RSN Expansion ieas
-
Ok ok ... back to the topic. Hey at least its about navy stuff ...Originally posted by Obersturmfuhrer:This thread has degenerated into a circus. Not only has the topic shifted drastically, there are also many misleading and irrelevant information posted as well. Although it's quite hilarious to read, I think it's about time to lock it.
From The StrategyPage
Rail Gun Approaching Regular Use
July 13, 2004: The U.S. Navy is energetically, and at great expense, developing a revolutionary next generation warship weapon; the rail gun. Instead of using explosives to propel a shell out of a gun barrel, a rail gun uses magnetism to speed a projectile along two rails. This requires a lot of electricity, and for that reason, the new class of surface warships (DD-X and CG-X) are being built with sufficient electrical generating capacity to support a rail gun. While rail guns have been working in labs for years, it will be another 5-10 years before they will be ready for installation on a working warship. But when the rail gun does become reliable enough for this, it will be an awesome weapon. Generating six to 30 times the energy of current five inch (127mm) naval shells. The rail gun “darts” will travel at about 1.5 kilometers a second, to a range of of to 450 kilometers (depending on the amount of energy applied to the rails). When the dart hits the ground, after spending up to five minutes in flight, it would bury itself 40 feet down, and leave a crater ten feet wide and ten feet deep. If the dart hits a tank, the vehicle is destroyed. A DD-X could carry 10,000 of these 127mm, 44 pound “guided darts” in the space now allocated for 1,500 110 pound 127mm shells and their propellant charges, and fire them at the rate of six a minute. One of the things slowing down introduction of rail guns is a guidance system that can survive the high acceleration of the dart (from sitting still to over 5,000 kilometers an hour in a second or two.) U.S. weapons researchers have built guidance systems, at great expense, that can operate in a conventional artillery shell. But the rail gun projectile is moving more than twice as fast. Moreover, these 44 pound, 127mm “guided darts” will be expensive, costing up to $5-10,000 each. That means a DD-X could be carrying $100 million worth of munitions for its rail gun. However, the navy feels that the rail gun will provide weapons that are cheaper than missiles, but still have the long range and accuracy that missiles possess. -
true paying other pple tax sucks.
unless of course we're living in brunei lol
they can pay the tax for us =X
just studied taxation
wah kao...everything oso they tax...no wonder now i understand its called a pay and pay country
alot of singaporeans complain that SG standard of living is higher
well they should be glad..if SG's standard of living is lower..that means we living like cambodia..
Anyway..i love this govt..everything is good..except that those major companies sometimes choose to avoid us as our market is small
Good strategy our govt is taking..
rofl at the foreigners calling singapore clean and green..
hawker centers at SG..like for example that 1 near bugis junction
and some at jurong east really Dirty!
No wonder now i understand why some places never receive publication from STB..
anyway im proud of my country becuz i got world class stuffs
but im shamed of the stuffs behind the world class..jian bu der guang
Regarding Rail Gun
Wonder how china can EVER catch up..when USA is using Rail gun on naval warships
When naval warships is used with rail gun sibei power!
if only ST Marine got enuf $$ and funds to carry out rail gun research
U.S government too rich oredi
if don't stop research ,...their national debt ar.. i think rising to $8 Trillion soon
Good luck pple!
i can almost imagine my mind..picture this scenario
A USA DDX warship is travelling at 9'o clock West from Pearl Harbor..
reaches the Taiwanese straits..
In the radar blip...the ship's advanced detection technology spots a hostile
Chinese Sovremenny-class going towards them from Hainan island at 2'o clock.
Chinese destroyer arms a "Sunburn" SS-N-22 Anti-ship tactical warhead..the one which is most advanced and deadly in terms of warhead..
Both ships reaches the "red alert"
Chinese destroyer ..upon reaching the range for the missile to work..
Locks on the USA DDX warship , USA DDX warship's crew in turn..
activates the PAC-III (Patriot) anti missile missile ....the SS-N-22 anti ship reaches a MACH 3 Speed..and thanx to latest technology..the SS-N-22 is effectively shot down..
The USA DDX warship then ..with double railgun equips on it's ship deck
points the Rail gun back at 8 o 'clock..with it's magnetic pulse fully charged
and round fully loaded..the deadly gun is ready to fire..
China's Sovremenny Anti Ship Missile are all readied and early missile warning system activated...as usual they were expecting a Harpoon missile..which they were trained to counter with..
To thier shock...they notice a projectile which is travelling at 1.5 km per second....and activates a unknown projectile alert..
Chinese sailors prepare for the worst..
the radar also detects 2 to 3 more similar unknown projectile coming from the US naval DDX warship..
After a few minutes... the projectile hits the ship with maximum impact..
giving a deep gash on the ship's hull
Ship's damage control department tried to shut out some doors to prevent waters from sinking the ship..
meanwhile ...2 of the projectile is arriving and 1 hits the deck and effectively neutralize the "sunburn" launcher
The other 1..hit the control room and the General who is inside..got killed..
Sailors feeling shock and demoralized..panics and ..
the ship sinks
bringing it down together with the rest of 7 SS-N-22 tactical warhead -
What a pig SibeiSuayKia is ! A person who does not know shame and is totally immature, ignorant.Originally posted by Joshua1975:no shame leh.... M-16 100m missed 2 and tell every one here. when CMI dun bring out.
Never try this and you dare bring in your shooting.
M-16, w/o scope, 400m, target matal plate 30cm X 30cm X 0.7cm.
100m missed 2 is unacceptable if you are what you 'think' to be. another bull from si gin na.
Using a SAR21 that standard is equip with x 1.5 scope at 100m, still can miss 2 rounds ? The best thing is still can boost about it ! And still tell everyone about it, it is so shameful !
By the way as you civilian shooting it, it is like a fair, you know airshow, they give you a badge as sovineurs, yep so that they can get you to go away fast. You see people are demoing SAR21, a lousy shooter like you missing 2 round with SAR21 with a x1.5 scope in control environment is totally embrassing to them.
People in SAF shoot with M16 without scope 400m, 300m ,200m 100m all 100% on target, that is common man. -
Locks on the USA DDX warship , USA DDX warship's crew in turn..
ships use the Standard missile system...aka the SM...currently SM-2ER
activates the PAC-III (Patriot) anti missile missile ....the SS-N-22 anti ship reaches a MACH 3 -
oh and btw the DD21 has been cancelled hasnt it? or was that the arsenal ship? or both?
-
"si gin na, ignorant, cocky" wahhahahaha... yo SibeiSuayKia give up lar, you are no one at all, saw post on nuclear (that interest me) but that all from you, give your point, physicist or you just any how say you are
so with nuclear how fast can the the carrier go, tell everyone here leh. what is the hardware used
another by you, wrong term liao, no one use km/s in any sea ops. ooi, physicistOriginally posted by SibeiSuayKia:... ...
To thier shock...they notice a projectile which is travelling at 1.5 km per second....and activates a unknown projectile alert..
... ... physicist should know this very well de mah.
FYI it is in kn dun know what kn is? ===> knot or what known as nautical mile.
ignorant cocky siginna sound good, you nick no good, sound like your closed one die liao and you become suay after that -
Nah my marksmanship shooting is
PURE OILY M-16 AT 100 METRE RANGE IN Amoy camp
and btw that was my 1st time trying out
THe SAR-21 WAS THE PLACE where i queued up whole day to have a 1st hand civilian try at it..
and i tested the Mp-5..i like the weight and the machoness
the gun design is not bad..
The M-16 has a even distribution of weight around the whole gun
regarding the Mp-5 the weight is more centered around the butt and the trigger
it was at point blank RANGE!
yeap and 1 thing is for sure
Nuclear powered aircraft carrier travels at 40+ knots at top
American Naval Carriers at 1942..for example the Essex which carries 91 aircraft could achieve a speed of 32 knots
i was just assuming China uses 1 variety of missile
that is the sunburn missile
china FYI uses alot of varieties of stuff
Nah i was taking the 1.5 KILO per hour taken from the article above
lazy to convert into knots..
He Who Says Pple Act Smart and Pretend to Know Everything is better den himself acting dumb
pig save it for urself..make bak qua and shuff it up ur *** =)
go stimulate ur male G-spot
anyway i heard the our Fearless PV travels at 20 knots ++?
Perhaps til SR-71 is comparable to MAV-1 den prolly maybe will be more shiok
Maybe we should get a B-52 H and upgrade it with AC-130 type of guns and rotary cannons and carry some SRAM tactical nukes and make it a even more lethal version of AC-130..
AC-130 is definitely a good weapon to look at after achieving air supremacy with F-16 and F-5 And the A4-SU..
After neutralizing the SAMs ..or the B-52 H modified could be used to go on a bombing run... on enemy bases..
I just happened to feel that A4-SU could not carry a wide range of payload for bombs..with more bombs around the fuselage ..but will reduce the ability to pull Gs and to dogfight..
i think if next time when expanding power..we should look at bomber plane instead of fighter/bomber..coz dropping off 1 or 2 bombs from a multirole aircraft isnt going to hurt the enemy much..
Anyway can C-130 Hercules carry bombs? other den parachuters and
etc.. last time sit inside a C-130 very shiok feeling..my hand was so near to the door at mid-air..if accidentally pull the handle..can fly out liao LOL..
C-130 has many variants like AC-130 and stuff and MC-130 Combat Talons..
i know that our C-130 can air-cargo drop Bionix thats the beauty of
AIR+LAND working together -
And....to that someone here.......no one is rushing u for a reply, so..pls finished ur post b4 posted them.. rather than always going back and edited it again and again..there's also an preview button in case u dunno......hmmmm.... or are u trying to gain that +1 ........
-
Anyway with regards to sea missions i think
we could get Sea Harriers since our Endurance LST landing space is so wide..
Sea Harriers II can work as a force multiplier since they are better and can engage airbone and sea threats meanwhile the LST handle against underwater threats..
2 SEA harriers II per LST ..equipped with LSTs should be able to deal maximum damage
wherelse on land..we could use those LAND Based Harriers in case our landing area is destroyed..
wait for the latest version to come out..anyone saw True Lies?
thats the power of a harrier..
can even deploy on HDB estates..or remote jungles...
V-22 osprey can oso do quite well
Amphibious assault transport of troops, equipment and supplies from assault ships and land bases ,combat, combat support, combat service support, and Special Operations missions worldwide
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/v-22.htm
just take a look at one of the pictures of the V-22 Taking off..
imagine we could deploy 1 from Endurance LST..
or the Harrier II
very good planes to expand the RSN..
since young i have felt that RSAF and RSN are binded by 1 thing..Fokker and Harrier..Why?
Both air and sea operations can be done and intergration..
the Harrier II costs 23.7 million USD
and need 1 pple only instead of 2 pple..
http://www.hqmc.usmc.mil/factfile.nsf/7e931335d515626a8525628100676e0c/5306aebae2b024dd8525626e0048ccf7?OpenDocument
Hehe , if any war happens ..3 LST flanked with 6 harriers could actively engage any ships with harpoons , 1 group on Malacca strait
another group heading towards South china sea..
The total of 12 harriers purchased could..provide close air support to KC-135 then let the more powerful planes like the NGF to deal severe damage..
the most crucial part is..what u gonna do when the airstrip destroyed?
All? Who is going to fight off the enemy..while you repair the airstrip
the harrier can operate in extreme conditions..maybe something like jungle
and use a wide range of weapons..
if we dowan park at HDB estates ..we can park at LST or any of our NB
but problem is Harrier II abit old..
The F-35 has VTOL o.O (Vertical take off and landing)
anyway..If we get either Harrier II or F-35 its gonna be very good..
the problem is F-35 is developmental stage and the F-35 has been cited as a possible replacement of Harrier II..wonder if pple will sell us..likely to be in excess of 4 times the price of Harrier II ..
New planes these days..keep on getting more and more expensive..
getting better bang for your money though..
haiz 2025- 2040..MAN!!we will have to wait so long oso..
now get Harrier II oso like bo hua..
these 3 planes i mentioned above are also going to play supporting in any naval role -
First you must know the job requirement of the LSTs. The LST's capability is set so that it can perform amphibous operation from a small to low medium scale. Amphibous operation require the support of alot of CAS and heli support. Helicopters are required to carry vital logistic goods, equipments, SOFs or even for the fast dispatch of troops to one spot. So if the Harriers or the JSF will to be deployed on the LSTs, where our helicopter will going to go?
Our LSTs will only perform amphibous landings in area of interest within the reach of our fighters. It is possible to sent frequent and constant waves of fighters afar to the area of interest however it is near impossible to sent frequent and constant waves of support helicopter. Thus seeing the fact that the call of a helicopter support is vital and unpredictable at any one time, it is more feasible to deploy helicopter on board.
Base on the range of our support bombers, the A-4 certainly can cover a range of 1000km or less without any trouble. Thus dun worry about theatre air support, it can be provided by deployments from our home base. -
even pakistani with thier old kind of airforce stuff...can shoot that damned UAV india has..and the UAV is bought from israel
As what i had said, you do not need a technologically advanced force to shoot down UAVs. Primitive methods like hunting UAV using eye sight by riding on a helicopter can be done by any airforce, thus nothing to be astonish about. UAVs are vulnerable to a certain extent, however years of UAV operations in countless of battles proved the worth of UAVs.singapore's UAV as a matter of fact is bought from israel too
Our UAV inventory is a secret. Of corse we have models from Israel, other than that, no one is willing to talk about.they work on those ...areas which i know and im not going to say..
I think i know more about UAV than you. Dun ask me why, im not going to say. I believe a number of us here do.Those UAV are known to crash..many of times in fact and
That is a generalisation and it is not true. Take that a UAV searcher MK2 cost about 7.5million, a Global hawk cost also about 7.5million?
each UAV crash costs 1.5 millionthese UAV also has a limited range...and life..can only go for few hundred km
That is depending on what UAV u are talking about. ST plan to build a MAV-1 which have a range of a regular fighter. The Global hawk have a range of about 300 Nautical miles.and UAV since can be shot down by PAF ..which uses those AA guns and Ak-47..im just assuming that UAV itself..nah ain't very good
I think AK-47 is impossible. Unless the UAV flies at 200 meter from the ground, so that you can see it or you ride an helicopter and burn the UAV from the heli's cabin.Never saw a RSAF black color UAV before. =)
Wrong, the MAV-1 is black in colour. I think you have a very primitive view on UAVs. Too bad, new generation UAV isnt just a remote control plane which have cameras.
to me UAV is just a modified version of the remote control plane which has camera lens.
unless ur talking about global hawk or predator..stupid searcher is so outdated liaoz..zz..PAF has so much land to cover yet oso can shoot down..
It still fits our requirement.haiz whats the point of doing recon...with a 1.5million plane..anyway the UAV is gonna be obsolete soon..
I am telling you that it is not 1.5 million dollar.Far away from SG got good points
It is within range of our F-16s with 600gallon tanks and our A-4SUs.
-stop possibility of pre-empts
-out of range from fighter jets..without KC-135Near to SG oso quite good
Wrong, athough u can just need 5 minutes of formation. Once you are up, we can take u down with the I-hawk. We dun have to use UAV to detect air defense formation, Sat-intell and Humint will do the trick.
-strike timing needs just 5 minutes to form a formation
-Near to SG bombers.
-Increased vulnearability
-SG unable to detect build up of forces due to air defense presense
the only few things i like about SAF is..KC-135..good oil tanker on the air..but need escorts =/
The apaches were first designed to fight the soviet in temperate forest of eastern europe. So it speaks of it's capability to fight in the forest. No point using the apache to fight in Jungle, it will too thick for tanks to manoveur.
AWACs...
Apache..not really like lar..but the jungle enviroment i dun think is goodi oso don't think the Fearless PV is that good..
What is a PV? You need a frigate as a PV? U know nuts!
last time got a navy poster..
but i don't like..coz the ship small
so i replaced it with a HUGE nitmitz aircraft carrier poster
more majestic and chio -
Dear forumners,
I think SibeiSuayKia is here to cause trouble because some of his posts aint worth reading. It is either he really dont know the subject or he is here to find some entertainment. Sometimes in Asia-Pacific Defence Forum, we do meet this kind of troublemaker. Can we just ignore him (although it is hard to) and can the moderators please see into this matter.
Thankyou.
Yours faithfully,
Foxtrout8. -
The A4-SU is slow and the Gs that it is able to pull is low..Originally posted by foxtrout8:First you must know the job requirement of the LSTs. The LST's capability is set so that it can perform amphibous operation from a small to low medium scale. Amphibous operation require the support of alot of CAS and heli support. Helicopters are required to carry vital logistic goods, equipments, SOFs or even for the fast dispatch of troops to one spot. So if the Harriers or the JSF will to be deployed on the LSTs, where our helicopter will going to go?
Our LSTs will only perform amphibous landings in area of interest within the reach of our fighters. It is possible to sent frequent and constant waves of fighters afar to the area of interest however it is near impossible to sent frequent and constant waves of support helicopter. Thus seeing the fact that the call of a helicopter support is vital and unpredictable at any one time, it is more feasible to deploy helicopter on board.
Base on the range of our support bombers, the A-4 certainly can cover a range of 1000km or less without any trouble. Thus dun worry about theatre air support, it can be provided by deployments from our home base.
the aircraft's airframe itself is weak..
the helicopters could be based around in the offshore islands like in pedra branca etc etc or more towards land based ops..
The LST is good in terms of dropping off the ampibious assault boats..
im thinking of a double prone attack of attacking thru boats and giving aerial support..the helicopter is not really geared towards attacking but for logistics and transportation
The A4-SU's payload is really low..drop 1 or 2 bombs destroy 1 building only..
im talking about the need for larger bombers..
Carrying more bombs will only make the 50 year old A4 weaker
the A4-SU is also unable to fly without escorts..and air supremacy..
Ya helicopter is good when it comes to navigational duties etc and rescue..
i admit..it can handle a multiple roles..
But the key role in war is still attacking..although the other parts do play a role too..
Umm base on ur suggestion , then prolly a Harrier II and a helicopter?
Cuz the LST all oso require alot of air support..so mah fan
even with on board Land-Air missile gear i oso don't think we can effectively hit the plane..its easier to air to hit land..
What? you call me nuts??
ur freaking fearless patrol vessel so small not majestic as the aircraft carrier..even as individual oso not as garang..
I-Hawk is old..and is like the Blood hound system which we got last time
trouble maker? as in?
Ban me hahaha? for doing military speculation?
if u were doing that in real life i would sue you for defamation
under the singapore's judiciary system
Read
Libel or slander "per se" is a defamatory statement made about a subject that, taking the words alone, is so offensive that the law will presume that it caused harm to the subject without any proof that the statement actually caused harm. It is defamation per se to make libelous or slanderous comments about a personÂ’s business or professional character or reputation. The subject need not prove that such comments actually caused him to lose customers or business; rather the law will presume that he was harmed. (Saying "Fred stole money from the companyÂ’s petty cash box" may be defamation even if Fred cannot prove that he was demoted or lost his job because of the statement.)
Under the SG forums commandments
1. Do not spam.
2. Do not advertise.
3. Do not cross-post.
4. Do not do anything illegal.
5. Do not try to subvert the profanity filter.
6. Do not post anything racist.
7. Adult oriented topics are allowed only in the 'Bar' forum.
8. Buying and selling is allowed only in the 'Marketplace' forum. This is only for personal items and not for any commercial business.
9. If you have to ask "but can I do this?", do not do it.
I , SibeiSuayKia, member of the Sgforums do declare as at July 31st 2004 that i have not violated or intentionally any of the SG forums setted by moderators as of 1999. If i have offend anyone unknowingly and subconsciously, please do accept my humble apologies[/b] -
The A4-SU is slow and the Gs that it is able to pull is low..
The A-4SU's speed make it a good CAS aircraft. The airframe is not weak, infact it is one of the most reliable fighter in the world.
the aircraft's airframe itself is weak..the helicopters could be based around in the offshore islands like in pedra branca etc etc or more towards land based ops..
Cannot, in any amphibous operation we take the assumption that the enemy firmly secure any ground within and fringing the area making a addition FARP near impossible. It is also hard to find islands near the landing site to support the landing.The LST is good in terms of dropping off the ampibious assault boats..
You had said it yourself that heli is for logistics and transportation and thus it is important. You cannot replace the heli with a harrier.
im thinking of a double prone attack of attacking thru boats and giving aerial support..the helicopter is not really geared towards attacking but for logistics and transportationThe A4-SU's payload is really low..drop 1 or 2 bombs destroy 1 building only..
Go and do your research of A4SU's payload.
im talking about the need for larger bombers..Carrying more bombs will only make the 50 year old A4 weaker
You need air support even if you operate Harriers or JSF from LST. It make no difference.
the A4-SU is also unable to fly without escorts..and air supremacy..Umm base on ur suggestion , then prolly a Harrier II and a helicopter?
Then the amount of total helicopter carried is not enough, the amount of firepower that 4 harrier provide is also insufficient. -
-edit double post-
-
im talking about heavier bombs like GBU stuffs =X
Anyway just wanna know if A4-Su can carry those bombs in which u see in those targeting camera..den after that.. a bomb explodes ..
just 1 bomb needed only.. last time it was said that
you need hundreds of bomb to hit 1 installation..
Whats the point of carrying 10 when it all hit civilian places?
incur civilian wrath? Smart bombs is the wayto go
im considering 1 or 2 Satellite guidance bombs after the fuselage need to carry missiles guns ..
and lotsa stuffs..
Air support im refering to comes with the LST itself that means not radioing the changi air base for any help..
if any Mig-29 comes and engage..the LST can handle it effectively and efficiently
4 Harrier may not work much of a difference
imagine how much difference between 4 harrier and 4 helicopters??
the 4 Harriers if effectively deployed with other RSAF fighters could turn other navies into a sitting duck like pearl harbor..
it reinforces the concept of a mini aircraft carrier..
just look at the sheer amount of power by just a few CBG in the iraq war..
4 Harrier..if carry good munitions and if catch the enemy sleeping..
could preempt and can down alot of warships
we could also use the Harrier II to weak down enemy's installations BEFORE doing the dropping of commandos and guards..
The LST itself is also a logistic ships..in the Gulf War II it has helped to refuel aircraft and ships..so.. i think not much help other then search and rescue and anti subwarfare..
considering the presense of 2 scorpene subs nearby..
and the presense of Fokker-50 ..is more den well equipped to handle it.. -
trouble maker? as in?
Im real and this is life. So try sueing me.
Ban me hahaha? for doing military speculation?
if u were doing that in real life i would sue you for defamation
under the singapore's judiciary systemRead
Am i accusing you? The very fact that you are creating trouble and alot of unhappiness here make you a trouble maker and I dun have the liberty to say that? Did i cause harm to you by saying that u are a trouble maker but in fact you aint one? Look at the above posts, the very fact that you cause trouble allow me to name you a troublemaker. The very fact that a killer kill someone allow others to call him a killer, he cant sue anyone with that.
Libel or slander "per se" is a defamatory statement made about a subject that, taking the words alone, is so offensive that the law will presume that it caused harm to the subject without any proof that the statement actually caused harm. It is defamation per se to make libelous or slanderous comments about a personÂ’s business or professional character or reputation. The subject need not prove that such comments actually caused him to lose customers or business; rather the law will presume that he was harmed. (Saying "Fred stole money from the companyÂ’s petty cash box" may be defamation even if Fred cannot prove that he was demoted or lost his job because of the statement.)Under the SG forums commandments
You are contridicting yourself. If you will to challenge me and want to sue me in real life, why plea for others to accept your humble apologies? Not sincere yeah?
1. Do not spam.
2. Do not advertise.
3. Do not cross-post.
4. Do not do anything illegal.
5. Do not try to subvert the profanity filter.
6. Do not post anything racist.
7. Adult oriented topics are allowed only in the 'Bar' forum.
8. Buying and selling is allowed only in the 'Marketplace' forum. This is only for personal items and not for any commercial business.
9. If you have to ask "but can I do this?", do not do it.
I , SibeiSuayKia, member of the Sgforums do declare as at July 31st 2004 that i have not violated or intentionally any of the SG forums setted by moderators as of 1999. If i have offend anyone unknowingly and subconsciously, please do accept my humble apologies
You did not do anything illegal however the very fact that you are prone to comment irresponsibly on things in which you are unsure of. Your ignorants and arrogance agitates kind souls who repeatedly try to explain things to you. -
Nope im just stating the laws..
hopefully we as a lawful citizen..won't breach the law..
just reminding someone to keep quiet..
and stop internet defamation..
and btw..that would be whatever that would happen to someone
like for example the "oei hong leong" defamation case..
And btw it wasn't targeting at you
unless your guilty of something? LOL
nah pals we're all singaporeans
but just share different views with regards to military
Some like it china manner
some like it india manner
some wanna do it the American manner
China's manner is to overwhelm enemy in last time history..by sending hundreds of thousands of troops
USA's manner is to plan carefully and strike key positions and using major force multipliers on the battlefield and using extremely high tech equipment to maintain it's position as best military in the world
Singapore's manner is to use technologically effectively to make up for shortfall of troops
My view is more of pro-american maybe? the concept i was speaking was a
D-Day sort of thing..
and btw americans in general love law alot and thats why they wanna sue here sue there =) =p -
im talking about heavier bombs like GBU stuffs
Guided bombs may and may not be heavy bombs. They could range from 500 pounds to 2000pounds.im considering 1 or 2 bombs after the fuselage need to carry missiles guns ..
I have seen A-4SU carrying multiple bomb racks, definately not one or two depending on the weight of the bomb.
and lotsa stuffsthe 4 Harriers if effectively deployed with other RSAF fighters could turn other navies into a sitting duck like pearl harbor..
If 4 Harriers have to be deployed with other RSAF fighters, must as well rely totally on RSAF fighters?it reinforces the concept of a mini aircraft carrier..
You know how much a light carrier cost? You know how much a carrier fleet cost? You know how much the political consequence cost?
just look at the sheer amount of power by just a few CBG in the iraq war..4 Harrier..if carry good munitions and if catch the enemy sleeping..
As far as im concern, the take off weight for a harrier to VTOL is much smaller than a A-4SU. If you are saying that the A-4SU cant carry much, then Harrier is not a plane for you.
could preempt and can down alot of warshipswe could also use the Harrier II to weak down enemy's installations BEFORE doing the dropping of commandos and guards..
F-16s from Tengah airbase or in the future cruisemissile from Frigates can do the job.The LST itself is also a logistic ships..in the Gulf War II it has helped to refuel aircraft and ships..so.. i think not much help other then search and rescue and anti subwarfare..
The LST have multiple roles, it can be a hospital ship, command ship, amphibious ship, logistic ship, replenisher...etc. -
shuff it up ur *** si liao lau bei go some somewhere else and cry, you should be happy that he no longer shuff it up ur*** but should feel sad as suayness will follow you till your last day on earth.
Below that mark out are from hear say, books, or TV and he say that himself all the time.Originally posted by SibeiSuayKia:Nah my marksmanship shooting is
PURE OILY M-16 AT 100 METRE RANGE IN Amoy camp
and btw that was my 1st time trying out
THe SAR-21 WAS THE PLACE where i queued up whole day to have a 1st hand civilian try at it.. 
and i tested the Mp-5..i like the weight and the machoness
the gun design is not bad.. which did you really test SAR21 or MP5. ya they even let you test fire 40/50, 60, 81, 105, that why 1 whole day The M-16 has a even distribution of weight around the whole gun regarding the Mp-5 the weight is more centered around the butt and the trigger
it was at point blank RANGE! yet he missed 2
yeap and 1 thing is for sure
Nuclear powered aircraft carrier travels at 40+ knots at top
American Naval Carriers at 1942..for example the Essex which carries 91 aircraft could achieve a speed of 32 knots 62 years apart compare what? no point go on, you cann't even say what hard ware to push the carrier but can only keep say nuclear is powerful, yes it is powerful, all in here know and you admitted it not unlimited but it last longer as you give way for you stand by go out of point
i was just assuming China uses 1 variety of missile
that is the sunburn missile
china FYI uses alot of varieties of stuff
Nah i was taking the [b]1.5 KILO per hour taken from the article above
lazy to convert into knots..
He Who Says Pple Act Smart and Pretend to Know Everything is better den himself acting dumb
pig save it for urself..make bak qua and shuff it up ur *** =)
go stimulate ur male G-spot his si lau bei always did that to him, cause him to be like this now.
anyway i heard the our Fearless PV travels at 20 knots ++?
Perhaps til SR-71 is comparable to MAV-1 den prolly maybe will be more shiok
Maybe we should get a B-52 H and upgrade it with AC-130 type of guns and rotary cannons and carry some SRAM tactical nukes and make it a even more lethal version of AC-130..
AC-130 is definitely a good weapon to look at after achieving air supremacy with F-16 and F-5 And the A4-SU..
After neutralizing the SAMs ..or the B-52 H modified could be used to go on a bombing run... on enemy bases.. I just happened to feel that A4-SU could not carry a wide range of payload for bombs..with more bombs around the fuselage ..but will reduce the ability to pull Gs and to dogfight.. dun need you to feel, when those dun know much, all the feel will be wrong...
i think if next time when expanding power..we should look at bomber plane instead of fighter/bomber..coz dropping off 1 or 2 bombs from a multirole aircraft isnt going to hurt the enemy much.. oso dun need you to think. Anyway can C-130 Hercules carry bombs? other den parachuters and
etc.. last time sit inside a C-130 very shiok feeling..my hand was so near to the door at mid-air..if accidentally pull the handle..can fly out liao LOL.. this show how siao he is.
C-130 has many variants like AC-130 and stuff and MC-130 Combat Talons..
i know that our C-130 can air-cargo drop Bionix thats the beauty of
AIR+LAND working together -
internet defamation? noone here needs to defame you. you just did us that favour yourself. hahahahaha. i love reading this thread just to see what a stupid incompentent blabbering idiot you are. oh, and please please please, sue me.
-
SibeiSuayKia, you are free to post whatever you wish, but remember that this is a forum, and any thing you post will get a reply of sorts.Take them in good faith, if you disagree, back up with your proof or evidence.If you cannot take others commenting on your posts, then go find some obscure Zimbabwean publishing house, publish them and marvel over your own genius in the comfort of your living room.
-
Its simply crazy ...full loading the A4-SU with bombs with no eyes that means bombs that hit anywhere in the country..might kill some civilians
with bombs..the A4 gets tougher to fly..because of the weight..with bombs you also need to carry more fuel tanks due to more power needed..
with all those stuff..the A-4 is definitely unable to defend itself..
A Fully loaded A4-SU without bombs would leave very little stuff for bombs..
i read up and the 1 or 2 smart bomb considering u use each 2000 pounds
don't forget if carry max payload ..the plane might sometimes not be able to take it
my suggestion would be a few AIM-9X + double cannon..
and 1 or 2 smart bomb satellite guidance
My 2.4km timing 9minute and half niah..
haiz so long never exercise actually should be blow that =p
Rely totally?
Nah i was in the C-130 as a flight all over singapore..just like to loiter around the door ROFL...saw parts of marina south..and sentosa..
A4-SU cannot carry multiple bomb rack if u equip it with other weapons and fuel tanks..that if it a trouble happens and A4-SU might need to defend itself when enemy planes come
Considering we left with 2000 pounds after equipping with cannons+ double tanks and missiles..
each bomb is 1000 pounds..this make perfect equation
War Scenario 1
what if RSAF's airstrip ALL kana destroy..(there might be a narrow possibility)
and u have 12 Harriers II left with advanced avionics available..hidden all over in HDB's ..the 12 Harriers II could actively engage the enemies WHILE u repair the airstrip..sure the 12 Harrier II may not be that good..considering u need 3 hours to repair..u can fight and chase them off..while the airstrip get repaired..
the hangar might be damage considering that we use hardened air shelter..
oh ya i tested the SAR-21 at point blank
the 1st 1 was M-16 at 100 metre..no point blank moving targets quite fast
LST can do alot of jobs thats why we need not use the helicopter for those jobs...we also might try equiping 2 LST side by side 1 with harrier 1 with helicopters..
War Scenario 2
Combined country fleet attack us..together with warplanes..RSAF planes overstretched even though operationally ready..airplanes coming from down and south..KC-135 all fully deployed..and the fuel inside is almost used up.
Commandos,Guards all requesting for bombardment of a coast in a hostile country before landing..helicopter from LST unable to do the job..since under-equipped and built for sub operations.
2 Steps to take..either use helicopter to clear the shore..(ignoring the existence of the 20 apaches which has been used to counter the massive amount of enemies coming from southern islands)
people decides to use the helicopter..with a door-machine gun and decides to pound the coast using the fixed gun inside the copter
enemy's coastal defense spots helicopter..fires missile and igla at it..
helicopter..being slower and lower in altitude compared to other fighter jets..
get shot down
Harrier II takes off with MK-82 bombs
and AGM-65 mavs..moves 9 o clock towards target..at mach 1..
drops off the MK-82 bombs..hit successfully onto target..
saw a few tanks hiding..together with tankers..engage with AGM-65 using IR
(Air-ground missile)AGM note that..
guards and commandos arrive after 15 minutes of pounding in fast speed boats..
just take a look at the awe and power
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/harrier/harrier3.html
The problem is..we must always prepare for PLAN B!
and we might not get F-35..i suggest we get EuroFighter+12 harrier II
if they disturb us...we can use the 12 Harriers II to destroy them. like in true lies..
i might be talking crap to you all now
but i love my country..Singapore ! thats why we must be prepared !
RSAF was built to bite rather then to defend
with lets say 4 harriers on 2 LST ...travel up the northern coast..
we can attack from the top..and if we got a aircraft carrier LAGI BEST
foreign aircraft coming back to singapore can park on the aircraft carrier =X
we can attack from the LST and from the southern part thus creating a double prong..lets say AIRFIELD DOWN
planes coming from our other countries arrive as backup..the pilots would be DAMN tired..our 12 harriers II can handle for 12 hours while they rest..
then the F-16 which is parked on other countries would take over once the harrier pilots get tired -
Its simply crazy ...full loading the A4-SU with bombs with no eyes that means bombs that hit anywhere in the country..might kill some civilians
The take off weight of a A-4SU is larger than a Harrier prepared for VTOL. If you are saying that with the bombs, the A-4 get tougher to fly, it goes the same with the Harriers.
with bombs..the A4 gets tougher to fly..because of the weight..with bombs you also need to carry more fuel tanks due to more power needed..
with all those stuff..the A-4 is definitely unable to defend itself..A Fully loaded A4-SU without bombs would leave very little stuff for bombs..
As i said, the take off weight of the A-4 is larger than the Harrier. No point toking about how little a A-4 can carry and suggest a harrier. Btw, you had seem to forgot totally about our F-16s, what make you think that we wont send them..
i read up and the 1 or 2 smart bomb considering u use each 2000 pounds
don't forget if carry max payload ..the plane might sometimes not be able to take itA4-SU cannot carry multiple bomb rack if u equip it with other weapons and fuel tanks..that if it a trouble happens and A4-SU might need to defend itself when enemy planes come
Comeon, in any CAS operation, there will be escorting figthers. What make you so sure that your harriers dun have to defend itself or what make you sure that your harriers can defend itself much better? Any CAS fighter will lose out to Figthers delicated to wipe them off....
My point is even with harriers or with A-4SUs, you still need figther cover. Thus why propose an aircraft which is much expensive than the A-4SU and yet carry a lower weight. Since our A-4SUs can do a better job and air cover is always required, let it be. -
The problem is..which general is going to risk it all
by not arming the A4-SU with AIM-9X and stuffs
i rather they carry 1 or 2 JDAM smart bombs which hit the target rather den 10 to 20 bombs which spread over target..if miss might kill some innocent pple
the SAF is not a merciless killing force..if it is..then it would have lost it's principle in the 1st place
Furthermore, even though there may be escorts , there may be alot of problems when it comes to escort..the formation might need to break up sometimes to engage enemies coming from different directions
when the fighter escorts..say F-16 engaging up 12 o clock north faces
threats from 3 and 9 o clock at a similar timing ...the A4-SU might need to defend itself..
F-16 will be used for bigger missions..of course =)
But im thinking that the F-16 will go first in the event of a conflict to maintain aerial superiority
A4-SU and Harrier II..which 1 better?
A-4 has not seen any major conflicts since Falklands war..
but Argentinian A-4 has managed to fire a missile onto a british warship..causing severe damage
A4-concept was in 1950+
whereelse Harrier II ...is in 1970+ same age as F-16 and F-18
IMHO A-4 should have been phrased out due to it's weak airframe and inability to pull Gs.. even though with advanced avionics
it is the equivalent of upgrading a WWII Spitfire aircraft with ability to fire AIM-120 AMRAAM
The Harrier II is better then the A4-SU is many aspects..
for example the Harrier II does not require runways.
Just imagine..if a guerilla group manage to steal a Harrier II jet and operate it against the police force in the area..
They can VTOL ... hit and run... come out from hidden locations..conduct ambushes..
The most significant edge is indeed still VTOL , i must stress..
Helicopters are also VTOL ... but why a fighter jet VTOL?
It combines many platforms together..and also boosts the concept..of defending singapore..we must be prepared for many scenarios..one of which enemy might attack and destroy runways and remember nothing is 100%
as i have highlighted in my above war scenario 1..it is indeed crucial for VTOL even as for a naval aircraft or a RSAF plane..
If it is not crucial..why even F-35 SVTOL variants in the first place?
The Harrier II in simple terms..has easy take off and landing as a helicopter
but PACKS the punch of a fighter plane.
The Harrier II may be weaker and require CAS..but one should not ignore the ability of it..
Like a guerilla warfare machine..Lets push our scenario back to southern islands of singapore..
If the main runways are gone..(ignore the usage of highways for tengah jets)
the southern islands are TOO small to have any..stretched run way for F-16 or A4-Su..
solution? get the Harrier II ASAP...