Singapore's Next Generation Fighter
-
Haha yeah. Wishful thinking if they think Singapore will buy the Mirage 2000. I have very strong reliable contacts in the military aviation industry in France and they have been given me alot of feedback.Originally posted by sbst275:Their missiles are very ex and they have been trying to get our deal all along by allowing our pilots in France to fly the Mirage 2000
But one thing is for sure, the NGF will never be a single engined aircraft. Too many HDB blocks around. -
What does HDB flat got to do with double engine?
Double engine will make us deaf when the Black Knights go into display -
One engine quit and you still got another, hopefully or else its down you go.Originally posted by sbst275:What does HDB flat got to do with double engine?
Double engine will make us deaf when the Black Knights go into display
Now you know why they keep their F5s in PLA and the 16s and A4s in Tengah and now in Changi?? -
I think it is a bit off topicOriginally posted by Old Bird:One engine quit and you still got another, hopefully or else its down you go.
Now you know why they keep their F5s in PLA and the 16s and A4s in Tengah and now in Changi??
PLAB because it is near to CBD. But F5 is single engine too
But PLAB is very easy to travel to there compared to the other 2 bases -
ahem F5 is a twin-engined jet okay....
2 x GE J85-21 turbojet engines with 3250lbs of thrust each and 5000lb of thrust in afterburner....
its redundancy.. one engine quit u still got one more working one hopefully to land the jet back....
single engine if it goes kaput... and no relight.... out u go.... pull the handle.. -
Thks as F5 is smaller than F16 and yet only F5 is double engine in this comparisonOriginally posted by cheeze:ahem F5 is a twin-engined jet okay....
2 x GE J85-21 turbojet engines with 3250lbs of thrust each and 5000lb of thrust in afterburner....
its redundancy.. one engine quit u still got one more working one hopefully to land the jet back....
single engine if it goes kaput... and no relight.... out u go.... pull the handle.. -
And hope the ejection seat works and the chute opens.Originally posted by cheeze:ahem F5 is a twin-engined jet okay....
2 x GE J85-21 turbojet engines with 3250lbs of thrust each and 5000lb of thrust in afterburner....
its redundancy.. one engine quit u still got one more working one hopefully to land the jet back....
single engine if it goes kaput... and no relight.... out u go.... pull the handle..
-
what does our frigate buying shows anyway........
-
That is dif, tech is from them.Originally posted by duotiga83:what does our frigate buying shows anyway........
However, avitation and marine is dif co, so dif dealings aft all -
Yes, wanting our maintainers to learn French was probably why Singapore ordered more Fennecs, more Super Puma/Cougars and getting French help for frigates.Originally posted by Old Bird:Our local aircraft maintainers are already finding it hard to speak a second language must now learn French. .
The Russians converted their MiG-29 stenciling and instructions to English to export it, you think the French would cut their noses to spite their faces?
Wow...so you mean DCN is expecting ST Marine to just 'wing it' when ST Marine builds 5 out of the 5 Formidable class frigates using Manuals in either French or poor English??
The Frech people are a stuckup lot.... they won't speak English to you even if they know how to and even when they know you cannot speak French. Been through that before, and they tend to keep alot of things to themselves.[/quote]
Yup, that also explains why a lot of our IPs in the AJT Detachment are extending their tours in Cazaux and keeping their families there. So they can go live amongst a group of stuckup, bigoted Caucasians.[quote]
It is going to be a blast trying to convert their Technical Manuals into English so that our guys can understand.
-
Longbow was only after they faced an intense competition from the Tiger. And it still has the "Kept in US soil till imminent threat against Singapore" clause.Originally posted by sbst275:That has all along an prob, but some green light go was given in the 11th hr like the green light to buy AH64 longbrow is 1 example
Even France and BAE may not give us fully as well, who knows? It's a matter of politics.
If cannot, we have a way out, Israel still.....
Israel? How much help can they give us, when they don't have the source codes for the APG-63(V)2/3? -
The F-16s were upgraded to the A/B Block 15 because other countries like Thailand bought it, thus clearing the Block 15 for export. And Singapore didn't request the F-16/79, it was offered to us.Originally posted by Old Bird:Yeah, and when Singapore wanted to buy the F16 it was initially offered the export version with the JT79 engine.
And now the Block 52 plus are rolling in.
Block 52s are because there were already a lot of other countries using and even building the Block 52s. -
Yes, yes, it is sure a very big differenceOriginally posted by sbst275:That is dif, tech is from them.
However, avitation and marine is dif co, so dif dealings aft all
-
Psst....
The scoop I heard about the DCN Frigate is that it was not the cheapest deal; the vote-swinger was that the French offered a lot of tech transfers.....
Language? Should not be an issue. Rem, the EU parliament needs no less than 25 translators, they can still agree to become a union. Hence, the issue is less of language than of proper documentation.
Our folks did get by without learning much Hebrew( _____ fill in the blanks), or Russian (Igla missiles), or German (Armburst), or French (Cougars, AMX-10, AMX-13, Airbuses [SIA])?
Last, do not derile our French mates through such stereotypes....yes, they might be stuck-up, or could it be that they are just not comfortable with a language that is not their mother-tongue? Just as some of us who are not comfortable with Mandarin....
Recently, I received an e-mail from a fellow French forumer....yes he wrote to me in French. I apologied that I could only speak English and French is limited to frequently used phrases seen in movies. I also told him that I used language translation tool to try and understand his mail. He fully understood and we conversed in English.
Stuck-up? not really.
Southpark
The Dude -
Originally posted by southpark2000:
ermm... you gotta see the other side of the equation...
1. AIM-120s....how many have we got on hand?
Divide them by the no. of F-16s we have and let's see if we have enuf or not 1st.....(someone help!!! - i dun have access to the statistics here).
2. I am not sure if we are able to purchase more of them....given US stance to "balance" the region
3. From 1 and 2, we can deduce that we want to get our hands on more BVR missiles, i.e., from elsewhere (Derbys, MICAs, METEORs eventually?)...
[b]Example:
I know from my prev. post we bot some 400 Pythons (Israel WBR missiles). We know that it is integrated with F-16s. We also know that we have some 60 F-16s.
Hence 400 / 60 = 6.667 missiles per plane. Assuming they carry 4 in a mission (2 at the wingtips, 2 on outer pylons), it implies that the stock can last only 1.2 missions or thereabout.....
Regards
[/b]
non of our immediate neighbour (read opponents) have 400 fighter planes... not even 200.... not even 100...
and other then the 400 python... we still got hundreds of AIM-9P/J/M plus Sparrow BVR coupled with about 150 AMRAAMs and an unknown number of derby....
that easily worked up to about 10 missiles for every potential adversary fighters....
i am sure that once RSAF dominates the sky... most of the time left would be used for bombing and CAS. -
Originally posted by Viper52:
right ,mr viper only the rafale fit into our demands , they have offer us to invest in the mk2, n rbe2 radar,n tech transfer, good for st-engg i think,and whats more the french goverment is supporting this deal,singapore n france have been met so offen to discuss military coperation issue,so rafale stand the biggest chance here,it will be rafale ,it will be rafale.
Heres a couple of interesting articles about technology transfer and how Singapore views them.
=============
The Straits Times, Page H6 - February 26, 2004
[b]Share know-how to secure deals here, says DSTA
By David Boey
DEFENCE companies aiming to land a Singapore contract were told in no uncertain terms yesterday that their sales pitch had better include the sharing of defence know-how with Singapore.
Arms deals with Singapore had stalled when vendors failed to recognise that the transfer of technology could be a deal-breaker, said the Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA), the national authority on military technology and weapons procurements.
Making the point at a two-hour briefing for some 130 defence companies, Mr Soh Kong Pheng, deputy chief executive (operations) at DSTA, said: 'Many of our suppliers can't understand, or underestimate, the importance we place on having technology transfers... We do this so we can, if we need to, upgrade the hardware. Suppliers can achieve an important competitive advantage if they understand this requirement well.'
Citing the ongoing evaluations to find a replacement fighter for the A-4 Super Skyhawk, he said the new warplanes might need to work with unmanned vehicles in future and DSTA also needed to understand how the fighter worked if it were to be upgraded.
Warplanes being evaluated in the deal, estimated to be worth $2 billion, are Dassault Aviation's Rafale, the Boeing F-15T Strike Eagle and the Eurofighter Typhoon.
While contractors would not want to give away all their trade secrets, Mr Soh said 'at the minimum' they should ensure DSTA can 'upgrade, modify and integrate' the warplanes at reasonable cost.
Another key concern was maintenance costs. As much as 40 per cent of the acquisition cost goes to supporting the aircraft through its 20- to 30-year life cycle.
'We need to buy spares, maintenance and support equipment, and so on. And for readiness reasons, we buy much of these upfront... This is too costly,' he said.
He suggested that the three warplane makers think up an 'investment strategy' for maintenance to minimise the upfront expenditure.[/b] -
But shouldn't we plan for a sieged Singapore scenario, if you know what I mean......Originally posted by tripwire:ermm... you gotta see the other side of the equation...
non of our immediate neighbour (read opponents) have 400 fighter planes... not even 200.... not even 100...
and other then the 400 python... we still got hundreds of AIM-9P/J/M plus Sparrow BVR coupled with about 150 AMRAAMs and an unknown number of derby....
that easily worked up to about 10 missiles for every potential adversary fighters....
i am sure that once RSAF dominates the sky... most of the time left would be used for bombing and CAS.
Plus, not all missiles would be in top condition, some duds, some can't hit target, etc.......
Oso, in wartime, the trainer planes would can be used as light attack planes. One fine example is the venerable BAe Hawk. -
ok, if language is a big issues here ,what about the deltas frigates we bought from them, we have tech tranfers from them n our own enginneers are working with them to intergrade the systems ,n all is going well right? and what about the taiwanese that bought the m-2000,i dont think they all speak france are they,if thats is the issues here than i dont think our frigates can be laid down on time.Originally posted by Old Bird:And that leaves the Rafale to compete with its French technology and French lingo which none of us can understand.
Our local aircraft maintainers are already finding it hard to speak a second language must now learn French.
The Frech people are a stuckup lot.... they won't speak English to you even if they know how to and even when they know you cannot speak French. Been through that before, and they tend to keep alot of things to themselves.
It is going to be a blast trying to convert their Technical Manuals into English so that our guys can understand. -
We need to take the outcome with a pinch of salt. While the Indian Air Force won with their planes, it was kinda lopsided.Originally posted by duotiga83:regarding F-15 vs Su-27/30 series, there is reports on the results.......even with the recent Cope India exercise......shall not say more......shld be rather obvious
- The US did not have AWACS, which is how they operate
- The dogfights were performed with a numerical disadvantage against the US.
http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/06-18-04.asp
"The major takeaway for the Air Force is that our prediction of needing to replace the F-15 with the F/A-22 is proving out as we get smarter and smarter about other [countries'] capabilities around the world and what technology is limited to in the F-15 airframe," Col. Snodgrass said. "We've taken [the F-15] about as far as we can and it's now time to move to the next generation." - Maybe it's just an excuse to get the Pentagon to fund the F/A-22 Raptor -
or its just factsOriginally posted by southpark2000:We need to take the outcome with a pinch of salt. While the Indian Air Force won with their planes, it was kinda lopsided.
- The US did not have AWACS, which is how they operate
- The dogfights were performed with a numerical disadvantage against the US.
http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/06-18-04.asp
"The major takeaway for the Air Force is that our prediction of needing to replace the F-15 with the F/A-22 is proving out as we get smarter and smarter about other [countries'] capabilities around the world and what technology is limited to in the F-15 airframe," Col. Snodgrass said. "We've taken [the F-15] about as far as we can and it's now time to move to the next generation." - Maybe it's just an excuse to get the Pentagon to fund the F/A-22 Raptor -
hmmm... it is obvious that each of the contenders have their own merits and demerits. anyway, i heard that the assessment team are looking at various angle before making a recommendation to RSAF HQ:
1. performance
2. costs
3. tech transfers
4. integration
5. political mileage
6. serviceability and maintenance
7. threat and deterrant value
which plane is in the lead? do u want to speculate or wait to hear the official word? -
"and other then the 400 ***... we still got hundreds of AIM-9P/J/M plus Sparrow BVR coupled with about 150 AMRAAMs and an unknown number of ***.... "
Just saw this from tripwire...
Hi buddy, there's no need to mention certain figures and assests, especially if the information is classified.
Moderators, should we do something abt this?[/b] -
Originally posted by qnh1011:
Everybody is an expert here. Some are heavy machinery maintainers aka diesel mechanic in some dinky workshop and some are heavy machinery operators aka 747 pilots. Some are air interdiction target acquisition experts.
"and other then the 400 ***... we still got hundreds of AIM-9P/J/M plus Sparrow BVR coupled with about 150 AMRAAMs and an unknown number of ***.... "
Just saw this from tripwire...
Hi buddy, there's no need to mention certain figures and assests, especially if the information is classified.
Moderators, should we do something abt this?[/b]
Some are weapon system experts in the design and engineering departments.
This is the cyberworld.
For all you know, tripwire may be from weapons branch and he signed the contracts for all these weapons. He should know what he bought. I am sure he kept the shopping list and the receipts.
And I could be working for MSD or SIB acting like a newbie with poor aircraft knowledge, putting forth silly assumptions and ideas to draw flak, just to see who is skirting the legal limits of the ISA clauses...... hmmmmmm.
Aw c'mon gnh1101, relax lah abit... this is cyberspace!! -
Who are the people in the assessment team?? What are their qualifications??Originally posted by qnh1011:hmmm... it is obvious that each of the contenders have their own merits and demerits. anyway, i heard that the assessment team are looking at various angle before making a recommendation to RSAF HQ:
1. performance
2. costs
3. tech transfers
4. integration
5. political mileage
6. serviceability and maintenance
7. threat and deterrant value
which plane is in the lead? do u want to speculate or wait to hear the official word?
Just wondering how the selection process works for these guys. Anyone in this forum part of the team??
qnh1101, are you part of that team?? I did know that they rated the performance criteria as #1 and serviceablility and maintainability as # 6.
Must be a lucky bunch to get to crawl around the aircraft, sit in the cockpit and run the systems and having everything you wanted to know explained to you by the vendors themselves and not forgetting the cool hats they give away.
Lets hope they have aptly qualified people to do this job coz they are talking about alot of taxpayers money there. -
Hmmm, interesting... here i am, addressing Tripwire and you come along. btw, thanks for the lively bit of debate in the previous posts.
"Everybody is an expert here. Some are heavy machinery maintainers aka diesel mechanic in some dinky workshop and some are heavy machinery operators aka 747 pilots. Some are air interdiction target acquisition experts.
none of these pple factor in the NGF selection... so, whats your point, and what does it have to do with my earlier post?
Some are weapon system experts in the design and engineering departments. ""This is the cyberworld."
I see... gee wah... what a revelation... tell us somethng else we dun already know"For all you know, tripwire may be from weapons branch and he signed the contracts for all these weapons. He should know what he bought. I am sure he kept the shopping list and the receipts."
Wah, if trippy is from weapons branch, what's his ext number so i can call him? btw, the exact name is not weapons branch, but close enuff... and they do not sign the contracts, keep the shopping list and receipts, so pls, no BS...
"And I could be working for MSD or SIB acting like a newbie with poor aircraft knowledge, putting forth silly assumptions and ideas to draw flak, just to see who is skirting the legal limits of the ISA clauses...... hmmmmmm. "
hmmm... i never thot of that... but if u are, do u know who am i? no? oh well, too bad... try harder thenAw c'mon gnh1101, relax lah abit... this is cyberspace!!
hmmm... going back a few posts, u said that if we are not qualified, then we are only armchair engineers and Playstation test pilots, i.e. should not post? and now u are calling for more stuff to be posted by the same armchair engineers and Playstation test pilots? so which is it? to post or not to post? (ok... lousy pun, but irresistable).
oh.. and the name's QNH1011... not some gnh1101 (what the hell is that?)...
Anyway, let's get back to the main topic...