Proposed reforms and expansions for SAF
-
I feel that Singapore should increase military spending,to protect our interests overseas and build up power projection capability,given these uncertain times.We should play a role commensurate with our status within the region.
My suggestions are as follows
RSN:
-an extra sqdrn of Delta-class FFGs to provide further AAW,ASW and anti-ship capability to RSN.
-1 sqdrn of DDGs to project power from Singapore to Andaman Sea and cover the whole of the South China Sea up to the rim of the Pacific Ocean.
-1 to 2 light carriers,similar to the Spanish navy's current carrier.Perhaps one with a tonnage of 20 000 tons and a capability to hold 30 aircraft,to provide a mobile 2nd strike capability as well as provide power projection to protect overseas Singaporean interests in areas such as the Middle East,the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea.
RSAF:
The RSAF currently has many vital assets baed on the ground,to my current knowledge.We suffer a weakness of being vulnerable to artillery fire from northern sectors.An enemy with artillery or similar assets based in the north makes it a strategic asset for use against RSAF ground based assets.
While it is known that there are several backup runways throughout the island,with hardened shelters and reinforced runways,it would still remain vulneralbe to bombardment,no matter how hardened.
Perhaps an investment in STOVL or VTOL assets should be made?This would allow the RSAF to operate out of less friendly ground environments.
Furthermore,the role of CAS should be investigated.Perhaps getting 'flying tanks' such as the A-10 Warthog would increase the scope of operations that the RSAF could undertake?
Out of interest,does the Rafale or EF Typhoon have STVOL capability?
NS:
To overcome current manpower constraints,perhaps the conscription of both male and female Singaporeans should be seriously considered,based of the Israeli system of conscription.More males could be deployed in active combat vocations,while females could be deployed in combat support vocations and other vital functions such as logistics,intelligence and Military Police.
To introduce an adversity quotient in current conscript batches,conditions in training camps such as Pulau Tekong could be made less comfortable,combined with removal of any and all air-conditioning facilities that may be exploited by troops,such as air-con bunks,a total waste of energy.This would cut waste and save funds,allowing it to be diverted to other,more vital areas,as well as contributing to increased physical ruggedness in the troops.Of course,the situation of making situations less comfortable in the barracks is an example.There are many other methods/strategies by which this may be accomplished.
A second suggestion would be more realistic and intense combat training,such as simulated battlefield conditions,with use of simulant elements such as animal blood and organs(easily bought at cheap prices from the abbatoirs)strewn through areas which troops must access,as well as use of plastic or rubber bullets in training,to desensitise troops and mentally condition them for combat situations.This can be done in a variety of ways.What was states could be used as an example.
A third suggestions is to increase the physical training standards of the recruits,and extend BMT to a term of 4 months to allow for harsher physical conditioning.Along with this,more discretion could be given to trainers and unit commanders as to the training of their units.Clear safety guidelines could be provided,within which trainers and commanders would operate as best as they saw fit."Siong" training should also be encouraged as it implements mental and physical toughness in recruits.
It should be kept in mind that at no times do I imply a drop in safety standards and procedures.Medics should be present at all times to ensure the physical welfare of troops.Should mental problems among troops crop up,a camp counselor should be provided,or a trusted CO to report to,though a counselor is the best course.
Elite units:
Elite units refers to those of the Guards,Commandos and NDU.Such units should all have their own style of 'Hell Week',to weed out weaker elements within the troops,though this is preferred for Commandos and NDU,which are actual Special Forces.Guards serve in the role of elite infantry.
Such units should have the chance of being deployed overseas more often to active or passive combat zones,to 'blood' them and allow combat experience to leak into the officer corps. and enlisted ranks of the SAF.
Such theatrs of operation I suggest are:Iraq,East Timor,Mindanao and the Balkans where peacekeeping and police duties could be undertaken.
An unorthodox option would be active deployment in areas such as South African cities or the Brazilian city of Sau Paulo,where the authorities would be glad of a helping military hand in dealing with their crime problems.Such areas are as close to real combat zones as possble,without as many resulting dangers,though still lethal.
An upgrade in the equipment used by elite units would also be in order,such as providing body armour to Guards for use in even normal operations and day to day usage,in the form of lightweight flak jackets for everyday duties,and full-scale armour similar to that used by American forces in current BUA such as in Iraq as of 2004 for peacekeeping duties.
(Yo,Mindef personnel,if you do read this,like you said in the Straits Times,at least keep these suggestions in mind.I'm starting my NS january 2005)
[btw,off topic,I know I asked this a long time ago,but is it possible for me to get into the Commandos if I am an only son?I am very fit and would probably be Pes B+ or Pes A-.My usual NAPFA is Silver,and I work out at least 3-4 times a week in a gym.My eyesight is 250 degrees.Care to comment on my chances?] -
Before you ask for more, perhaps consider how much would it cost? and would it really be that much more effective?
Perhaps you would reconsider after you left NS and found yourself a regular job and paying taxes.
It would be pointless to argue with you now. -
wow, where u copy one. why is SOF left out of elite unit ? most probably is due to the fact that publications should not make known dat SOF exists although alot of men know it exist. dats why they still say the cdos were the ones who took part in the hijack incident in the 90s. nice try to make it seem u typed all the stuff...
and....if u think an arti attack would render our RSAF useless....u are very wrong...serve NS to find out why or start reading STs....
frog in a well.... -
x 2Originally posted by RussianPower:Before you ask for more, perhaps consider how much would it cost? and would it really be that much more effective?
Perhaps you would reconsider after you left NS and found yourself a regular job and paying taxes.
It would be pointless to argue with you now. -
[/b]Originally posted by Sardaukar:My suggestions are as follows
[b]RSN:
-an extra sqdrn of Delta-class FFGs to provide further AAW,ASW and anti-ship capability to RSN.
-1 sqdrn of DDGs to project power from Singapore to Andaman Sea and cover the whole of the South China Sea up to the rim of the Pacific Ocean.
-1 to 2 light carriers,similar to the Spanish navy's current carrier.Perhaps one with a tonnage of 20 000 tons and a capability to hold 30 aircraft,to provide a mobile 2nd strike capability as well as provide power projection to protect overseas Singaporean interests in areas such as the Middle East,the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea.[/quote]
Umm...I hope you are joking...do you know how much it would cost to operate an aircraft carrier? We don't have enough personnel for that, let alone the cost. Acquiring an aircraft carrier would mean that we would require additional force protection of warships, etc...SAF would go broke in no time. And our defence scope doesn't require us to have an aircraft carrier. Even Thailand has problems maintaining its own helo carrier.RSAF:
That might be good but not necessary. Remember that our defence strategy is based on forward deterrence. Even if we managed to take a few hits on the runway, they can be repaired almost immediately. Our aircraft are under HAS anyway. A VTOL or VSTOL aircraft is good for close air support, but lacks the punch and power required for air-to-air combat...
The RSAF currently has many vital assets baed on the ground,to my current knowledge.We suffer a weakness of being vulnerable to artillery fire from northern sectors.An enemy with artillery or similar assets based in the north makes it a strategic asset for use against RSAF ground based assets.
While it is known that there are several backup runways throughout the island,with hardened shelters and reinforced runways,it would still remain vulneralbe to bombardment,no matter how hardened.
Perhaps an investment in STOVL or VTOL assets should be made?This would allow the RSAF to operate out of less friendly ground environments.
Furthermore,the role of CAS should be investigated.Perhaps getting 'flying tanks' such as the A-10 Warthog would increase the scope of operations that the RSAF could undertake?
Out of interest,does the Rafale or EF Typhoon have STVOL capability?NS:
Our weapon technology has allowed us to do more with less...the 155 SP Primus is an example. I mean, its not just the military alone. By conscripting females, we will cause labour shortages in the long run. This lone is detrimental to our economy. Remember, Economic defence plays a part too...
To overcome current manpower constraints,perhaps the conscription of both male and female Singaporeans should be seriously considered,based of the Israeli system of conscription.More males could be deployed in active combat vocations,while females could be deployed in combat support vocations and other vital functions such as logistics,intelligence and Military Police.To introduce an adversity quotient in current conscript batches,conditions in training camps such as Pulau Tekong could be made less comfortable,combined with removal of any and all air-conditioning facilities that may be exploited by troops,such as air-con bunks,a total waste of energy.This would cut waste and save funds,allowing it to be diverted to other,more vital areas,as well as contributing to increased physical ruggedness in the troops.Of course,the situation of making situations less comfortable in the barracks is an example.There are many other methods/strategies by which this may be accomplished.
Boy, recruits are gonna hate you...Do you know that Tekong is actually hotter than mainland S'pore? Wait till you try it out....
A second suggestion would be more realistic and intense combat training,such as simulated battlefield conditions,with use of simulant elements such as animal blood and organs(easily bought at cheap prices from the abbatoirs)strewn through areas which troops must access,as well as use of plastic or rubber bullets in training,to desensitise troops and mentally condition them for combat situations.This can be done in a variety of ways.What was states could be used as an example.
This is especially wasteful, considering the amount of kway chup you can make from all that pig organs...
But seriously, plastic/rubber bullets are dangerous, even if they are not fatal. A shot at the wrong place can blind you for life...realistic enough for you? Let's see what parents would say to their sons having to undergo such training...A third suggestions is to increase the physical training standards of the recruits,and extend BMT to a term of 4 months to allow for harsher physical conditioning.Along with this,more discretion could be given to trainers and unit commanders as to the training of their units.Clear safety guidelines could be provided,within which trainers and commanders would operate as best as they saw fit."Siong" training should also be encouraged as it implements mental and physical toughness in recruits.
[b]
It should be kept in mind that at no times do I imply a drop in safety standards and procedures.Medics should be present at all times to ensure the physical welfare of troops.Should mental problems among troops crop up,a camp counselor should be provided,or a trusted CO to report to,though a counselor is the best course. [/quote
Wah lau eh...NS is only two or 2 1/2 years leh...four months of BMT ah? Don't forget that you require time to train a soldier in other skills. That's why it takes so long...by the end of 2 or 2 1/2 years, SAF soldiers have to have theoretically gained enough well-rounded knowledge and skills to be ready for war. Its not worth it to extend BMT. And you think medics would solve the problem of injuries? Its not a volunteer army leh....
[quote]Elite units:
Elite units refers to those of the Guards,Commandos and NDU.Such units should all have their own style of 'Hell Week',to weed out weaker elements within the troops,though this is preferred for Commandos and NDU,which are actual Special Forces.Guards serve in the role of elite infantry.
Such units should have the chance of being deployed overseas more often to active or passive combat zones,to 'blood' them and allow combat experience to leak into the officer corps. and enlisted ranks of the SAF.
Such theatrs of operation I suggest are:Iraq,East Timor,Mindanao and the Balkans where peacekeeping and police duties could be undertaken.
An unorthodox option would be active deployment in areas such as South African cities or the Brazilian city of Sau Paulo,where the authorities would be glad of a helping military hand in dealing with their crime problems.Such areas are as close to real combat zones as possble,without as many resulting dangers,though still lethal.
An upgrade in the equipment used by elite units would also be in order,such as providing body armour to Guards for use in even normal operations and day to day usage,in the form of lightweight flak jackets for everyday duties,and full-scale armour similar to that used by American forces in current BUA such as in Iraq as of 2004 for peacekeeping duties.
Dude, I think you are either pulling our legs at this point or you are seriously soft in the head.... Cdos and NDU do have 'Hell Week,' although there's less of it in Gds. But we go through tekan sessions nonetheless...
To deploy these units overseas would mean that the mandate of SAF would change, or rather, our foreign policy would change. I think the citizenry wouldn't take too kindly to the fact that their conscript son(s) is/are deployed in combat zones whether active or passive. Apart from regulars, there is no good reason why S'pore gov't would send NSF for overseas deployment. We are a conscript army first and foremost. Second, like I mentioned earlier, it takes time to train a soldier fully for him to survive in a combat environment...sending NSF overseas after a year or so of training is tantamount to launching a suicide mission should things go awry....you wanna answer to their parents?
[quote][b](Yo,Mindef personnel,if you do read this,like you said in the Straits Times,at least keep these suggestions in mind.I'm starting my NS january 2005)
[btw,off topic,I know I asked this a long time ago,but is it possible for me to get into the Commandos if I am an only son?I am very fit and would probably be Pes B+ or Pes A-.My usual NAPFA is Silver,and I work out at least 3-4 times a week in a gym.My eyesight is 250 degrees.Care to comment on my chances?]
With your current eyesight, I don't think its possible. Unless you go for eye surgery before NS. Like I proposed in a previous posting, issue prescription combat glasses (like in the U.S.) and you can get more fit individuals in elite units. The U.S. Rangers also have speckies now....
Wait till you serve NS and tell us again whether your opinion has changed after your BMT... -
You are seriously deluded.Look realistically around you, do you think that your suggestions make any mature sense?
-
Wah lau.. You wanna turn us into another Sparta or Soviet Union huh? There can be too much of a good thing. Arm ourselves to the teeth for what? Singapore is not a regional power like China, India and Japan nor even a sub-regional power like Vietnam, Indonesia or both Koreas. We do not need to project such overwhelming power beyond our immediate locale. Nor is such projection desirable given the trade-offs required with other societal goals like the economy and social welfare. If we had that much money, isn't it much better to give the money to those poor ah-kongs and ah-mas selling tissue paper, cardboard boxes and drink cans? Dun be so xiao-on.. Relac
-
cant imagine him being someone 'dua liap' in SAF...
-
Harlo sir. Who want to pay for all these? Your grandfudder ar?
2 light careers? For what? You want to start an arms race in SEA? I'm sorry to tell you this, but your views are not realistic. Like Langley mentioned, we're not a regional power in Asia. And we don't really need to be one, either.
No point wasting billions of dollars. Do you want us to be like a mini-North Korea? Their people are starving because they spend too much money on military expenditures.
The money will be more well-spent on other factors. Hope you see that.
-
Originally posted by Sardaukar:
This is the only one I truly think should be look at, the rest was too expensive or not neccessary.
RSAF:
The RSAF currently has many vital assets baed on the ground,to my current knowledge.We suffer a weakness of being vulnerable to artillery fire from northern sectors.An enemy with artillery or similar assets based in the north makes it a strategic asset for use against RSAF ground based assets.
While it is known that there are several backup runways throughout the island,with hardened shelters and reinforced runways,it would still remain vulneralbe to bombardment,no matter how hardened.
Perhaps an investment in STOVL or VTOL assets should be made?This would allow the RSAF to operate out of less friendly ground environments.
Furthermore,the role of CAS should be investigated.Perhaps getting 'flying tanks' such as the A-10 Warthog would increase the scope of operations that the RSAF could undertake?
Out of interest,does the Rafale or EF Typhoon have STVOL capability?
[/b]
Let's imagine that our enemy attempt a multi pronged preemptive strike against us, for example mass arty bombardment from the north to create a chaotic situation all over SG, and the same time a few sqn of SEAD capable airstrike against all our airbases.
Of course SG is one the world most densely protected with our AWACs and ADS but this of course a "what if" exe.
Let's say they do manage to render all our airstrips inoperatable, which means there will be a window where we are unable to strike back.(to repair a airstrips take time as well as preparing highway for fixed wing a/c to takeoff)
With that in mind , what are our options if that happens, we need something to give us a breather so that we could have our fixed wing a/c ready to takeoff.
1)As suggested by Sardaukar, a a/c carrier,but to me it is a very expensive option, a version like Thai/Spanish carrier for say 4-6 STOVL a/c and 2-3 helo carrier ,a flag ship for our RDF and at sametime a mobile airbase to reduce impact of preemptive strike.
2) one sqn of STOVL a/c in underground bunker so that it could takeoff from unprepared road.
3)Invested in STOL UCAV, like for example our MAV-1 stealth UCAV that we are developing, of course it must be able to carry PGM and AAM.
And maybe only need a short say 200-300m straight road or rocket assisted takeoff.
Comments please. -
If you have to spend all that money.......and I mean REALLY HAVE TO.......don't you think it's better spent sending one division of troops into NAJAF for 3 years???
The experienced gained would be invaluable.
Sometimes it's difficult for me to understand how an organisation that have never seen armoured combat claims that all the world's tracked vehicles doesn't suit it's needs (Eg Primus, Bionix)?
And millions spent developing our very own. I think high time to find out if it's worth it! -
But performance wise, VTOLs not as good as other fighters right?
A simpler solution would be to place more aircraft in the air during times of crisis, with supporting tankers and E-2Cs. Can both defend and/or retailate against a preemptive strike as well as protect the aircraft themselves. -
one sentence ... those are cRaZy ideas.
i am not going to pay my tax for TOYs and so are others... -
They don't have to take-out all the runways......just the number of CAS sorties required to support a full blown all out counter attack from SAF would require all our runways working full time.Originally posted by gary1910:This is the only one I truly think should be look at, the rest was too expensive or not neccessary.
Let's imagine that our enemy attempt a multi pronged preemptive strike against us, for example mass arty bombardment from the north to create a chaotic situation all over SG, and the same time a few sqn of SEAD capable airstrike against all our airbases.
Of course SG is one the world most densely protected with our AWACs and ADS but this of course a "what if" exe.
Let's say they do manage to render all our airstrips inoperatable, which means there will be a window where we are unable to strike back.(to repair a airstrips take time as well as preparing highway for fixed wing a/c to takeoff)
With that in mind , what are our options if that happens, we need something to give us a breather so that we could have our fixed wing a/c ready to takeoff.
1)As suggested by Sardaukar, a a/c carrier,but to me it is a very expensive option, a version like Thai/Spanish carrier for say 4-6 STOVL a/c and 2-3 helo carrier ,a flag ship for our RDF and at sametime a mobile airbase to reduce impact of preemptive strike.
2) one sqn of STOVL a/c in underground bunker so that it could takeoff from unprepared road.
3)Invested in STOL UCAV, like for example our MAV-1 stealth UCAV that we are developing, of course it must be able to carry PGM and AAM.
And maybe only need a short say 200-300m straight road or rocket assisted takeoff.
Comments please.
PGMs will not reduce the sortie rates for CAS. Just make it more expensive only. With all the maneuvering (maybe close range engagements) in the first phase........ maybe PGMs will reduce collateral damage but still it doesn't mean less sorties.
You need a way to recover and re-arm our aircrafts.......
Instead of aircraft carriers ..... maybe a floating runway like the one being trialled in Japan. More expensive option - Mobile Offshore Bases.
Why not do away with CAS altogether......
More Primus, LWSPH, Light tanks, firepower to the soldiers etc -
I find his ideas rather hawkish...why in the world would we want to project power into the region? Inviting trouble. He failed to assess the political viability of such an expansion..definately trigger an arms race in the region and undermine coorporation within ASEAN with an saf over-powerful. Mini carriers? What for if they can only carry helos or STOVL jets not good enough for air-to-air roles. How do you project power with insufficient air power to protect the fleet?
And the part about realistic training using rubber and plastic bullets, isn't the laser thingy already realistic enough? Using rubber or plastic bullets can increase realism to a certain high, but will jeapodise safty..and even lower the morale of trainees with the amount of bruses they are going to get. -
To overcome current manpower constraints,perhaps the conscription of both male and female Singaporeans should be seriously considered,based of the Israeli system of conscription.More males could be deployed in active combat vocations,while females could be deployed in combat support vocations and other vital functions such as logistics,intelligence and Military Police.
I'll prefer calling up more permanent residents (PMs) before enlisting women in general. As things currently stand, I believe only the under 21's & locally-schooled PMs get conscripted - & the SAF has benefited from this through the decades. But, calculating/referencing from different sources, the PM population has risen from about 82,000 combined in the 1980 Census to about 138,000 males in the 2000 version - so why not take advantage of that, especially the older twentysomethings? I'm not expecting drastic changes & they'll obviously be hard to be integrated into a military-operational unit as well. But on paper IMHO a lot of these educated PMs can displace the current rear-echelon personnel, which in turn can be freed up to operate some of the modern technology/equipment (which may not necessarily require combat-fit troops to operate). -
We will have to live in poverty if his idea comes true
.....which is impossible. -
I'm in agreement on this. While the RSAF has measures to survive a first strike on our airfields, we must take note that a successful strike on our airfields would result in a gap of at least 3-4 hours where they will be inoperative while the craters are filled over. Considering todays cratering munitions have a mix of cratering devices and anti-personnel mines to slow down repair work, it would almost seem certain that 3-4 hours would be an optimistic figure. And in the meantime, we would need something to maintain a certain level of sortie rates for air defence/urgent CAS. So whats the solution?Originally posted by gary1910:This is the only one I truly think should be look at, the rest was too expensive or not neccessary.
Let's imagine that our enemy attempt a multi pronged preemptive strike against us, for example mass arty bombardment from the north to create a chaotic situation all over SG, and the same time a few sqn of SEAD capable airstrike against all our airbases.
Of course SG is one the world most densely protected with our AWACs and ADS but this of course a "what if" exe.
Let's say they do manage to render all our airstrips inoperatable, which means there will be a window where we are unable to strike back.(to repair a airstrips take time as well as preparing highway for fixed wing a/c to takeoff)
With that in mind , what are our options if that happens, we need something to give us a breather so that we could have our fixed wing a/c ready to takeoff.
1)As suggested by Sardaukar, a a/c carrier,but to me it is a very expensive option, a version like Thai/Spanish carrier for say 4-6 STOVL a/c and 2-3 helo carrier ,a flag ship for our RDF and at sametime a mobile airbase to reduce impact of preemptive strike.
2) one sqn of STOVL a/c in underground bunker so that it could takeoff from unprepared road.
3)Invested in STOL UCAV, like for example our MAV-1 stealth UCAV that we are developing, of course it must be able to carry PGM and AAM.
And maybe only need a short say 200-300m straight road or rocket assisted takeoff.
Comments please.
The purchase of a carrier, even a small one, for Singapore would not be a wise move. On the military side, it would be a severe strain on our already taxed manning needs. While automation would reduce the crew needs for the ship itself, the airwing would need its specialist-trained crew, something that automation would not solve.
On the economic front, costs would be prohibitive. Not just the startup, but costs to keep the ship running.
Fianlly, political considerations. A carrier would throw the entire regional balance out-of-whack and plunge it into some pretty serious unfriendliness between us and our neighbours. It might spark off a whole new arms race and destabilise the area. One could argue Thailand already has a carrier, but I'm talking in the context of the Malay Peninsula/Indonesian archipelago.
And as someone has pointed out, it would need a small group of escorts to accompany it. More $$, more manning needs. Not practical, nor cost effective.
As for a STOVL, that I'm in favour of. I've argued about this before, if we were to get F-35s, it would make perfect sense to get at least a squadron of the USMC STOVL version to complement 1 (maybe 2) squadrons of conventional versions. A better solution would be to get all STOVL aircraft, but its not a practical solution as that would really increase costs. -
More Apaches? Better solution would be more and better SAMs. My friends in ADA all complain that our missiles are kinda short-range and that the mainstay of our ADA force are actually the I-Hawks. Anyway, manpower wise should not be a problem. First-generation PRs no need to serve but all second-generation male PRs have to serve NS.Originally posted by Viper52:I'm in agreement on this. While the RSAF has measures to survive a first strike on our airfields, we must take note that a successful strike on our airfields would result in a gap of at least 3-4 hours where they will be inoperative while the craters are filled over. Considering todays cratering munitions have a mix of cratering devices and anti-personnel mines to slow down repair work, it would almost seem certain that 3-4 hours would be an optimistic figure. And in the meantime, we would need something to maintain a certain level of sortie rates for air defence/urgent CAS. So whats the solution? -
That's right.Our I-Hawks are probably older than the battery commanders that operate them.Missile technology is one area you have to keep up-to-date in..I can't believe that we are not spending even a moderate sum on ADA when we can spend billions on choppers and frigates.ADA is important for point-defense, and especially now in this climate of terrorism, we should invest more on such systems to provide proper protection for our buildings and installations.Anyone here from PDF should find this idea agreeable.
-
Problem could be that ADA grouped under RSAF. And RSAF's share of the defence budget is probably all used up to buy all those fanciful planes so ADA, the poor cousin, gets peanuts. If you ask me, investing in a good SAM system is more worth it than investing in planes. Not only is it cheaper but its likely to be damn effective. Our likely adversaries sux at SEAD so they can't destroy our fixed defences whereas our fixed defences can destroy them. This may also be a wiser choice given that our offensive edge has been blunted by Malaysia's purchase of newer SAM systems than us e.g. Jernas. RSAF, chuck your Rapiers! According to my ADA friends, Rapiers all bo bo and pak boh one.
-
Also, just read in today's Lianhe Zaobao's cover story (dunno why ST never publish) US phasing out P-3C Orions. Taiwan buyin alot. Perhaps Singapore should buy also. Unlike us who bought antique submarines, Malaysia has modern Scorpenes and Agostas, posing serious threats to our Deltas. Furthermore, littoral waters should be good anti-sub hunting grounds for the Orions.
-
For wad? We already have our "silver bullets"!
We have 3 operational squadrons of VF-1C, variable fighters.
And 4 Battalions of Gundams. For fish go buy carriers? -
Before we start having delusions of grandeur, let's start looking at Singapore's primary constraint, manpower! 1 time light carrier is probably going to take up an entire squadron worth of manpower just to man that carrier. Let alone the escorts that one such carrier will entail. Why do we want to project power? We don't even have the manpower to be totally safe, let alone get involved in the South China Seas. Our new Delta frigates are also highly automated, just to ensure that we have no problem manning them! And we are not even talking about the ensuing arm race! Let's not ask for trouble!
-
Singapore is not a claimant to the Spratly Islands. We also do not have any Exclusive Economic Zones containing lucrative oil and gas fields plus fishing grounds to secure. Thus Thailand has compelling reasons to buy a carrier but we do not. Our only maritime interest is to ensure the security of SLOCs in the Straits of Malacca and the South China Sea. And we can do this with what we have now. With KC-135s, I really dun see the need for carriers to extend our reach. Anyway, the Endurance class LSTs do have the capability to carry a few helicopters. All this should be more than enough already.