Extension Endurance
-
Extension Endurance class LST, around 12 000 tons. 4 air landing pad plus internal 4-8 heli storage.
Will that be useful for SAF?
5 old LST are replace by 4 Endurance class LST. Still 1 more to go to be equal.
Maybe the naval is waiting for the VTOL JSF for intergration.
Your view please? -
I douby SAF will go fot VTOL .... endurance extension - can the ship physically / technically take it ?
-
i think we should discard the old mindset about numbers......
we should think more about capabilities......if we take away 5 LSTs and replace by 4 new endurance class 'LST', we must consider whether their capabilities have increased. a smaller number does not mean that the overall capabilities has decreased. just a basic comparision between the old ships and the new ships and you will notice the quantum leap in technology and capabilities -
Extension of Endurance is a cost effective way to allow for prolonged deployments in peace-keeping efforts.
You can do more with the same crew.
Along with more helis....maybe the docking bays can be re-configured to take a couple of Fearless PVs. -
I would rather have a underway replenishment ship with 2 more frigates then have a Endurance Helicopter carrier!
-
i dun think i like the idea of a BIG target...
it is Ok if u want it to draw enemy fire on it to make the enemy lose out tactically ... -
The Endurance Class can accomodate 2 Helis in Hangar as well as 2 10ton Helis on Open flight deck. So in Wartime scenario, the LST will carry at least 4 Helis. For our future acquisition of our Helicopter ( most probably will be the latest Eurocopter cougars ) one of the criteria is for foldable rotor blades. So hope this answer your pausible wish for an extended Endurance.
-
Got an idea...
Imagine, a LST can carry 8 Apache.
How much power projection and attack power is that?
The neighbours sure KPKB.
-
RSAF also kpkb...Originally posted by clarencebk:Got an idea...
Imagine, a LST can carry 8 Apache.
How much power projection and attack power is that?
The neighbours sure KPKB. 
-
why would they?Originally posted by kopiosatu:RSAF also kpkb...
RSN is helping them to project power.
-
umm.... i dont think RSAF would KPKB... but rather the ARMY would KPKB...
understand that the apache was for the army in the first place... if the navy sapu it... the army would go amok and take over CNB..
but i think a extension LSD would be feasible... the LSD is already a big target to begin with... making it bigger by 50% would hardly matter much.... but it would sure make the LSD a real menace... at 210meters long.... think we have to call it LPD by then or LHA?
can loads lots of helos too...
come crisis... 4 LPD + 6 FFG + 6 MCV + 4 SSK + 4 MCMV + 6 APV and dozens of helos can really really look nasty at sea....
when needed... -
umm.... i dont think RSAF would KPKB... but rather the ARMY would KPKB...
understand that the apache was for the army in the first place... if the navy sapu it... the army would go amok and take over CNB..
but i think a extension LSD would be feasible... the LSD is already a big target to begin with... making it bigger by 50% would hardly matter much.... but it would sure make the LSD a real menace... at 210meters long.... think we have to call it LPD by then or LHA?
can loads lots of helos too...
come crisis... 4 LPD + 6 FFG + 6 MCV + 4 SSK + 4 MCMV + 6 APV and dozens of helos can really really look nasty at sea....
when needed... -
It will be quite a showOriginally posted by clarencebk:Got an idea...
Imagine, a LST can carry 8 Apache.
How much power projection and attack power is that?
The neighbours sure KPKB.
But are u refering to a new LST or the present LST?
The present LST can carry as many as 8 apache? -
i think current LSD can hold about 6 apache...
1 in hanger?
4 in forward half of heli-deck
1 in rear half of heli deck ready for TO.
that is probably the best they can do... since i dont think the rotoblade in foldable.
if got foldable rotor like the SL300.... i think the LSD can hold maybe up to 10 helo..
-
Not really so. If you think about it, having the apaches parked on the LST can be quite a feasible idea.Originally posted by tripwire:umm.... i dont think RSAF would KPKB... but rather the ARMY would KPKB...
understand that the apache was for the army in the first place... if the navy sapu it... the army would go amok and take over CNB..
No need to secure enemy airbase to land them in the front lines. Take off straight from LST and conduct the missions inland, after which can returned back to the LST. Mobility of firepower.
Problem is, if the LST got sunk, there goes our apaches too. -
hahaha don't you guys know how ma fan it is for us to be sent to LST for exercise?Originally posted by clarencebk:why would they?
RSN is helping them to project power. -
in the may edition of air forces monthly, there was an article that wrote that the british are doing trials on their apaches on LPDs...
-
Do our apaches have adequate protection against the corrosion resulting from operating a period of time over the sea? Since they are used manly for ops over land.
If RSAF is serious about operating or attaching apaches to LSTs, they can try fitting them with foldable blades. Read it somewhere(think it's AFM) that US Army is putting such blades on their apaches for trials. -
I dun think the Apaches need to be permanently stationed onboard the LST. They can be like US with the carrier and LHD etc, While docking or non-operational time, the helos can be parked back at SBAB or CAB if allowed. Then at a moment's notice fly back in.
I do not expect our "Apache carrier" to be out-stationed for too long as that would be far too intimidating to any nation and with our current supply ships, i dun think we can last long.
the furthest i think would be the SouthChinaSea or IndianOcean where help is still a call away.(this is assuming in peace-time)
In war, this fellow can go as far out as she wans, provided a new supply solution is in place to support it. But then again, as singapore we are no super power, we only wanna protect what is ours therefore i do not see the need of getting out to where its more than necessary. This solution is mainly an attack platform.
I would consider it a silver bullet and only activated/announced when its necessary. Cos with 6-10 fully loaded Apaches with ammo reload, this is definately not a friendly ship. -
i'm not sure about apaches, but the pumas have MPAIs and it's not meant to filter out moisture or salts. The only way to protect the aircraft from all that salt is daily structural and compressor wash.Originally posted by eurofighter:Do our apaches have adequate protection against the corrosion resulting from operating a period of time over the sea? Since they are used manly for ops over land.
If RSAF is serious about operating or attaching apaches to LSTs, they can try fitting them with foldable blades. Read it somewhere(think it's AFM) that US Army is putting such blades on their apaches for trials.
Once the aircraft comes back to land, there's is still some major washing to do.
Foldable blades, it should be possible if they use 2 pins to hold each blade.
But if the aircraft is to be left there for some time, exposing the pins will result in faster corrosion due to the environment. The pins need to be lubricated... and for it to be lubricated, u need to raise the rotor blades which needs a mechanical hoist, which is available only indoors.
Deployment on the LST is not as easy as most think, just putting the aircraft on the ship and activating it as and when. Most don't see the logistics that go through behind it, they don't see the extra equipment that needs to be brought on board, they don't see the manpower a squadron sacrifices on land, they don't know that the navy supplies only a certain type of fuel which is not the "best" fuel for that aircraft.
As most of you know that SAF is pretty ngiao... so when a detachment leaves the squadron they take along tools with them. And sometimes those remaining in the squadron can't work on the aircraft because the tools are not available.
Anyway this is referring to those ideas about leaving the aircraft on the LST on patrol and standby -
Yeah... operations should start from land. Unless there is a need then aircraft will be deployed on LSTs.Originally posted by clarencebk:I dun think the Apaches need to be permanently stationed onboard the LST. They can be like US with the carrier and LHD etc, While docking or non-operational time, the helos can be parked back at SBAB or CAB if allowed. Then at a moment's notice fly back in. -
It is not advisable to put all the eggs in one basket...Originally posted by kanzer:i think we should discard the old mindset about numbers......
we should think more about capabilities......if we take away 5 LSTs and replace by 4 new endurance class 'LST', we must consider whether their capabilities have increased. a smaller number does not mean that the overall capabilities has decreased. just a basic comparision between the old ships and the new ships and you will notice the quantum leap in technology and capabilities -
Just to give a scenario:
Assuming we are at war with N neighbour, all we have to do is to sail our Apache Carrier (with all the escorts) to the side of their country and we have all the power and flexibility in stopping their land forces in invading our tiny pathetic red dot. This will reduce our turn around time and offer us more chances in keeping our "frens" busy.
If assume is S neighbour, all we have to do is the park that guy in the middle of the sea to form our extra line of defence. An Apache i believe is not only meant for tanks, i mean if it can kill tanks, surely ships are no problem too...right?