really need to be creative, we should look at cutting down on wastage and maybe also the salary and number of BGs instead of scrapping plans of gettting more hardware.
i believe y we're still waiting so long for the new NGF deal to be announce is because of the cost..most likely we RSAF want a cheap,Fresh n Big breasted deal..hey we're Singaporean rite?
but think it wont be tat cheap..maybe just fresh n big breasted..? -
Yes, manpower(full time pilots) will always be an issue......but you don't need 500 planes flying all the time. You only need to keep them close to flying state.
Planes can be dry-clad for storage.
1st line staffs today are NSFs already. 2nd line and depot level repairs and staffs are already privatise and supposedly very efficient and ' very low cost' to RSAF.
This option would cost lower.
Lesser units of more capable NGFs is going in the wrong direction!!! I pray this is not Mindef's thinking.
Technology cannot replace the man in situation awareness.....not yet. Even JSFs does not aim to reach that level yet.
USAF based on experience in OIF are now talking up the A-10s. Perhaps this is an indication our A-4s have not seen their days yet!
So at least for CAS role, you need more planes in the air, that can loiter longer and carry more munitions.
Deep strike roles should best be left to A310 with Brahmos-S.
CAP/Intercept role - F-16S (I hope a soup up F-16A) with KC-135s
SEAD role - F-16D
CAS role - A-4Super Skyhawk and Hawker Hunters
E-2C should be replaced with LADARs on B747s with space satellites with a prism/mirror. SAR is outdated liao. -
I found an interesting document that compares the operating costs for USAF's fighter squadron.
In one table you can see the numbers for ~6000hrs of flying for squardron of F16Cs and F15Es......30% more!
Please follow this link:
http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1091/MR1091.chap6.pdf -
How to dry-clad them in Singapore? U can do that to tonner but I doubt you could do that to fighters, juz look at the US AMARC , the whole desert turn into an open storage. Mainteneace wise will be a nite mare and what abt the associate system, (spare and missile system...etc. The question will also comes up where to store the 500 fighter (maybe less for thoseon storage condition).Originally posted by Fairyland:Yes, manpower(full time pilots) will always be an issue......but you don't need 500 planes flying all the time. You only need to keep them close to flying state.
Planes can be dry-clad for storage.
1st line staffs today are NSFs already. 2nd line and depot level repairs and staffs are already privatise and supposedly very efficient and ' very low cost' to RSAF.
This option would cost lower.
Lesser units of more capable NGFs is going in the wrong direction!!! I pray this is not Mindef's thinking.
Technology cannot replace the man in situation awareness.....not yet. Even JSFs does not aim to reach that level yet.
USAF based on experience in OIF are now talking up the A-10s. Perhaps this is an indication our A-4s have not seen their days yet!
So at least for CAS role, you need more planes in the air, that can loiter longer and carry more munitions.
Deep strike roles should best be left to A310 with Brahmos-S.
CAP/Intercept role - F-16S (I hope a soup up F-16A) with KC-135s
SEAD role - F-16D
CAS role - A-4Super Skyhawk and Hawker Hunters
E-2C should be replaced with LADARs on B747s with space satellites with a prism/mirror. SAR is outdated liao.
Operation cost will also one thing..Look at the US Nay F14 vs F18 debate..sure the F14 look sleek and nice and have a real punch after they play with it (new cockpit,F404 and Lantrin) and added attack role and hell it can out turn and out perform the F18A/C/D/E/F in all aspect but maintenace wise ia a nitmare for those squadron with the F14. Spare parts are harder to find,
Like one of the member said if they found a fault in the F16 or its Engines( thousand of items to go wrong) the whole fleet will be ground
..can u iimage our A-4 Super SkyHawk/F5 going aginst the Mig29/Su-30.. 100 SKyHawk vs 30 Mig29/SU-30 and we will still get wipe out by their BVR missile and close in dogfight . No doubt the Soviets during the Cold War justify their numbers by the saying " quantity is a quality on its own" but with the advance of technology and missile, we need more bang for our buck. No Point having 400 F-16s with an radar crosssection of an car and the enemy sees you long way beforehand/cross into their airspace when you can have 30 - 40 more stealthy 4th generation fighters creeping up to them and say "Boo!"
A10 are built for CAS just look at the Tatitium bathtub the Pilots are sitting in and all their subsystem are duplicate or triplicate. Its speed are slow so that the pilots can keep the battlefiled within sight when they are do turns (that is also their killing points too slow!) and the A10 converted to OA10 the US are just fitting with the 30mm, flare podsand 70mm rokects only while the A4 they arent clear for much store and their 20mm guns may not be much of an CAS use and with thier high run speeed may not even be efficent
NGF is on the table whether or not cost is there as we need to maintain our technological superiority over our potential enemy.
Cost of "E-2C should be replacing with LADARs on B747s with space satellites with a prism/mirror. SAR is outdated liao." not feasible as the operating an B747 is hugh and not to mentioned that u need at least 2 - 3 B747 to maintain rd the clock vigil and also for maintance period, Space satellite? where are we going to get that? We got at most 1 or 2 mini satellite by NUS/NTU and the best chance we have is the Israel Opef 4 (Opps isnt that a secret projects ) -
OK one more tryOriginally posted by smisig:How to dry-clad them in Singapore? U can do that to tonner but I doubt you could do that to fighters, juz look at the US AMARC , the whole desert turn into an open storage. Mainteneace wise will be a nite mare and what abt the associate system, (spare and missile system...etc. The question will also comes up where to store the 500 fighter (maybe less for thoseon storage condition).
Operation cost will also one thing..Look at the US Nay F14 vs F18 debate..sure the F14 look sleek and nice and have a real punch after they play with it (new cockpit,F404 and Lantrin) and added attack role and hell it can out turn and out perform the F18A/C/D/E/F in all aspect but maintenace wise ia a nitmare for those squadron with the F14. Spare parts are harder to find,
Like one of the member said if they found a fault in the F16 or its Engines( thousand of items to go wrong) the whole fleet will be ground ..can u iimage our A-4 Super SkyHawk/F5 going aginst the Mig29/Su-30.. 100 SKyHawk vs 30 Mig29/SU-30 and we will still get wipe out by their BVR missile and close in dogfight . No doubt the Soviets during the Cold War justify their numbers by the saying " quantity is a quality on its own" but with the advance of technology and missile, we need more bang for our buck. No Point having 400 F-16s with an radar crosssection of an car and the enemy sees you long way beforehand/cross into their airspace when you can have 30 - 40 more stealthy 4th generation fighters creeping up to them and say "Boo!"
A10 are built for CAS just look at the Tatitium bathtub the Pilots are sitting in and all their subsystem are duplicate or triplicate. Its speed are slow so that the pilots can keep the battlefiled within sight when they are do turns (that is also their killing points too slow!) and the A10 converted to OA10 the US are just fitting with the 30mm, flare podsand 70mm rokects only while the A4 they arent clear for much store and their 20mm guns may not be much of an CAS use and with thier high run speeed may not even be efficent
NGF is on the table whether or not cost is there as we need to maintain our technological superiority over our potential enemy.
Cost of "E-2C should be replacing with LADARs on B747s with space satellites with a prism/mirror. SAR is outdated liao." not feasible as the operating an B747 is hugh and not to mentioned that u need at least 2 - 3 B747 to maintain rd the clock vigil and also for maintance period, Space satellite? where are we going to get that? We got at most 1 or 2 mini satellite by NUS/NTU and the best chance we have is the Israel Opef 4 (Opps isnt that a secret projects )
I remember seeing T33s, Strikies (I think maybe Hunters too?) being coated with some paint before they were parked under the hot humid sun at end of runway in Paya Lebar.
With underground caverns and their controlled environment something can be arranged.
You can run one fleet of F16 running two engine types. That will spread the risks alot. BTW the airframe should have proven itself because F16s have clocked a very lot of hours. Albeit mostly in temperate climate........but the 7 xF16s in RSAF should give some clues here.
Of course you don't expect A4SUs to go up against MIG29s/SU30s BUT with networking(which MAY already be in place) you don't need a radar on board to launch AMRAAMs.
Need to qualify AMRAAMs on A4SUs. Probably pylon rewiring to MIL STD 1750? We have the cap for that. On that aspect, I think you need to brush up on what stores the A4 is qualified on. Visit the RSAF open house. Some stores we may not even know about!
The A4's speed/acceleration is a protection against VSHORAD - a common complaint on the A-10 in the CAS role.
I would argue that Brahmos-S together with our own Super Duper networking and additional AEW sensors/platform IS ALREADY A HUMONGOUS (AND ORGASMIC) TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANTAGE OVER POTENTIAL ENEMIES.
Of course if RSAF pilots YEARN DEARLY to talk dirty and expect a HOT reaction from their ride.......
That I agree we don't have now. But I do recall the ACMI pods have a audio advisory feature for several scenario - one of them is anti-mid-air collision ->"Pull hard right", "Pull harder!", "Pull harder!!!", "Argh!!!", "Tissue please"
LADAR is still some long ways away......
Plans for satellites is still ongoing rest assure it's more than one or two but they may not be just remote sensing only. -
hmmm can the F16 engine swap be done? I mean the PW against the GE engine...I alway tot they have diff engine naclle ?
In the end arugment end with where can we get mnore pilots? AlphaS (lost are ex-military anyway)?? lol (need more wages)
Hmm u think the Gaberment/Military wans to puts all its egg in one basket, juz a tot but to depend on the US for all our aircraft isnt that abit foolish? Scully they got one new president that is not asia frendly siao liao,,abit of thing embargo here emargo there.. I personally think deversity is good..
We better open a new thread else pp call out OT OT -
Sorry I missed this point on RCS......fyi there are some paint that DSTA likes to boast about that they applied on the patrol craft that reduces temperature by 10 degrees????Originally posted by smisig:No Point having 400 F-16s with an radar crosssection of an car and the enemy sees you long way beforehand/cross into their airspace when you can have 30 - 40 more stealthy 4th generation fighters creeping up to them and say "Boo!"
That's not all they do you know.......
A little of the same paint applied on the engine intake has the effect of water injection into the engine increasing dry thrust by 50%!!!
I'm kidding. But they do have an answer to the RCS problem......
The engine nacelles are different for the two engine types. I understand that one of the two engines even require a bigger air intake.....so they are not exactly alike but I'm willing to bet that you can still save alot on the commonalities between the two variants of F-16. -
Originally posted by smisig:
i think bush gonna lose the nex elections, and if kerry gets e seat, we can almost certainly say byebye to the US-Singapore FTA...but an embargo is highly unlikely.. mayb strict-er rules on US military exports will be set.. but hey~ there alwaes the french~
hmmm can the F16 engine swap be done? I mean the PW against the GE engine...I alway tot they have diff engine naclle ?
In the end arugment end with where can we get mnore pilots? AlphaS (lost are ex-military anyway)?? lol (need more wages)
Hmm u think the Gaberment/Military wans to puts all its egg in one basket, juz a tot but to depend on the US for all our aircraft isnt that abit foolish? [b]Scully they got one new president that is not asia frendly siao liao,,abit of thing embargo here emargo there.. I personally think deversity is good..
We better open a new thread else pp call out OT OT [/b] -
This hunt is for a replacement for the A4 skyhawk attack plane and not about finding a replacement for the F16 which is used more for the defence of singapore's airspace.anyway the F16 is far from reaching the limit of its airframe lifecycle.we just bought some more from the states a couple of years back,brand new airframes and not u.s surplus stocks.we need an attack aircraft for deep strike interdiction into enemy territory,the A4 cannot do tat with its limited range and payload.the F16 can do this but not as well as the F15 tat we are going to buy.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Getting an NGF is important for us, in order to stay ahead in regional air power, which is catching up at a rapid rate. Hence we need something to leapfrong the competition and put us all the way out infront, for an effective detterence, rather then keep aquiring existing systems in ever increasing numbers.
The F-16 is still effective, but it's in itself approaching the limit of it's airframe lifecycle. To use it as a replacement for our Skyhawks would be akin to replacing a 60 year old retiree with a 45 year old worker. While it may be cost effective in the short run, it will not add up in the end, when we find ourselves needing to replace our F-16s say, 15 years down the road, with what? NGFs. And of course, we would have missed out on 15 years of getting a headstart in operating ATFs in the region, and along with it, lots of technical expertise that would allow us to fight the air war far better.
Can an F-16 still be on the cutting edge in the skies of the future? No doubt it will still be high up the food chain but certainly no longer the top dog.
In hunting for an NGF, I think the RSAF is pretty justified. -
its seem tat ur very confidence tat we're getting F-15...u got some inside news?Originally posted by kingkhong79:This hunt is for a replacement for the A4 skyhawk attack plane and not about finding a replacement for the F16 which is used more for the defence of singapore's airspace.anyway the F16 is far from reaching the limit of its airframe lifecycle.we just bought some more from the states a couple of years back,brand new airframes and not u.s surplus stocks.we need an attack aircraft for deep strike interdiction into enemy territory,the A4 cannot do tat with its limited range and payload.the F16 can do this but not as well as the F15 tat we are going to buy.