Wish List for SAF 2006-2016
-
What equipment do you think we will possibly purchase in this time period to replace old weapons or to add new capabilities? Perhaps to make this even more interesting we could suggest the competitors vying for any future SAF contracts and perhaps estimate numbers to be acquired...
e.g. 6 or 8 new guided missile corvettes for the navy, possible competitors are an enlarged development of the Swedish Visby class, advanced variant of the Israeli Saar 5 class, or a more heavily armed version of the ST Marine 81m OPV design.
Probably in the 2011-2013 timeframe. -
Why not JSF-35 VTOL planes to be purchased as our air-force runway space is getting scarced.
-
Yes hopefully we will acquire a squadron of F-35B VTOL warplanes alongside larger numbers of the conventional F-35A. Anyone has a good guess as to when we will start retiring our F-16 fleet so as to justify acquiring larger numbers of these planes?Originally posted by larrenV2.003:Why not JSF-35 VTOL planes to be purchased as our air-force runway space is getting scarced. -
Very difficult as lockheed is modifying them to be flown sky high as a recognaissance plane...so it is actually or maybe RSAF is using F-16 as a backup juz like our SAR-21 in operation but M-16 in stnadby & guard duty also...Originally posted by Delta 5:Yes hopefully we will acquire a squadron of F-35B VTOL warplanes alongside larger numbers of the conventional F-35A. Anyone has a good guess as to when we will start retiring our F-16 fleet so as to justify acquiring larger numbers of these planes?
-
Another thing... New generation supersonic anti-ship missiles such as the Norwegian NSM missile are a must if we are to maintain parity against regional navies which are building/buying larger numbers of new surface combatants.
It seems odd that our new La Fayette FFGs which are equipped with the state of the art Aster 15 SAM system and other advanced systems continue to rely on the Harpoon anti-ship missile as their primary weapon.
-
So does the most powerful navy in the world? Whats ur gripe against the harpoon ?
-
The Harpoon missile first entered service in 1978 and has been upgraded numerous times since. However, even when compared to Soviet missiles of that era such as the AS-6 Kingfish and SS-N-12 'Sandbox' the Harpoon was at best mediocre in performance. The Soviet weapons had ranges of over 500km and had 2,200lb warheads as compared to the 500lb warhead of the Harpoon, not to mention higher speeds. The USA however had large numbers of Harpoons and since Soviet ships were not renown for their air defences, the capability was judged to be adequate, especially against SAMs like the SA-N-1 Goa and SA-N-3b Goblet meant primarily for the anti-aircraft role. The Harpoon missile was in fact a small part of the USN's anti-ship strategy which included the striking power of its over 60 SSNs and 12 aircraft carrier battle groups.Originally posted by Shotgun:So does the most powerful navy in the world? Whats ur gripe against the harpoon ?
In recent years, new weapons such as the SS-N-26 (Yakhont) and SS-N-27 'Sizzler' offer performance surpassing even that of the Harpoon Block 2. New European missiles such as the MM40 Exocet Block 3 and NSM also present a potent threat to ships not equipped with adequate air defences. Singapore currently has the largest anti-ship missile inventory in the region comprising of several hundred Gabriel 2 and Harpoon missiles. However, they represent older technology and several shots would be required against modern warships operated by several SEA countries to ensure a kill. A supersonic weapon coupled with stealth characteristics would greatly increase the killing power of our surface fleet.
Any conflicting views are welcome. Lets keep this thread alive. -
I want locally-made light tanks to replace our existing antiquated AMX-13SM1s and locally-made MBTs as well.
The new MBTs will be called the Optimus. The new light tanks will be called the Rodimus. -
AUTOBOTS TRANSFORM!Originally posted by fudgester:I want locally-made light tanks to replace our existing antiquated AMX-13SM1s and locally-made MBTs as well.
The new MBTs will be called the Optimus. The new light tanks will be called the Rodimus.
hahaa
Yea i would like to see a new light tank -
Perhaps if we were to be up against ships of DD class and above, i would agree that we need a bigger and longer reaching missile.Originally posted by Delta 5:The Harpoon missile first entered service in 1978 and has been upgraded numerous times since. However, even when compared to Soviet missiles of that era such as the AS-6 Kingfish and SS-N-12 'Sandbox' the Harpoon was at best mediocre in performance. The Soviet weapons had ranges of over 500km and had 2,200lb warheads as compared to the 500lb warhead of the Harpoon, not to mention higher speeds. The USA however had large numbers of Harpoons and since Soviet ships were not renown for their air defences, the capability was judged to be adequate, especially against SAMs like the SA-N-1 Goa and SA-N-3b Goblet meant primarily for the anti-aircraft role. The Harpoon missile was in fact a small part of the USN's anti-ship strategy which included the striking power of its over 60 SSNs and 12 aircraft carrier battle groups.
In recent years, new weapons such as the SS-N-26 (Yakhont) and SS-N-27 'Sizzler' offer performance surpassing even that of the Harpoon Block 2. New European missiles such as the MM40 Exocet Block 3 and NSM also present a potent threat to ships not equipped with adequate air defences. Singapore currently has the largest anti-ship missile inventory in the region comprising of several hundred Gabriel 2 and Harpoon missiles. However, they represent older technology and several shots would be required against modern warships operated by several SEA countries to ensure a kill. A supersonic weapon coupled with stealth characteristics would greatly increase the killing power of our surface fleet.
Any conflicting views are welcome. Lets keep this thread alive.
Looking at the waters around us, I really don't think we need a missile that can reach 500km or pack more than 500lb per warhead. When it comes to anti ship missiles, i believe most definitely more than 1 missile would be fired at each target since 1 on its own would most likely get shot down.
And as for a stealthy missile... well unless its seeker is of a passive nature. Maybe infra-red or tv guided. If its gonna be an active seeking missile, stealth is not gonna be a huge concern since the ESM of most ships would pick up the missiles radar?
I agree that we need missiles that are REALLY fast. The faster your bullet, the better the chances of the shooter's survival. -
the seas around us are crowded. Supersonic/long ranged ASMs are more likely to hit an oil tanker when fired
-
I would rather we have more MPA aircraft and a few JSTARs/E-3Bs would be nice.Originally posted by sgFish:the seas around us are crowded. Supersonic/long ranged ASMs are more likely to hit an oil tanker when fired
For the RSN, two LPDs for helicopter and relief forces. -
I'd like to see an update on the weapons in our standard infantry section,
with the advent of the SAR21, we don't have a magazine commonality between our SAW, and our assult rifles (can someone clarify this ? I'm 2.5G army. last time with the M16S1 this is solved by drilling two lobang on the side of every M16 mags, so the SAW will accept M16 mags. is the new SAR21 mag compatible with the SAW ? ... )
same goes for the M203/M16 combo ... it seem weird to me that we'd be supporting two different assault rifle platforms; SAR and M203/M16 platforms. shouldn't we be trying to to streamline the logistics ? -
development and production of a Helicopter for use for army\navy\airforce
-
I say we buy Black Hawks to replace the retired UH-1Hs.Originally posted by Lance_han:development and production of a Helicopter for use for army\navy\airforce -
2016? ROD loh!
-
4 batteries of long-range SAMs comprising 16-24 launch vehicles. Possible candidates are the French Aster 30, Israeli Arrow 2 or American Patriot. These examples are listed in order of my personal preferred choice. Since our Navy has ordered the Aster 15 it seems logical for the Air Force to order the longer-range counterpart.
This is to fill the gap in long-range ground based air defence since the retirement of the Bloodhound Mk 2 (28 launchers) in 1990. -
I'd go for a combination of the Aster 30 and the Arrow 2 ABM.Originally posted by Delta 5:4 batteries of long-range SAMs comprising 16-24 launch vehicles. Possible candidates are the French Aster 30, Israeli Arrow 2 or American Patriot. These examples are listed in order of my personal preferred choice. Since our Navy has ordered the Aster 15 it seems logical for the Air Force to order the longer-range counterpart.
This is to fill the gap in long-range ground based air defence since the retirement of the Bloodhound Mk 2 (28 launchers) in 1990.
The Patriot is not that effective despite the media blitz.Perhaps future integration of the Aster 30 onto our FFGs. -
Well!! i dont really have any wish list! Just one GET THAT IDIOTIC LOOKING AMX-13 OUR OF MY SIGHT
-
Why throw the decoy away?Originally posted by Orcishwarrior:Well!! i dont really have any wish list! Just one GET THAT IDIOTIC LOOKING AMX-13 OUR OF MY SIGHT 
-
So you agree to having the Optimus and Rodimus tanks I talked about?Originally posted by Orcishwarrior:Well!! i dont really have any wish list! Just one GET THAT IDIOTIC LOOKING AMX-13 OUR OF MY SIGHT -
Originally posted by fudgester:So you agree to having the Optimus and Rodimus tanks I talked about?
Actually a medium tank with steel armour capable of modular armour add-ons armed with a 120mm smoothbore main gun would serve our needs well. It would have state of the art fire control and an autoloader meaning it is manned by 3 men and low-observability features.
500 units could be built to replace all the AMX-13SM1, AMX-10PAC-90 and Centurion Mk 13 tanks.
These are all the tanks that we have (revealed to the public ) that need replacement. -
yea get rid of the AMX, even with all the upgrades its shelf life has been stretched to the max. Store them up as reserves or something or use them as trainers.
-
I don't think they will even suffice as trainers... Probably the only fate that awaits them in a few years is dismantling and scrapping.Originally posted by donchoo:yea get rid of the AMX, even with all the upgrades its shelf life has been stretched to the max. Store them up as reserves or something or use them as trainers. -
Maybe they can give them away to NUS/NTU for study purposes... the way our Skyhawks have ended up.Originally posted by Delta 5:I don't think they will even suffice as trainers... Probably the only fate that awaits them in a few years is dismantling and scrapping.