Singapore's Next Generation Fighter
-
RSAF's F-16Ds are filled with Israelis black boxes.....that I presume we can modify and upgrade.
Why can't the F-15T follow the same approach......
One could transplant the F16-I avionics on board the F-15T.....
As for RCS....I wonder if it's wise to attempt to do Deep Strike Interdiction at 30,000ft even with the Rafale?
Seems to me DSTA is an expert in overcoming the restrictions imposed on us by US politicians........so how can tech transfers be an issue over the choice of NGF?
NGF as an interim to the JSF, the focus should be centered on lowest costs(whole product life cycle) and shortest time to IOC.
Without the above, everything is meaningless........
F-5 upgrade took so long the airframe hours got burnt up too quickly to derive maximum.......in the end you need to get more airframes. -
I think if there is going to be remotely any hope at all for the F15 it will be that congress allows us in the coming months to finally airlift the 100 knives from guam back to our own shores.
otherwise like my canadian boss alus says
"get yur shit together and get on outta here!" -
Originally posted by kingkhong79:
The thing here is will they let us have them?which is what the tech transfer also includes.Like it has been said the US does not sell us alot of things.Infact while Boeing is offering the same version of the F-15 that the USAF is using the US congress is still pondering if they could let us have it.
i agree tat tech transfer will be important if we to be able to upgrade our planes.but do u think we really need to upgrade the plane ourselves if we buy the F15.the israelis and americans will have a lot of upgrade packages developed for the F15.
The F/A-22 program is on time and infact a few planes are months away from being ready...yes production planes are almost off the flight line.The 1st batch of pilots have been trained.Also the F-15 is being slowly phased out....I believe the F-16 is replacing the F-15 as the primary attack aircraft...not too sure about that though.
the F15 will remain in service withe USAF for a long time yet because it will be at least another decade before the F22 enters into mass production.
Both DA and BAE have offered to let us in on the development of upgrades especially the french.Infact the french want us to be a major partner in developing the export version of the Rafale
on the other hand if we buy the rafale we'll be dependent entirely on the french for upgrades and spares and troubleshooting,wwho knows wat the potential problems wif the rafale are because its not fully tested.
Not really.....Mindef expects the plane in around 2006-2009 which is NOT NOW!!The NGF must also be able to help us retain air supiourity if the F-35 project gets delayed.The Eurofight and Rafale in my opinion are the front runners and the F-15 is might win only if the US offers more technology especially for the F-16.
As my argument goes,the risk with choosing the F15 is zero.the risk with choosing the rafale or typhoon is huge.like i said before,the Mindef want immediate delivery of their purchase and not apurchase that can be delivered only ten years down the road.tats the reason why the mindef is evaluating the aircrafts NOW because it wants a attack/fighter aircraft NOW.In this case,the Typhoon was never a contender in the first place.The rafale is being used as apawn to get a better deal from the americans juz like the case in the past when we threatened to get the Tiger chopper when the yanks refused to sell their Longbow Apache to us. -
Yes, but because the USAF knows perfectly from experience that if we don't get the KC-135s from them, we'll get boom refuelers from someone else. Be it Israel, Iran or anyone else. As they have shown, if they can deny us the capability, they will. At the drop of a hatOriginally posted by kingkhong79:Thanks for the history but we r now in the year 2004.regarding the inflight refuelling aircraft,we've got the KC135 now from the yanks didnt we?
Thats because we had a VERY good alternative waiting in the Eurocopter Tiger. Even so, I've heard that the Longbow radars might be kept in US territory until a "military threat against Singapore is imminent" (again)i recall when we first expressed interest in purchasing the Apache from the yanks,they only wanted to offer us the Apache AH64A without the mastmounted radar system but in the end they still sold us the latest Longbow Apache.
To answer your questions; Yes, but not all we wanted. Yes. Yes. Yes. Your answer (or shall we say, assumption) only shows how much you know about the Peace Carvin program. There are a lot on the C/D Vipers we have that came from the Israelis, who were the ones who gave us the source codes to integrate a whole bunch of goodies onto the aircraft, which I won't go into detail but most of the military nuts here(save for you) already know about.And did the yanks offered us any tech transfer when we bought the F16?Did the lack of tech transfer affect the effectiveness of the F16 in the RSAF in any way?Did we need any tech transfer of the F16 in order to integrate it into our defence system?Did we need the souce code of the F16 for weapons integration with other sources?The answer to all this is a definite no.
Wrong, wrong, partially right and wrong. DSTA already has said tech transfer might make of break this fighter deal. We don't need the new fighter now, the last A-4s are due to go in 2007. Meanwhile F-15 deliveries to RoK start in mid-'06. You sure Boeing St Louis can complete the 40 and get down to ours then? Or do you think your good Yankee friends will shaft the Koreans in favour of our needs?yeah the tech transfer will be a nice-to-have but not very crucial in our case.we simply need a capable tried-and-tested battle-proven cost-effective fighter/attack aircraft NOW.The keyword is NOW.That will be the F15 no doubt about tat.The Typhoon and rafale is still undergoing testing and orders to the french and German airforces may not be fulfilled for a number of years yet. this is especially true for the Typhoon
Rafale F1 is already in production and has combat missions over Afghanistan. Rafale F2 will start deliveries later this year. F3 is right on schedule. As for the French AF, their Rafale requirements are staggered to ease fiscal pressures and the Dassault production facilities are well-geared to fulfil more orders in between those of the French AF.
The point is only applicable to the Typhoon, which I have stated before. Nothing new. Then again, production aircraft are rolling off the lines.
The F-15 is now. But we need something for the FUTURE.so when will the RSAF get its first aircraft delivery if it chooses the rafale or typhoon?The typhoon and rafale represents the future MAYBE. but the F15 is NOW.
When will the RSAF get its first delivery if it chooses the F-15? With the Korean order in mind.
Do you know that for sure, or did you hear that from someone, or (heaven forbid) come up with that one yourself? After all, you've already mis-represented a lot of facts already.tats why the RSAF will choose the F15.The Rafale and typhoon are simply the pawns of the RSAF to get a better deal from the yanks.
Is that so bad? Troubleshooting source codes will represent a good learning experience for our software engineers while work on the radars will give our engineers and people first hand experience of how that works FROM THE GROUND UP. As I've said before, Singapore is looking to be more than an end-user of hardware, we want to learn how to upgrade, improve, modify and eventually even build and design our own stuff. In other words, self-reliance. With the Americans always looking to sell things with enough strings attached to ensure their end-users end up in knots most of the time without their help, this already represents a gulf in expectations of both parties.regarding your last question,My definiton of tech transfer is the same as your.but to mi tech transfer is a pretty vague term because there is always the extent and depth of tech transfer to be considered.providing the source code in my opinion is not very deep or extensive.in any way,i think the only reason the french and british r willing to provide source codes to us is because the rafale and typhoon need lots of troubleshooting in terms of systems integration,sure will help their aircraft industry if singapore can contribute to the troubleshooting exercise of their troubleprone national aircraft.Mindef will have no need for the source code of the F15 because its systems are fully integrated and tested already.
Again, deluded assumptions from you without any consideration of past events. The Yanks have integrated everything they need for THEMSELVES. Which is fine and good FOR THEM. But what they have which we want from them, they might not want to sell us. And what we want that we can get from 3rd parties, how are we going to integrate these 3rd party equipment without the source codes? What then?Mindef will have no need for the source code of the F15 because its systems are fully integrated and tested already.
Again, these are events with precedents in the Singapore context. -
Fairyland, we can mod and upgrade the Israeli black boxes on the F-16s because they have given us the source codes for the Vipers and the black boxes.Originally posted by Fairyland:RSAF's F-16Ds are filled with Israelis black boxes.....that I presume we can modify and upgrade.
Why can't the F-15T follow the same approach......
One could transplant the F16-I avionics on board the F-15T.....
We can't do that with the F-15T because it contains things the Israelis don't have (yet) like the AESA radar (if the Yanks live up to their promise and sell it to us)
In an ideal world, yes, the NGF will be an interim till the JSF comes. But IMO with recent whispers from the JSF main partners, we'll have to consider that the JSF remotely *MIGHT* have to be left out of future equations. And even if it does, we might not get it will much later than originally planned. Would you want to defend Singapore's skies with F-15s in 2020?
Seems to me DSTA is an expert in overcoming the restrictions imposed on us by US politicians........so how can tech transfers be an issue over the choice of NGF?
[/quote]
DSTA is not an expert, they did it with (mainly) Israeli help. As for the Vipers, IIRC the Israelis got those source codes through some less than aboveboard means as well.
[quote]Originally posted by Fairyland:NGF as an interim to the JSF, the focus should be centered on lowest costs(whole product life cycle) and shortest time to IOC.
Without the above, everything is meaningless........ -
Fairyland, DSTA has admitted that most of the E-2 upgrade is based COTS technology.Originally posted by Fairyland:BUT this has not prevented our upgrading of the E2C which is a major success!
Ya the RF aperture maybe needs upgrading!
Yes, we're closer to the Pentagon than the White House or Capitol Hill. But in the end, who reports to who? Last time I checked, US is not a military junta.
As for the US President......I thought our relationship with them is multi-faceted. I think we are closer to the Pentagon than the White House or Congress. Change of Presidency will not have that great an impact......not as good as the Israeli lobby but not that bad.
That is my primary concern here as well, that we get value for money on the new fighters, which is why I am urging caution on the F-15 bid and study the fine print carefully.
All I care about is Mindef not wasting money away here. Majulah!
Unlike kingkhong, I'm not rubbishing any of the contenders outright, just urging a less simplistic (than his) way of looking at the overall picture. -
Again, pulling statements out of your hat with no regards to facts and reality, read the following link:Originally posted by kingkhong79:the F15 will remain in service withe USAF for a long time yet because it will be at least another decade before the F22 enters into mass production.
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=11503682
The F-22:
- is ALREADY in production and,
- was never meant to enter "mass production". Its costs percludes that. Theres this concept called "fiscal reality". It's scheduled to remain in low rate production while gradually replacing the Eagles.
Theres no such thing as zero risk. 'Nuff said.
As my argument goes,the risk with choosing the F15 is zero.the risk with choosing the rafale or typhoon is huge.
-
Originally posted by kingkhong79:
some of your info is really outdated, i suggest you go read up to update yourself, you can start here, its a website run by someone here
The F15 is not really a stop gap solution until the F35 arrives.its simply a replacement for the A4.in this regard i would say this Next generation FIGHTER is a misnomer because most probably its going to be used as an ground attack aircraft rather than for air-to-air combat.theres a high chance of the F35 failing to meet its expections,its really a design with too many compromises,a design tat aims to satisfy everybody but ends up satisfying none.i would put my bet on our next air-superiority fighter to be the F22.
True singapore wants to be able to upgrade its weapons but in this case the french did not promise any tangible tech transfer.it simply says we can play a part in the development of the advanced radar system they r working on,so even if there is any real tech transfer,we can only upgrade the radar system.so wats the point.[/b]
www.pirate.per.sg -
Well, the ADF will be very nervous if this comes true. Their whole airborne fleet(figthers/bombers) is banking on the JSF getting thru.Originally posted by Viper52:In an ideal world, yes, the NGF will be an interim till the JSF comes. But IMO with recent whispers from the JSF main partners, we'll have to consider that the JSF remotely *MIGHT* have to be left out of future equations. And even if it does, we might not get it will much later than originally planned. Would you want to defend Singapore's skies with F-15s in 2020?
So NGF is ALSO an insurance policy........NOW it's clearer......
Ok, we are looking for a JSF fallback NOT an A4 replacement NOR a numbers top-up game here.
Let's not discuss on whether JSF will make it ON TIME or not. What's the relevant for 2020?
1) A2A engagements will happen at longer ranges - assuming your rules of engagement doesn't require eyeballing friend or foe before firing.
2) RCS will be a major factor - same as navy. Actually if one has networking it is possible to fused RF returns from different platforms in different angles. So then........how?
3) More missions will be unmanned - probably NGF as mother ship for mid-course guidance or re-targetting.
4) 2 heads better than one - definitely a must with all the information to digest.
5) Advanced sensors and datalinks
6) Smarter faster and more agile weapons
7) Airframe/Propulsion - thrust vectoring relevant? FBW will lighten pilot's burden but that's old stuff, unless you want to talk to the plane?
Seems airframe and propulsion is inconsequential aside from RCS and cost effective maintainability issues. Days of pulling Gs and sucking air are over if technology is what 'they' say it is.......
Typhoon is out! Rafale's only selling point is the radar plus potential tech transfer.
F-15 has all the above with proven LANTIRN BUT minus tech transfer.
If we need control over the avionics package, best option is to transfer Viper's (Storm will be better) black boxes into an empty F-15E shell.
Only problem left is the radar which it seems is all there is to the tech transfers that Singapore is after. Maybe we should look for the answer elsewhere instead of incorporating it in the NGF tender. -
Let me reply some of your comments in blue (assuming you are arguing in favour of the Eagles, and my reply is in favour of the Euro-carnards in particular the Rafale) below
Originally posted by Fairyland:
Well, the ADF will be very nervous if this comes true. Their whole airborne fleet(figthers/bombers) is banking on the JSF getting thru.
So NGF is ALSO an insurance policy........NOW it's clearer......
Ok, we are looking for a JSF fallback NOT an A4 replacement NOR a numbers top-up game here.
Let's not discuss on whether JSF will make it ON TIME or not. What's the relevant for 2020?
1) A2A engagements will happen at longer ranges - assuming your rules of engagement doesn't require eyeballing friend or foe before firing.
Both Typhoon and Rafale are BVR A2A capable. In fact if one factor the "in development" ramjet powered Meteor, then the Euro-carnards will have an edge against the Eagles/Amraam combo.
Ok, what about WVR? Both Typhoon and Rafale will eat an Eagle any day given that their agility is better. Now, one might argue that an Eagle can be armed with AIM-9X and JHMS or Python 5/DASH-4 combo, then at best Eagles will only match Typhoon and Rafale.
2) RCS will be a major factor - same as navy. Actually if one has networking it is possible to fused RF returns from different platforms in different angles. So then........how?
In terms of RCS, Eagles sucks big time. Rafale is the best. One thing that Rafale definitely has an edge over its competitors is its ECM suite. You can easily read about it. It has got radar cancelling technology built in.
3) More missions will be unmanned - probably NGF as mother ship for mid-course guidance or re-targetting.
Rafale has the edge. Dassault is looking at a future growth of Rafale to convert some into UCAV controllers. Eagles - nah, Typhoon? Don't know about EADS plans.
4) 2 heads better than one - definitely a must with all the information to digest.
5) Advanced sensors and datalinks
All of the are on par if not Euro-carnards have slight advantage.
6) Smarter faster and more agile weapons
7) Airframe/Propulsion - thrust vectoring relevant? FBW will lighten pilot's burden but that's old stuff, unless you want to talk to the plane?
None have thrust vector so far. Dassault and EADS were looking at a growth potential to upgrade their respective products with thrust vectors. Don't know the status now.
Seems airframe and propulsion is inconsequential aside from RCS and cost effective maintainability issues. Days of pulling Gs and sucking air are over if technology is what 'they' say it is.......
Typhoon is out! Rafale's only selling point is the radar plus potential tech transfer.
F-15 has all the above with proven LANTIRN BUT minus tech transfer.
If we need control over the avionics package, best option is to transfer Viper's (Storm will be better) black boxes into an empty F-15E shell.
Only problem left is the radar which it seems is all there is to the tech transfers that Singapore is after. Maybe we should look for the answer elsewhere instead of incorporating it in the NGF tender. -
Read an article on Rafale from jedonline:
The Spectra EW suite with the active cancellation is powerful if it really works.....for all emitters.
Passive ESA radar has least system gain and lower range than Active ESA radar?
The FSO on board maybe superior to LANTIRN? and allows for longer range visual identification of friend or foe.
Rafale has lots of good stuffs until you think of the ILS costs and probably much longer time to reach IOC compared to F-15E/T.
Glad to see French going for 2 seaters too which effectively kills the Typhoon.
My bet for a cost effective JSF fallback is still F-15T with faith (something that's been proven) in DSTA/Israelis/'Free Sex for all lobby' to come up with a work around on the tech transfer and upgrade path perhaps involving F-16E/F (Storm) inserts or F-15I stuffs.
Answer is clear......to me at least
I don't think you can ink this tech transfer and have the implementation go to our expectations. French or otherwise.
Boeing should cut a good deal RSAF cannot refuse and get it over with before year end.
BTW what are the Koreans getting for their F-15K? Would be nice to use that as baseline for continuing pro F-15 direction.
Answer:
1) APG63 - No AESA
2) ALR56 - Older and less capable than our F-16Ds
3) ALQ135 - I think older than mysef
4) No FSO onboard - LANTIRN instead
5) Helmet mounted sight - nothing new
Understand that F-15I is also not much better with the ESM/ECM replaced. No wonder Israelis going for F-16I.....cheaper and also because their military aid is down to USD1.5 billion a year?
If you sell a weapons platform that have strategic reach.....it's understandable you want to control the use and damage it can cause. -
hey again i saw Rafale this morning from PLAB ... make it RafaleS...
2 to be correct. Can anyone comfirm them? -
There will be a lot of newvous countries, UK, RAAF, Netherlands etc. Not to mention the USMC and USN. But like I said, if the program needs money thats simply not there, it would be as Singaporeans say, lan-lanOriginally posted by Fairyland:Well, the ADF will be very nervous if this comes true. Their whole airborne fleet(figthers/bombers) is banking on the JSF getting thru.
[/b][/quote]
Let's not discuss on whether JSF will make it ON TIME or not. What's the relevant for 2020?[/b][/quote]
Heh heh, just a random year I selected. I used the hoped-for JSF entry-into-service date of 2012, factored in delays and then waiting for our turn and got that date
I'm not too sure Typhoon is out. There are 2-seat versions available, and they're supposed to be combat capable as well. The consortium's problem is that for too long, they've failed to present a united front regarding development matters and more than once, looked like they're pulling in different directions. I've no doubt they've got a great product, they just need to work more on ironing out some pretty serious issues.
1) A2A engagements will happen at longer ranges - assuming your rules of engagement doesn't require eyeballing friend or foe before firing.
2) RCS will be a major factor - same as navy. Actually if one has networking it is possible to fused RF returns from different platforms in different angles. So then........how?
3) More missions will be unmanned - probably NGF as mother ship for mid-course guidance or re-targetting.
4) 2 heads better than one - definitely a must with all the information to digest.
5) Advanced sensors and datalinks
6) Smarter faster and more agile weapons
7) Airframe/Propulsion - thrust vectoring relevant? FBW will lighten pilot's burden but that's old stuff, unless you want to talk to the plane?
Seems airframe and propulsion is inconsequential aside from RCS and cost effective maintainability issues. Days of pulling Gs and sucking air are over if technology is what 'they' say it is.......
Typhoon is out! Rafale's only selling point is the radar plus potential tech transfer.
F-15 has all the above with proven LANTIRN BUT minus tech transfer.
I'm also not sure that Rafale's "only selling point is the radar plus potential tech transfer". Lets not forget USN F-14s and F-18s were creamed by the Rafale F1s in WVR and the Yanks didn't want to try BVR after that. Arguably the newer F-15s are better aircraft, but I've no doubt that Rafale can hold its own vis-a-vis the best F-15s the Yanks can offer.
As for the LANTIRN, its OBSOLETE. The other pods on the market, such as Litening II, Sniper etc beats it hands down. -
I believe I've read somewhere that a single Rafale C was scheduled to join Rafale B302 here in Singapore after AA.Originally posted by MushyMaro:hey again i saw Rafale this morning from PLAB ... make it RafaleS...
2 to be correct. Can anyone comfirm them? -
Yep..both Boeing and DA will be flying their planes in Singapore and doing all the sales pitch till around may this year.BAE will be flying 2 Eurofighter end of this year early next year to do the flying around and sales pitch....was reported in the ST......so i guess i was right about having Eurofighters being assembled for us....Originally posted by Viper52:I believe I've read somewhere that a single Rafale C was scheduled to join Rafale B302 here in Singapore after AA. -
speaking about litening, the lastest version is AT and northrup just delivered a few of them to marine corps. this version has better a2a capability. imho, we should be using this rather than lantirn. gives our falcons an extra sensor in the a2a mode. somemore made by rafael, easier to get tech transfer.
-
Another key factor is that Litening comes in a single pod, as opposed to LANTIRNs separate pods. Saves weight and reduces drag.Originally posted by cavsg:speaking about litening, the lastest version is AT and northrup just delivered a few of them to marine corps. this version has better a2a capability. imho, we should be using this rather than lantirn. gives our falcons an extra sensor in the a2a mode. somemore made by rafael, easier to get tech transfer. -
and it comes with a ccd-tv for daytime ops and the AT version provides multi-target cueing and extended rangeOriginally posted by Viper52:Another key factor is that Litening comes in a single pod, as opposed to LANTIRNs separate pods. Saves weight and reduces drag. -
I tot LANTIRN has one pod with IR/EO sensor and other a TFR?
Litening is great as replacement for the Atlantic? pod!
Rafale is a smaller package with inferior payload/range even with conformal fuel tank. It's more agile but dogfighting is not the main mission for NGF.
The extra payload/range of the F-15E is the baseline. You cannot upgrade this short of redesigning the whole airframe.
Putting the F-16I avionics into the F-15 is probably the best option IF the US will let us do it.........like the Hawk SAM, you buy some original configuration and we'll sell you some to modify......... -
Isn't the argument in favour of the Eagles surrounds having an integrated avionics suite? If we start putting F-16I avionics into the Strike Eagles, doesn't take go against the argument.Originally posted by Fairyland:I tot LANTIRN has one pod with IR/EO sensor and other a TFR?
Litening is great as replacement for the Atlantic? pod!
Rafale is a smaller package with inferior payload/range even with conformal fuel tank. It's more agile but dogfighting is not the main mission for NGF.
The extra payload/range of the F-15E is the baseline. You cannot upgrade this short of redesigning the whole airframe.
Putting the F-16I avionics into the F-15 is probably the best option IF the US will let us do it.........like the Hawk SAM, you buy some original configuration and we'll sell you some to modify.........
Secondly, how are we sure we will even get the F-16I suite? There are a lot of classified stuff used only by IAF. No matter how close Singapore is with Israeli, there are bound to be some no-go items.
Anyway, even before entertaining this thought, what makes us believe that the US will change their policy of release their software for us to integrate anything with the Strike Eagles? Releasing software to Israel cannot be viewed in the same context as Singapore IS NOT Israel. Even the Israeli were forbidden to touch some areas such as the radar, isn't it even more impossible for Singapore to obtain the software for any integation work?
The US package on offer has always been the entire integrated platform with all assorted weapons. US will NOT release the source code to Singapore period. DSTA and ST Aero are also not in the league of Rafael and IAI to develop local fighter jets avionics or combat suite, not to mention, advanced ECM/ESM suite. Singapore is good at integrating different software/equipment but not known for being a developer.
If Singapore is serious in further develope its skills in aircraft avionics, radar technologies , then the European offers of technology transfer look so much more attractive. -
Yes, the second Rafale has arrived.Originally posted by MushyMaro:hey again i saw Rafale this morning from PLAB ... make it RafaleS...
2 to be correct. Can anyone comfirm them? -
The above arguments lead us to the answer I started with in the first place......go with F16I!Originally posted by Joe Black:Isn't the argument in favour of the Eagles surrounds having an integrated avionics suite? If we start putting F-16I avionics into the Strike Eagles, doesn't take go against the argument.
Secondly, how are we sure we will even get the F-16I suite? There are a lot of classified stuff used only by IAF. No matter how close Singapore is with Israeli, there are bound to be some no-go items.
Anyway, even before entertaining this thought, what makes us believe that the US will change their policy of release their software for us to integrate anything with the Strike Eagles? Releasing software to Israel cannot be viewed in the same context as Singapore IS NOT Israel. Even the Israeli were forbidden to touch some areas such as the radar, isn't it even more impossible for Singapore to obtain the software for any integation work?
The US package on offer has always been the entire integrated platform with all assorted weapons. US will NOT release the source code to Singapore period. DSTA and ST Aero are also not in the league of Rafael and IAI to develop local fighter jets avionics or combat suite, not to mention, advanced ECM/ESM suite. Singapore is good at integrating different software/equipment but not known for being a developer.
If Singapore is serious in further develope its skills in aircraft avionics, radar technologies , then the European offers of technology transfer look so much more attractive.
It will give lowest cost and fastest IOC WITH tech transfer MINUS AESA radar technology which Singapore's not getting anyhow even with Rafale!
Rafale maybe a capable aircraft in terms of avionics BUT frankly speaking I don't think the US is gonna let us buy it
The NGF with it's strategic reach is not much different from a cruise missile, ICBM etc South East Asia is not a hotspot as the Koreas but we are not that peaceful a region too.
I'm afraid there maybe some other 'consequences' which was made all too clear to the Koreans before. I wonder if a Singapore buy on Rafale and the supposedly tech transfer is really worth all this?
Our best bet is still the 'Free Sex for All lobby'.
Or get rid of our Non Aligned status and formally become a US Ally.
Get kicked out of ASEAN in the process..... -
2 rafale took off from wsap r/w 02 at 0800hrs ltc headed in the direction of bukit timah hill.Originally posted by ChineseJunk:Yes, the second Rafale has arrived. -
Once again, the argument against the F16U was RSAF didn't want to put all the eggs in one basket. We don't want to find that if for some technical reasons that the Vipers were to be grounded, Singapore would be left defenseless with no planes to fly. (Exggeration of course, but we can't simply count of the 2 F5S sqns to take care of air defence right).Originally posted by Fairyland:The above arguments lead us to the answer I started with in the first place......go with F16I!
It will give lowest cost and fastest IOC WITH tech transfer MINUS AESA radar technology which Singapore's not getting anyhow even with Rafale!
Rafale maybe a capable aircraft in terms of avionics BUT frankly speaking I don't think the US is gonna let us buy it
The NGF with it's strategic reach is not much different from a cruise missile, ICBM etc South East Asia is not a hotspot as the Koreas but we are not that peaceful a region too.
I'm afraid there maybe some other 'consequences' which was made all too clear to the Koreans before. I wonder if a Singapore buy on Rafale and the supposedly tech transfer is really worth all this?
Our best bet is still the 'Free Sex for All lobby'.
Or get rid of our Non Aligned status and formally become a US Ally. Get kicked out of ASEAN in the process.....
Second and less obvious reason is that RSAF has already purchase Block 52+ variant, which is not much different from F-16I. Thus, there is absolutely no reason to have an NGF program if the Advanced Block 52 will suffice. RSAF could simply get a further batch and be done with. Of course, the reason of getting NGF is that the Blk 52+ couldn't fulfil the all the roles RSAF (now and in the next 10 years or so) set for NGF.
RSAF also will not have a distinct edge in the region by having more Blk 52+ Vipers.
As for comparing this NGF program and the Korean FX program, I think we can expect a different outcome. The Korean FX program actually identified the Rafale as the "best" choice. In fact, the Korean AF wanted Rafales. It was only when US pressured them to re-evaluate their decision, basing on integration issues with US forces in Sth Korea and that Boeing was almost nearly shutting down the F-15 production lines. If technical merits and the level of tech transfer is dominant in the selection criteria, I believe you will see Rafale beats Eagles over and over again. I think the French are so very desperate to sell Rafale almost at any 'cost'. Rafale will never be an export success due to the relative poliferation of second hand third gen aircrafts like the Vipers. Dassault's own Mirage 2000 also essentially curses Rafale to be an export failure.
Sure, the US can "pressure" Singapore to buy USA, but the pressure will not be as great as what they had given to the Koreans. Singapore transparent procument policies and selection criteria also means that they are less likely to be in the position to put undule pressures on Singapore without Mindef threathens more European purchases. Singapore is in the driver seat - not the US!
The ball is in Boeing's court. It is up to them to offer Singapore a package we simply can't refuse. Or else, I think Euro carnards are definitely a better choice.
BTW, there are more procument coming up including the Naval Helos, trainer, etc. I'm sure the US govt won't want to upset Singapore too much huh! -
i think u really in fairyland, you have never done any technical work on an aircraft before. its not that simple to put some avionics into an aircraft, does the electrical connectors fit, is the bus system compatible, can the wires cables route thru the a/c, whats the effects of the components on the cg, can the boxes fit into the bays in the a/c. after you managed to put the components in, you need to test, is the avionics working to the desired levels. the antennas need to be redesign or not? lots and lots of issue, the best example if the f-5s project, see how long it took us.Originally posted by Fairyland:Putting the F-16I avionics into the F-15 is probably the best option IF the US will let us do it.........like the Hawk SAM, you buy some original configuration and we'll sell you some to modify.........