Singapore's Next Generation Fighter
-
The limiting factor is the human pilots,not the planes.A pilot can max out at only abt 10Gs whereas planes can do much more without breaking in half.Originally posted by Fairyland:How relevant is pulling Gs in modern air combat?
F-15 being bigger, I guess the forces acting on the structure at the ends, would be alot more than smaller size fighters?
Looks like it's going to be F-15 or Rafale or more F-16s.
Confirm the RSAF will choose the F15. -
Pulling Gs is still very relevant, while the BVR arena has gotten a lot more important as missiles become more reliable and longer range, assuming that WVR "knife-fights" are passe and irrelevant is a big mistake. That is why even with advances in BVR technology, airforces are still putting in a lot of effort in advanced agile IR dogfight missiles and ACM practice.Originally posted by Fairyland:How relevant is pulling Gs in modern air combat?
F-15 being bigger, I guess the forces acting on the structure at the ends, would be alot more than smaller size fighters?
Looks like it's going to be F-15 or Rafale or more F-16s.
If the rumour posted about the F-15 being damaged during the evaluation is correct, size would have nothing to do with it. The F-15 is designed to take the stresses of being "wrung out" in tough maneuvers.
There is no chance for the F-16 in the NGF. Its already out of the running. I doubt there would be no more purchases of more F-16s, since we've already have/ordered 62 C/Ds (less 2 written off) and its enough to fit out 5 sqns (140, 143, 145 and the 2 US-based sqns) -
Sigh...Pulling more assumptions out of your hat with nothing to back them up, just because its your personal favourite.Originally posted by kingkhong79:Confirm the RSAF will choose the F15.
As I've said, keep an open mind till the results are announced, and don't jump the gun. It was the same back when the list of contenders was 6 strong and lots of rumours and talk were flying about on which was the final 3. -
wah!!! so lousy, are u sure??? we are singapore lay. n i dont need google to swim ,i just need a good specs to see jah bo ok liaw.Originally posted by Viper52:Sidewinders and Sparrows....use Google for goodness sake... -
may i know what type the france is offering us ,is it the f-3 type with the m-883 plus trust vector featuresOriginally posted by Viper52:Sigh...Pulling more assumptions out of your hat with nothing to back them up, just because its your personal favourite.
As I've said, keep an open mind till the results are announced, and don't jump the gun. It was the same back when the list of contenders was 6 strong and lots of rumours and talk were flying about on which was the final 3. -
it's google not goggle......Originally posted by leong262000:wah!!! so lousy, are u sure??? we are singapore lay. n i dont need google to swim ,i just need a good specs to see jah bo ok liaw.
anyway we were using sidewinders and Sparrows.....but this yr we got our Aim-120's released to us so we have that too -
Not to forget. Rumours about derbies too...
-
No more F-16s?.....hard to accept for me. Seems to me some are all too eager to write off this platform as a fallback to NGF. A little voice tells me RSAF's NGF is something else ALOT more something else.......twin engine and all that.Originally posted by Viper52:Pulling Gs is still very relevant, while the BVR arena has gotten a lot more important as missiles become more reliable and longer range, assuming that WVR "knife-fights" are passe and irrelevant is a big mistake. That is why even with advances in BVR technology, airforces are still putting in a lot of effort in advanced agile IR dogfight missiles and ACM practice.
If the rumour posted about the F-15 being damaged during the evaluation is correct, size would have nothing to do with it. The F-15 is designed to take the stresses of being "wrung out" in tough maneuvers.
There is no chance for the F-16 in the NGF. Its already out of the running. I doubt there would be no more purchases of more F-16s, since we've already have/ordered 62 C/Ds (less 2 written off) and its enough to fit out 5 sqns (140, 143, 145 and the 2 US-based sqns)
So RAFALE is the ONE! Bye bye F-15!
What about the likes of Python 4s and 5s? I believe they take out alot of Gs in the maneuvers with their off boresight acquisition capabilities. -
I was under the impression (Read it in another forum - can't recall where though) that we also purchased some Block 60s; its outfit is similar to Israel's F-16 Block 60......Originally posted by Viper52:There is no chance for the F-16 in the NGF. Its already out of the running. I doubt there would be no more purchases of more F-16s, since we've already have/ordered 62 C/Ds (less 2 written off) and its enough to fit out 5 sqns (140, 143, 145 and the 2 US-based sqns)
Southpark
The Dude -
You meant Block 52+ right? IAF does not have Block 60. Only UAE has Block60s.Originally posted by southpark2000:I was under the impression (Read it in another forum - can't recall where though) that we also purchased some Block 60s; its outfit is similar to Israel's F-16 Block 60......
Southpark
The Dude
The last batch of Vipers RSAF purchased was rumoured to be the Block 52+. However, all the block 50+ seem to have different avionics outfitted. Thus, the ones in HAF, IAF and RSAF will all be different somewhat. -
For newbies/those with short memories
, heres a pic I've posted earlier on the RSAF's first Block 52+/Advanced Block 52, along with the discussion thread
Thread
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=73133
Photo
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_photos_album33-photoabm.html -
Looking at the RSAF's force structure, I would find it hard to see where we will fit in more F-16s without forming new squadrons, unless we plan for attrition replacements/strengthening each squadron. 145 Sqn will convert to the new Block 52+, 142 Sqn will fly the NGF, 150 Sqn will use the new AJTs, I expect the F-5s to soldier on till 2015 at least (maybe a reduced number since our oldest F-5s will be almost 40 years old then), where they will be replaced by the JSF.Originally posted by Fairyland:No more F-16s?.....hard to accept for me. Seems to me some are all too eager to write off this platform as a fallback to NGF. A little voice tells me RSAF's NGF is something else ALOT more something else.......twin engine and all that.
Yes, there would be high G-forces involved, but the Israelis are tight-lipped about exact figures. Anyway missiles traditionally can take higher G forces because they are not restricted by a man inside.
What about the likes of Python 4s and 5s? I believe they take out alot of Gs in the maneuvers with their off boresight acquisition capabilities. -
Nos. of aircrafts to form up a squadron varies, T-33 and S211 squadrons are examples. I remember there were about 30odd kites in those squadrons.
Looking at the RSAF's force structure, I would find it hard to see where we will fit in more F-16s without forming new squadrons, unless we plan for attrition replacements/strengthening each squadron.
145 Sqn will convert to the new Block 52+, 142 Sqn will fly the NGF, 150 Sqn will use the new AJTs, I expect the F-5s to soldier on till 2015 at least (maybe a reduced number since our oldest F-5s will be almost 40 years old then), where they will be replaced by the JSF.
Maybe no need to increase squadron numbers.
AJTs for trainee fighter pilots or WSOs(use F16D?).......another
type?!!!
I wonder if the F15 was flying clean when it's wing spar cracked....if it happen?
Looks like F-15 is loosing ground fast. Rafale is supreme! -
The difference is that those were basic jet training units. As the main crew complement (students) was short term, it made more sense to keep aircraft/perm staff in 1 unit. For a fighter squadron, the admin work required to support more aircraft would be complex. An optimum fighter squadron size is between 12-16 aircraft.Originally posted by Fairyland:Nos. of aircrafts to form up a squadron varies, T-33 and S211 squadrons are examples. I remember there were about 30odd kites in those squadrons.
Maybe no need to increase squadron numbers.
AJTs for trainee fighter pilots or WSOs(use F16D?).......another
type?!!!
AJT is for training fighter pilots. Yes another type. -
G Loading 101
Actually, pilots can sustain more Gs than airframe depending on aircraft IF we're talking about INSTANTANEOUS G and not SUSTAINED G loading. Formula 1 racers who crashed have survived in crashes in excess of 49 Gs, of course in a measured instant (several milliseconds or sumthing, I dont have the statistics with me).
Many airframes don't have such tolerances to such instantaneous G loads so if you're in a non-FBW aircraft, it's easy to stress or even destroy the airframe without having you killed by pure G (just pull on that stick really hard, very fast). FBW aircraft usually try to prevent these instantaneous G loads.
As for missiles, what's most important from my readings is turn radius which is a function of G + speed. Even with a high G (let's say 30G+) missile, due to it's high speed and hence high turn radius, a low G aircraft at a lower airspeed can still outturn a missile (u just have to have the Force with you to turn into a missile if the countermeasures fail). Air to Air missiles are also limited by rocket burn time (again I don't have figures), but i reckon by the time it reaches an aircraft (if fired at the limit of the missile range with good PK), the rockets would have been expended and it's coasting on pure kinetic energy which can easily bleed off when turning for final engagement.
As a final note, me being the unhealthy smoker type who hasnt exercised in 5 years I reckon I won't last long at 4Gs sustained.
(all my info is at least a decade old, so I may be wrong with the latest, greatest AAMs)Originally posted by Viper52:Yes, there would be high G-forces involved, but the Israelis are tight-lipped about exact figures. Anyway missiles traditionally can take higher G forces because they are not restricted by a man inside. -
UK and Australia could get early deliveries of Block 2 configuration with upgrade a year later
Lockheed Martin F-35s could be delivered to the first international customers in 2012 despite a projected one-year extension of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) programme's development phase.
One option would allow the programme to release less-capable F-35 models to foreign buyers with delivery requirements in 2012. The aircraft would be delivered in the Block 2 configuration, with only software changes and weapons integration tests needed to upgrade to Block 3 about a year later.
Maj Gen John Hudson, JSF programme manager, says the alternative plan is being developed as potential foreign customers are consulted. "Are Block 2 airplanes a whole year early good enough," says Hudson, "or is everyone going to wait until Block 3?"
The configurations share propulsion and airframe designs, but have vastly different capabilities. Block 3 JSF would have a full-up weapon system capable of the aircraft's full mission profile, including carrying all external and internal weapons loads. Block 2 could carry air-to-ground precision weapons for interdiction and close air-support missions, but lacks most of its potential air-to-air arsenal, including Raytheon AIM-9X Sidewinders and MBDA AIM-132 Advanced Short Range Air-to-Air Missiles.
The option is aimed at the UK and Australia, which need to begin replacing ageing aircraft no later than 2012, says Michael Cosentino, Lockheed Martin's director of international programmes. Singapore is another potential customer that would require F-35 deliveries to begin in 2012, but it has not yet signed a formal agreement to enter the programme as a security co-operation participant.
The US Marine Corps had expected to receive the first operational F-35 in the second quarter of fiscal year 2008, but is now more likely to receive the first aircraft in FY09. The first US deliveries are in the Block 1 configuration, which includes a minimal operational load of Boeing GBU-31 and GBU-32 Joint Direct Attack Munitions and two Raytheon AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles.
The proposed one-year programme extension is part of a draft replan of the original 10.5-year system development and demonstration phase that is expected to be approved by the Defense Acquisition Board on 17 June. The delay raises the programme's total cost from $33 billion to $40.5 billion.
STEPHEN TRIMBLE / WASHINGTON DC -
Eurofighter Typhoon Single-Seat Production Aircraft Takes Flight
PS002, the fifth Eurofighter Typhoon Instrumented Production Aircraft (IPA5), successfully carried out its first flight on 7 June 2004, at BAE SYSTEMS Warton, United Kingdom. IPA5 took off from Warton at 1602h, piloted by Typhoon Project Pilot, Mark Bowman, and landed at 1630h. This new Eurofighter Typhoon production test aircraft was assembled by BAE SYSTEMS on behalf of the Eurofighter partners and will now join the four nation flight test programme. -
France Helps Dassault Aviation with Singapore Military Jet Competition
By Pierre Tran, Sunday Business, London Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News
Feb. 22 - The French government has flown to the aid of Dassault Aviation, signing a E659 million ($850 million, UKpound 441 million) contract that allows the aircraft-maker to build an advanced version of its Rafale jet, which is competing in Singapore's tender for new fighter planes.
Singapore's $2 billion competition for 20 combat aircraft is a test of Dassault's ability to sell the Rafale into export markets. The French plane is pitched against the Eurofighter Typhoon and Boeing's F-15 Eagle.
The signing with the French procurement office last Tuesday allows Dassault to go to the Singapore Air Show this week with a contract in hand that assures financing for work on a Rafale F3 fighter-bomber model being offered to the Asian city state.
Dassault's chief executive, Charles Edelstenne, said the company's share of the development contract would be E457 million. Thales, which builds the radar, will snare E100 million, with the rest shared between electronics company Sagem and missile builder MBDA.
The contract comes as welcome news to Dassault, which faces uncertainty over a planned order for 59 Rafales for the French Air Force, which had been due last year.
Because of budgetary problems, successive governments postponed Rafale orders, which led to obsolescence of some of the electronic parts designed a decade ago.
The contractors and the government have been locked in a dispute over who should pay for replacing the outdated electronics and testing new parts, estimated to cost E200 million to E300 million.
The government is negotiating over financing the replacements, but that will probably involve a trade-off, which could lead to postponing orders for 11 or 12 jets in the batch of 59 aircraft.
The defence budget runs to 2008 and an amount has already been earmarked for the Rafale programme, so deferrals would be pushed into the next budget.
Dassault insists the production line needs an output rate of one and a half jets a month to be viable, and previous plans had been for two planes a month. Deferrals would hit revenues and increase unit costs.
Edelstenne pours scorn on critics of the Rafale, saying if France had joined the four-country Eurofighter programme, it would have cost 40 percent more to buy the same number of aircraft, because of cost overruns due to Eurofighter's technical hitches.
Dassault saw a slide in orders for its Falcon business jets for 2003, with only 40 aircraft sold, compared to 72 in the previous year. Edelstenne said 2003 was the worst year in civil aviation in the past 10 years. Most Falcons are sold in the US market.
Net profit for 2003 fell 5.4 percent to E295 million from E312 million, on sales of E3.3 billion, down from E3.44 billion. New orders dropped to E2.42 billion from E3.52 billion. The outlook for 2004 was uncertain. -
A Singaporean delegation is currently in France (in Brittany for those who know where it is) to study the maintenance process of the Rafale F1 flottila from the French Navy. The 12F squadron was officially declared operational with the Rafale F1 last week.
Cheers, -
See here http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/topstories/story/0,4386,258664,00.html
"Fighter jets make first flight outside Europe, to Singapore
State-of-the-art Eurofighter Typhoon could replace Singapore's ageing Super Skyhawk, and will be tried by RSAF pilots
ALFRED LEE FOR THE STRAITS TIMES
LONDON - Two of the world's newest fighter jets took off from Britain yesterday for Singapore, where they will be seen for the first time outside Europe.
The swing-wing, twin-engined Eurofighter Typhoons will be in Singapore for two weeks for evaluation as a replacement for the Republic of Singapore Air Force's ageing Super Skyhawk fighters.
The Typhoons, which can fly at twice the speed of sound, will take five days to complete the 13,000km journey. They will make four stopovers at air bases in the Mediterranean, the Middle East and Asia - the locations are secret for security reasons - and will be refuelled mid-air about 16 times.
The British Royal Air Force's most senior officer of Chinese heritage, Wing Commander David Chan, is piloting one of the Typhoons and is the officer-in-charge of the Singapore-bound air detachment, which includes three giant support C130 Hercules transports, a Nimrod reconnaissance plane and tanker aircraft.
Wing Cdr Chan told The Straits Times just before take-off from the Typhoon's British home base at Warton, Lancashire, 400km north of London: 'The Typhoon is a brand new, state-of-the-art multi-role fighter which is just now going into service with the air forces of Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain.
'We are still carrying out tests and evaluation and they are ahead of schedule, with no major problems.
'The Typhoon is a great aircraft, a dream to fly, and I am confident everything will go well in Singapore.'"
Cheers -
I'm from SG buses
I look with interest with this NGF
EuroFighter is not a good plane after all. It is an omnirole (Or Multirole) fighter comapred to the F15T. The EuroFighter is also very expensive, 80 million Euro ($96 million US) compared to a F15T ($40-60 million USD). All these are just my opinion
The A4SU is a striker plane, while the EuroFighter is omnirole, it is contradicting. However, I won't speculate on the possibility of purchase of F15 or EuroFighter. After all, all these are smear campagin from BAe system. I don't comment on such smearing campagin
If it was replacement for F5T, I may prefer EuroFighter.
However, this is a question appearing again, which plane is going to replace the RF5? -
Hi, I'm Bob and new to this forum. Please be gentle.
I was just involved in a nice discussion with a friend of mine this morning, looking out for "purchase patterns", as it were, and we came to the somewhat surprising conclusion that Strike Eagle is in with a shout. Lets have a look at the "purchase patterns" of the SAF:
Land Systems
A lot of US stuff, but since 2000, we've been making our own.
Naval Systems
Largely European - principally because the US yards are not into small boats.
Missile Systems
Apart from I-Hawk and Spike, largely European as well. Which brings us to our item of interest:
Airframes
Ever since the Hawker Hunters (which were essentially hand-me-down "start your own air force" kits), every single one of the RSAF fighter aircraft purchases has been a US make. The answer to this simple pattern lies less with the fact that we are under any sort of political pressure to "buy American" than with the fact that Singapore's prime priority in choosing an airframe appears to be based on ease of logistics, maintainability, spare part availability and cross-systems compatability. The F-5E was chosen because it had an impressive production run and in the end, when its production ended, we were still able to buy spare planes from Jordan to cannibalise for parts. The F-20 Tigershark was offered to us as the Hunter replacement on incredible terms and all signs pointed to it being a very good machine. Yet in the end, Singapore went for the F-16 and not the F-20 because nobody, but nobody else bought the F-20. And that's why we don't buy Russian either - they have the worldwide numbers, but what with the factories closing down (as Mig did) and with factories fighting with each other over who makes what (as with the Sukhoi bunch) - Russian reliability for airframe service is essentially a nightmare.
Simply put, if your planes do not have the production numbers enough to sustain a long and reasonably cheap serviceability record, Singaporean assessors will always put a big fat "X" in the "cons" column.
I'm a huge fan of the Rafale. But despite the French throwing everything they have to win the Singaporean contract, the deal seems to be, unfortunately, the least easy to "service" 30 years down the road - plus it's got all those other logistical problems associated with its French armament packages to sort out. The Eurofighter people, although late to the game, seem to understand exactly what Singapore is looking for in its airframes, plus they have the "outside consortium" Austrian deal to showcase - they come in second. However a big "con" there is that the Tranche 3 ground-attack version won't enter service til 2008 - that is assuming everything goes according to plan. Singapore doesn't like to bet on "things going according to plan".
Point is - don't be too surprised if a 30-year old airframe should win out in the end... unless the assessors see a real need to "buck the pattern".
What do you think? -
Agree that the ILS alone would swing it all to the F-15E. Even politically it maybe a better decision though the benefits would not be as great as South Korea.
But don't forget the F-15E can still pack a punch! As a strike platform, there's no equal in the world. And then there is the question of what exactly does Mindef has in mind for this 'NGF'?
Twin engines, long range in the form of conformal fuel tanks......
Of course Rafale is still the best. Boeing has to work much much harder.
I still think there maybe a Peace Carvin V or VI or VII. -
F15T is offered and not F15E (Believed to be better than F15K)Originally posted by Fairyland:Agree that the ILS alone would swing it all to the F-15E. Even politically it maybe a better decision though the benefits would not be as great as South Korea.
But don't forget the F-15E can still pack a punch! As a strike platform, there's no equal in the world. And then there is the question of what exactly does Mindef has in mind for this 'NGF'?
Twin engines, long range in the form of conformal fuel tanks......
Of course Rafale is still the best. Boeing has to work much much harder.
I still think there maybe a Peace Carvin V or VI or VII.
Think of this, is it logical to replace a striker A4SU for a omnirole plane? Come on, we have already 60 F16CD. You want to have somemore omnirole? Then, there will be no strike capability which is contradicting our deterrance policy (I think most would know of this). BTW, we have 40 F16CD and 20 more on order.
Also, the Rafale and Eurofighter may face some operational problems, our KC135 sterotanker may not be able to refuel this European planes. So it is not just buy, we need to see our operational needs and can it be met? -
but the americans very li siao one....
u buy their planes, their planes very good also no point. they dun sell u the missiles lah, dun share their on-baord computer software lah... no this no tat... got plane no arament also no pt.....