Singapore's Next Generation Fighter
-
the rafales can be refueled by the KC135.
there are basically two systems for midair refuelling: the boeing flying boom, used by planes built for the USAF, and the probe-and-drogue system, used by everything else that has midair refuelling capability. our kc135 carries a flying boom at the rear and a drogue assembly on each wing, and can refuel both type. no problem. -
Eh, why did they allow us to buy Longbrow AH64? Why are they willing to sell us Scud in the first place? Why they let us have 60 F16CD (One of the largest fleet in the world)?Originally posted by foga: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.....
The non share of weapons happened because of poltical issues which need not say, it was so famous. As for C130H, they were not willing to as we do not have good ties with USA in 1970's. This also takes with the F5T, it came as spare parts.
BTW, MINDEF is also considering replacing the UH1H and C130H (Refer to Defending The Lion City written by Tim Huxley) -
What abt EuroFighter? I don't trust this plane actually, it is Germany, Italy virgin plane. It is also new and never went on war before. In fact, there were also reports that the EuroFighter is unsafe for solo flying (Archives from CNA). Its range is also the shortest (Counted in Km, not miles)Originally posted by wd1:the rafales can be refueled by the KC135.
there are basically two systems for midair refuelling: the boeing flying boom, used by planes built for the USAF, and the probe-and-drogue system, used by everything else that has midair refuelling capability. our kc135 carries a flying boom at the rear and a drogue assembly on each wing, and can refuel both type. no problem. -
BTW, is there any chance that the RF5 will be replaced by other recon planes?
-
Hi All,
Sbs guy - it seems fairly likely that the role of the Tigereye will be taken over by our fast-growing and increasingly-important fleet of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) - Singapore is looking into robotic vehicles as serious "force multiplier" units and medium to long term is odds on to delegate all reconnaisance activity to robot planes.
Regarding your other question, it seems to me that you are asking "why are we considering omni-role fighters to replace the Skyhawk, which is a close air support specialist?". The modern air forces are currently entering a new phase of replacing large numbers of decent and one-dimensional planes with smaller numbers of very very very capable ones. Take the RSAF as an example - say we have 60 A4s (close air support) and 60 F5s (air interdiction and interception). We would be looking to replace them with 60 (rather than 120) Omnirole fighters in which the pilots are expected to fly-fight-bomb-fight-land in this one platform. It has been a sort of "trend" ever since the F/A-18 and all new plane developments since then have been geared towards this capability. It makes sense to the smaller armed forces too - replace two types of aircraft with a smaller numer of one type - same capability as before but just as easy, if not easier to service.
The bottom line is whatever Singapore chooses in the end, we can ber certain that it would be a carefully eveluated and considered decision based on force requirements and not some politician's whim. It would likely be the "best" - perhaps not the best plane of the lot - but the best for Singapore in the long-term.
Cheers. -
Your idea is pratical
However, don't forget our deterrance policy. Without any striker plane, it may not be possible like the A4SU, only for striking
As for EuroFighter, it has not been tested in war yet. Even long run like from UK to SGP. Whats more, it range is only 500km unlike F15 for 3000km. -
i just don't get it....what is on earth by tested or not tested......not tested means is lousy?
-
Hi sbs,
Thank you for pointing out that my point appears practical. It isn't my point, its the upgrading doctrine of most modern air forces in the world today. You must realise "Omnirole" does not mean "can do only one thing", it means "can do EVERYTHING" - a point that you may have mistaken.
It seems that you are extremely worried about the "replacement" of our fleet of "strike" aircraft. What I tried to explain in my previous post is that you do not have anything to worry about with regards to replacing the cute little Skyhawk. All three of the aircraft under evaluation are not just worthy successors to the A4, BUT will carry a helluva lot more, fly a whole lot further, deliver the payload more precisely and have the means to fly back "hot 'n fighting" much more capably than the A4SU ever will. If you want to talk numbers, the Eurofighter (which by the way I don't fancy anyway) carries a 6500-7500 KILO payload versus the A4's 8200 POUND one (thats roughly 4000 kilos). Strike Eagle can pack 10.5 thousand kilos. Rafale can carry 8 thousand kilos.
With regard to the "legs" of the Typhoon, open sources state that the full-load combat radius (hi-lo-hi) is 1389 kilometers, well above your 500+ km estimate and not much less than the Strike Eagle's 1463 km rating. With twin drop tanks, it can go up to 3706 km, again not very much less than the Strike Eagle's radius on tanks.
Bottom line is - EF isn't neccessarily worse than any of the other two contenders - you just personally don't seem to like it! That's fine though, for a forum. But we need to be sure of the facts before slagging anything. Just go to Google and read up more on the planes. Its great fun and fairly informative. And please don't mark me as a Typhoon fan either - if it were up to me, I'd go for the Rafale in a heartbeat. But I reckon its good for Singapore that our fighter aircraft purchase decisions are not made by the likes of you or me!
I hope I have laid your concerns to rest.
Cheers -
As a defensive force RSAF has never had any strike cap for so many years........Originally posted by sbst275:F15T is offered and not F15E (Believed to be better than F15K)
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?
A4s even when re-engined to F404, mostly serves CAS role and maybe some maritime missions.
F-5s carried out the point air defence.
Until F-16C/Ds we didn't really have any fighters. Now we have SEAD roles covered.
So why strike role now and for defensive purposes too?
I wonder -> maybe SCUD(or more specifically ASTRO) busters -
We do have deterance policy established in 1990's fully. It involes some classified info which I'm not comfortable to say but read the Tim Huxley book and you may be enlightened.Originally posted by Fairyland:As a defensive force RSAF has never had strike cap for so many years........
A4s mostly serves CAS role and F-5s point air defence.
Until F-16C/Ds we didn't really have any fighters. Now we have SEAD roles covered.
So why strike role now? I wonder. -
Ok reasoningOriginally posted by HiI'mBob:Hi sbs,
Thank you for pointing out that my point appears practical. It isn't my point, its the upgrading doctrine of most modern air forces in the world today. You must realise "Omnirole" does not mean "can do only one thing", it means "can do EVERYTHING" - a point that you may have mistaken.
It seems that you are extremely worried about the "replacement" of our fleet of "strike" aircraft. What I tried to explain in my previous post is that you do not have anything to worry about with regards to replacing the cute little Skyhawk. All three of the aircraft under evaluation are not just worthy successors to the A4, BUT will carry a helluva lot more, fly a whole lot further, deliver the payload more precisely and have the means to fly back "hot 'n fighting" much more capably than the A4SU ever will. If you want to talk numbers, the Eurofighter (which by the way I don't fancy anyway) carries a 6500-7500 KILO payload versus the A4's 8200 POUND one (thats roughly 4000 kilos). Strike Eagle can pack 10.5 thousand kilos. Rafale can carry 8 thousand kilos.
With regard to the "legs" of the Typhoon, open sources state that the full-load combat radius (hi-lo-hi) is 1389 kilometers, well above your 500+ km estimate and not much less than the Strike Eagle's 1463 km rating. With twin drop tanks, it can go up to 3706 km, again not very much less than the Strike Eagle's radius on tanks.
Bottom line is - EF isn't neccessarily worse than any of the other two contenders - you just personally don't seem to like it! That's fine though, for a forum. But we need to be sure of the facts before slagging anything. Just go to Google and read up more on the planes. Its great fun and fairly informative. And please don't mark me as a Typhoon fan either - if it were up to me, I'd go for the Rafale in a heartbeat. But I reckon its good for Singapore that our fighter aircraft purchase decisions are not made by the likes of you or me!
I hope I have laid your concerns to rest.
Cheers
But again, a omnirole does not have a capability of a strike only plane like an F16CD, cannot keep with F18 or F15. This I have checked from my friend who is very interested in aircraft said that OmniFighter have 1 disadvantage, they do not have strike only capabilities although they can switch. EuroFighter can only run abt 2700km, while F15 can run up to 5400km at 1 go.
Why I say F18 is because of our neighbour purchase, it can inflict a very painful wound. In fact in Tim's book, it was saying.... Read out yourself on the earlier pages
What they did to A4SU I'm not sure, but I don't believe it was just as simple to add in a F18 engine. But it's classified. -
ominirole means swing role.....unlike multirole....Originally posted by sbst275:Ok reasoning
But again, a omnirole does not have a capability of a strike only plane like an F16CD, cannot keep with F18 or F15
Why I say F18 is because of our neighbour purchase, it can inflict a very painful wound. In fact in Tim's book, it was saying.... Read out yourself on the earlier pages -
1st and foremost i believe it's AH-64D Longbow. they didn't agree to sell us the Longbow system but jus the AH-64D without longbow.
as to why they decided to introduce such a system in SEA region, perhaps because thai has cobras.
Scuds> from US? am i getting this correcting?
60 F-16s are a quite an impressive number but we are definately not one of the largest F-16 operators.
we have the americans, followed by the israelis, japan, taiwan, south korea, turkey, netherlands, uae, begium.... i seriously dun think we made it to top ten users list.
yes they may sell us the 'advance' fighter jets, attack heli.. but question is the weapons. AIM-120 for example. due to US's state policy, not being the first to introduce capability into the region, we are unable to purchase till malaysia acquired it's AA-12 ( correct me if i'm wrong). we had a problem with the F-16s' source codes when we upgraded them a few years ago didn't we.
i'm not anti-'made in america hardware stuff" guy.
i'm jus questioning the availablity of the various weapons and systems that's supposed to be used alongside the plane or copters?. putting all the eggs inside the same basket serve not strategic purposes, perhaps onli viable reasoning is logistics wise.Originally posted by sbst275:Eh, why did they allow us to buy Longbrow AH64? Why are they willing to sell us Scud in the first place? Why they let us have 60 F16CD (One of the largest fleet in the world)?
The non share of weapons happened because of poltical issues which need not say, it was so famous. As for C130H, they were not willing to as we do not have good ties with USA in 1970's. This also takes with the F5T, it came as spare parts.
BTW, MINDEF is also considering replacing the UH1H and C130H (Refer to Defending The Lion City written by Tim Huxley) -
RF-5T's so called air photos are abt to be a thing in the past , or is it alreadi.
we have UAVs to provide accurate and real-time images and infor.
i dun see RSAF getting any air recon variants of the the NGF planes or F-16C/Ds ones.Originally posted by sbst275:BTW, is there any chance that the RF5 will be replaced by other recon planes? -
i dun think they'll ever wanna have only UAVs doing recon... not in the near future anyway...Originally posted by HiI'mBob:Hi All,
Sbs guy - it seems fairly likely that the role of the Tigereye will be taken over by our fast-growing and increasingly-important fleet of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) - Singapore is looking into robotic vehicles as serious "force multiplier" units and medium to long term is odds on to delegate all reconnaisance activity to robot planes.
Probably modify some F-16s for the job? the dutch, americans and belgians have done it. did a search on google and found this on F-16.net :
http://www.f-16.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=printpage&artid=64 -
EURO fighter or Typhoon is a multi-nation project.
yes it's a virgin design. and RSAF has to keep up with the latest technology constantly! if not, they would have to revert the NS period back to 2.5 years!! (perhaps after the minister's , namely LHL's sons, finishes their NS liablity)
perhaps, on our singaporean point of view, only planes that are combat-proven / battle-tested are the american planes. why didn't u bring out the Tornados? among the 4th generation fighter planes, euro fighter has won quite an impressive order list.
as for euro fighter havin the shortest range... tat i'll leave it to the experts..Originally posted by sbst275:What abt EuroFighter? I don't trust this plane actually, it is Germany, Italy virgin plane. It is also new and never went on war before. In fact, there were also reports that the EuroFighter is unsafe for solo flying (Archives from CNA). Its range is also the shortest (Counted in Km, not miles) -
i did remember reading something off the net concerning modifying some our F-16s into recon planes but i believe it was because there seem to be a market for such a system in taiwan and jordan, and partly because it's was an ST concept.
UAVs would be our main aerial recon system. of course we dun rely soley on UAVs for recon. we purchase satecom recon from overt sources like many nations around us doOriginally posted by laser51088:i dun think they'll ever wanna have only UAVs doing recon... not in the near future anyway...
Probably modify some F-16s for the job? the dutch, americans and belgians have done it. did a search on google and found this on F-16.net :
http://www.f-16.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=printpage&artid=64 -
Hi Laser,
I agree that the Tigereye is likely to stick around for some time (probably until the 2008 replacement date). But I concur with foga that manned spy aircraft are a dying breed. For two reasons:
1) Our military leaders would rather sacrifice our young men to die fighting rather than information gathering;
2) That said, remote information-gathering technology has improved in leaps and bounds over the years and Singapore is in the forefront where that's concerned. Satellite imaging + long-loiter UAV feeds (Global Hawk-style UAVs) + short prebattle "over the horizon" drones (we don't have a 100 Searcher UAV fleet for nothing) + small unit portable "popup" fantail style units for on-site battle management can pack a heck of a C4I punch if integrated properly. And that is the whole point of the "3G Geekwarrior" concept of the new armed forces - proper information, proper integration.
Sbs guy - I think there is only one way in which you can cease losing sleep over the selection of the new aircraft:
F-15E Strike Eagle : Singapore is considering it for, and will ultimately deploy it (if chosen) as our new "striker fighter";
Eurofighter Typhoon: Singapore is considering it for, and will ultimately deploy it (if chosen) as our new "striker fighter";
Dassault Rafale: Singapore is considering it for, and will ultimately deploy it (if chosen) as our new "striker fighter"
Also, the countries which currently deploy or will deploy the abovementioned fighters, are operating the planes (or some versions thereof) as "Striker Fighters".
Cheers and regards. -
yup. in time to come, a 3G army like ours, will not have to depend on air photos taken one two days before a pre-planned attack. wat we need/ wat we have is the capability to extract real-time infor from the battlefield and feed them to the various ground commanders.
remote sensing technology is alreading being exploited in the form of our MPA and in the LALEE project.Originally posted by HiI'mBob:Hi Laser,
I agree that the Tigereye is likely to stick around for some time (probably until the 2008 replacement date). But I concur with foga that manned spy aircraft are a dying breed. For two reasons:
1) Our military leaders would rather sacrifice our young men to die fighting rather than information gathering;
2) That said, remote information-gathering technology has improved in leaps and bounds over the years and Singapore is in the forefront where that's concerned. Satellite imaging + long-loiter UAV feeds (Global Hawk-style UAVs) + short prebattle "over the horizon" drones (we don't have a 100 Searcher UAV fleet for nothing) + small unit portable "popup" fantail style units for on-site battle management can pack a heck of a C4I punch if integrated properly. And that is the whole point of the "3G Geekwarrior" concept of the new armed forces - proper information, proper integration.
Sbs guy - I think there is only one way in which you can cease losing sleep over the selection of the new aircraft:
F-15E Strike Eagle : Singapore is considering it for, and will ultimately deploy it (if chosen) as our new "striker fighter";
Eurofighter Typhoon: Singapore is considering it for, and will ultimately deploy it (if chosen) as our new "striker fighter";
Dassault Rafale: Singapore is considering it for, and will ultimately deploy it (if chosen) as our new "striker fighter"
Also, the countries which currently deploy or will deploy the abovementioned fighters, are operating the planes (or some versions thereof) as "Striker Fighters".
Cheers and regards. -
don,t u know that france air force is also the user of the kc-135 tanker to top up their m-2000 ? do your home work .Originally posted by sbst275:F15T is offered and not F15E (Believed to be better than F15K)
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?
-
RSAF is considering fitting some recce pods (Vinten? or Rafael) to some of the F-16. These pods will not carry films but instead transmit near real time images from the sensors.Originally posted by foga:i did remember reading something off the net concerning modifying some our F-16s into recon planes but i believe it was because there seem to be a market for such a system in taiwan and jordan, and partly because it's was an ST concept.
UAVs would be our main aerial recon system. of course we dun rely soley on UAVs for recon. we purchase satecom recon from overt sources like many nations around us do
Something the RF5 cannot do if I'm correct. But I think they offer better resolution, I think.
UAVs at present with the Searcher can only do tactical recon. and even then it's limited unless they have the SAR fitted.
Strategic recon you get from the weather man! -
EuroFighter
F-15E strike eagle
Rafale
WHO WILL WIN THE HEARTS AND MINDS OF RSAF AND ALL SINGAPOREAN? -
Yes, the 12 newer AH64 are longbrow, that's why they can come back only in 2008. This was the 2nd orderOriginally posted by foga:1st and foremost i believe it's AH-64D Longbow. they didn't agree to sell us the Longbow system but jus the AH-64D without longbow.
as to why they decided to introduce such a system in SEA region, perhaps because thai has cobras.
Scuds> from US? am i getting this correcting?
60 F-16s are a quite an impressive number but we are definately not one of the largest F-16 operators.
we have the americans, followed by the israelis, japan, taiwan, south korea, turkey, netherlands, uae, begium.... i seriously dun think we made it to top ten users list.
yes they may sell us the 'advance' fighter jets, attack heli.. but question is the weapons. AIM-120 for example. due to US's state policy, not being the first to introduce capability into the region, we are unable to purchase till malaysia acquired it's AA-12 ( correct me if i'm wrong). we had a problem with the F-16s' source codes when we upgraded them a few years ago didn't we.
i'm not anti-'made in america hardware stuff" guy.
i'm jus questioning the availablity of the various weapons and systems that's supposed to be used alongside the plane or copters?. putting all the eggs inside the same basket serve not strategic purposes, perhaps onli viable reasoning is logistics wise.
Sorry, it's not Scud but rather SAM (I'm apologetic of this, causing confusion)
We are the only country in Asia to have the F16CD and one of the largest fleet. Israel, Japan does not have F16CD but F15E, get your facts right. Taiwan is using F16AB
Belgium, Denmark are using F16AB only. As for upgrading, it was the 7 A/B
As for weapons, they could have been implicated by political events like in 1993 for one guy. They also don't wish to have sendiments happening. BTW, MY citizens are already ranting on us having so many planes. -
I know, but does Britian or Germany has for EuroFighter?Originally posted by leong262000:don,t u know that france air force is also the user of the kc-135 tanker to top up their m-2000 ? do your home work . -
JAS 39 is one of themOriginally posted by foga:RF-5T's so called air photos are abt to be a thing in the past , or is it alreadi.
we have UAVs to provide accurate and real-time images and infor.
i dun see RSAF getting any air recon variants of the the NGF planes or F-16C/Ds ones.