Singapore's procurement blunders

• ^Delta^

  11 Feb 07, 22:08

  Originally posted by CM06:

  Yeah try cleaning 8 barrels + vehicle+ mg + missle launcher + engine...nsf/ns men will curse you for your suggestions.
  
  That aside, the igla has good enough coverage for armour ops. 4 missiles ready to fire to engage 2 flying targets + ifv mg fire + tank canister + 25 mm = alot of projectiles in the air while the armour run away and call for CAP.

  Missiles like these are sealed in canisters and require minimal maintanence. The other components you mentioned exist in just about any SAF vehicle. And no. I know of many dedicated NSFs/NSmen who dun mind spending a few more minutes cleaning the exterior of 4 additional missile tubes. A few minutes to save us all from being chopped to bits by air delivered enemy cluster muntions.
  
  And no. Our armour does not operate like that. CAP is standard in any armoured thrust and it is not called on only when needed.
• CM06

  11 Feb 07, 23:34

  Originally posted by ^Delta^:

  Missiles like these are sealed in canisters and require minimal maintanence. The other components you mentioned exist in just about any SAF vehicle. And no. I know of many dedicated NSFs/NSmen who dun mind spending a few more minutes cleaning the exterior of 4 additional missile tubes. A few minutes to save us all from being chopped to bits by air delivered enemy cluster muntions.
  
  And no. Our armour does not operate like that. CAP is standard in any armoured thrust and it is not called on only when needed.

  Actually i was referring to shotgun's Tung M1..yeah it's a burden and they -will- clean it many willingly...i'm just saying there will be a good number who will curse while doing it. On a note, i thought the Tung M1s AA guns are 4 on each side? Hence what i meant by 8 barrels.
  
  and i know how our armour works hence why i said the igla's good enough in the earlier scenario(it's against helis, less likely vs low flying aircraft) i'm wrong about calling in cap, yes i know what aerial conditions(neutral/clear skies) are set as when we do the "stuff" i mixed up with calling for cas...entirely different thing.
  
  I have seen the igla thingy it aint top notch but i have a feeling it's already an upgrade vs nothing in the past especially to the lower echelons. I do hope we get something better in the future. Yeah i meant since we can make iglas locally and then maybe we can make a much better sam with r&d by ourselves.
• Shotgun

  11 Feb 07, 23:46

  I don't think a CAP is always around in an armored thrust as suggested. If you have enemy ADA activity, there will be problems. Enemy air activitiy, also will be problems. Severely bad weather and visibility (common in the tropics, and countries around indon.) , also problems operating at lower altitudes.
  
  Relying on CAP as ur sole defense against enemy air activity isn't smart.
• CM06

  11 Feb 07, 23:46

  Originally posted by tek_koh:

  i agree with some of you guys above
  Flop1:Vastergotland
  Flop2:F-15Es( we have been talking bout that since u know when)
  Flop3:Sar 21( lilttle too heavy and bulky...too short for tall soldier like me)
  
  but dont forget the good buys
  1:Leopard(Best perforamce tanks around)
  2:Missile Corvette (Small but capable enough vessel)
  3.F-16( Something to do everything)

  Actually from other forums(ldf), ask tankee, many more experience military-linked forumers believe that the vastergotland and f-15es are very good a choice made by our saf. I forgot what they said about the subs but it's something like almost as good with new tech (aip) and much cheaper, better than anything else in the region. As for the F-15s, it would be the most advance ones in the world when those land on our shores. It's a hi-lo aircraft mix. F-16s for the cap/cas (dogfighting?). F-15s for the air superiority(Aesa, bvvr engagements correct me if i'm wrong) and Deep strikes (very long range + huge payloads) Just imagine a F-16D with TWO engines... heh.
  
  As for the SAR-21 it has it's quirks but it sure fits great in the matchbox! Besides you can rambo with one hand! Anyway the sar debate is on another thread so excuse my ranting!
• storm_freaky13

  11 Feb 07, 23:52

  Well thats what my teacher told me about the cracks, not sure if they used X-Rays (or some radiowave thing) to check it out. But its also common knowledge that the F-404 engine was overpowered for the old airframe. Nonetheless, it improved the performance drastically.
  
  Most of the pilots still love the Skyhawk citing its like driving a sportscar. I too love it because of its shape.
• storm_freaky13

  12 Feb 07, 00:03

  Im considered a relatively tall fella but i feel that the SAR-21's length is very good. I personally feel that the M-16 is too long. im 1.80m in height.
  
  Well perhaps i prefer compact weapons then again who doesnt? In a modern Urban setting, M-16s are too long for effective room clearing. Its hard to swivel around quickly but of course anyone can argue that it is a formidable weapon in the right hands but for a citizen army such as ours, easy to use is key and thats where the SAR-21 shines.
  
  To me I dont think its as big a flop as retiring the Hueys. The SP pilots are way overworked. With so many choppers gone, the CH-47s and SPs have to cover their work and the pilots fly more hours than any other aircraft a week.
  
  This isnt a procurement blunder but more like a retiring blunder. the RSAF should have gotten replacement choppers first, need not cover 1 for 1 but at least a few would be good.
• SingaporeTyrannosaur

  12 Feb 07, 01:17

  There's far more to procurement then simply getting the best and biggest guns at the moment... else you might end up like a certain northern country that has a mess of different weapons systems that is a nightmare to keep up with.
  
  One has to consider the politics, economics and what have you not of the weapons you are buying. You can get the best fighter jet but it ends up costing you a bomb and you realize you lack the skills and manpower to support it... you would find it a lot less useful then if you had used your brains a little and thought through it a little more.
  
  The merits and quirks of the SAR-21 has been discussed quite a lot in another thread, it would make for an interesting read once you get past some of the heated debate.
  
  But AFAIK, there does not seem to be any real reason to consider the weapon a flop once all things have been considered. The additional weight of the weapon comes from the nick nacks that in the standard variant and all things factored it the weapon isn't obese compared to it's other counterparts (in fact it is often lighter). As for bullpup versus conventional it is another debate altogether. I am a bullpup person though, and I like the weapon pretty much.
  
  But going for German rifles? Sure they are popular but given the way things currently are, there is no reason to sub out the SAR-21 for the H&K. I believe one of the things that made the SAR extremely attractive to the SAF was that it was extremely cost effective for the features it provides.
  
  As for the Igla, I think the rationale behind it went that it has a similar preformance envelope to the Stinger (which was also considered) but was a lot cheaper. Hence by using two Iglas together one gets a higher hit rate then the Stinger at a lower cost... but at a cost in mobility though. But Manpads knocking down Su-30s at high altitude and speed? I'm not sure any Manpad in the world can do it reliably.
  
  
• ^Delta^

  12 Feb 07, 01:18

  Originally posted by Shotgun:

  I don't think a CAP is always around in an armored thrust as suggested. If you have enemy ADA activity, there will be problems. Enemy air activitiy, also will be problems. Severely bad weather and visibility (common in the tropics, and countries around indon.) , also problems operating at lower altitudes.
  
  Relying on CAP as ur sole defense against enemy air activity isn't smart.

  Yes especially with growing numbers of Su-27 Flankers and their Su-30 counterparts present in increasing numbers in the neighbourhood, we cannot be complacent.
• Seth35

  12 Feb 07, 01:25

  Quad SA-18 SAMs on M113 APCs:
  A novel, low cost solution indeed. Probably effective against low level air threats but a more effective solution will be needed against higher level threats. A system in the class of the Russian SA-15 will be needed. (Not that I advocate buying Russian arms, but a more capable system with a full range of sensors and 8 missiles per unit is advisable)
  
  

  Hey i thought they had the IGLAS mounted on top
• Shotgun

  12 Feb 07, 02:10

  Yeah, I think I've seen those as well.
  
  But I thinking if having mechanised shorads like the Tunguska M1, would be more effective. The IGLA doesn't really have a fantastic pK. A hail of gunfire, with a couple of SA-19s can quickly ruin a CAS sortie.
  
  Better pK, and still retain mobility. Why not?
• gary1910

  12 Feb 07, 07:36

  Actually the Mechanised Igla do not operate alone but as a batt perhaps 4~6 with a mixed of IFU (Intergated Fire Unit) and WFU(Weapons Fire Unit) and not neccesary together but spread out to cover the AO.
  
  Weapon Fire Unit (WFU ) has the 4 Igla lanuchers, IRST optronics for targeting ,and network computer....
  
  Next we have the Intergrated Fire Unit (IFU), it's not only have what the WFU have as montioned above but extra thing like the surveillance/search & tracking radar( the dustbin like radardome), IFF and battle management system ( a wireless network computer).
  
  So for example now say a battery of 6, and say 2 IFU and 4 WFUs in that battery and they are operating together with CAD giving air defence cover for the CAD in that airspace sector.
  
  So it represent a great improvement over the RBS-70 on V200 with Giraffe radar.
  
  And the system itself does not mean that it could only operate Igla, if it is neccessary , it could be upgraded with other better VSHORAD missile in the future while retaining the all the other major system like radar, BMS, IRST optronics etc.
  
  In fact , it is quite similar to the German Ozelot.
  
  The PK of Igla is abt 60% and 40& with ECM but when 2 missiles is launched , it will increase by another 50%.
  
  According to what I have heard , Igla was chosen becos it is cheap, in fact very much cheaper than for example the Mistral, one of the VSHORADs in our inventory.
  
  So using surplus hull of M113s with the introduction of BX, Mechanised Igla means great saving for SAF than to buy foreign system.
• Fingolfin_Noldor

  12 Feb 07, 10:00

  If we want to shoot down Sukhois, then we have to turn to the land variant of the Aster, or the Russian S300 or any of the equivalents. I'm not sure if the US has an equivalent though it has mounted AMRAAM on some vehicles.
• CM06

  12 Feb 07, 10:31

  No, if we have to shoot down sukhois then our air force has been terminated already.
  
  As gary said our ada is a comprehensive network. Upgrading it wont take lots of time but at the current senario, it's more than sufficient. Perhaps in the future we will get better shorads.
• spencer99

  12 Feb 07, 14:17

  Originally posted by gary1910:

  Actually the Mechanised Igla do not operate alone but as a batt perhaps 4~6 with a mixed of IFU (Intergated Fire Unit) and WFU(Weapons Fire Unit) and not neccesary together but spread out to cover the AO.
  
  Weapon Fire Unit (WFU ) has the 4 Igla lanuchers, IRST optronics for targeting ,and network computer....
  
  Next we have the Intergrated Fire Unit (IFU), it's not only have what the WFU have as montioned above but extra thing like the surveillance/search & tracking radar( the dustbin like radardome), IFF and battle management system ( a wireless network computer).
  
  So for example now say a battery of 6, and say 2 IFU and 4 WFUs in that battery and they are operating together with CAD giving air defence cover for the CAD in that airspace sector.
  
  So it represent a great improvement over the RBS-70 on V200 with Giraffe radar.
  
  And the system itself does not mean that it could only operate Igla, if it is neccessary , it could be upgraded with other better VSHORAD missile in the future while retaining the all the other major system like radar, BMS, IRST optronics etc.
  
  In fact , it is quite similar to the German Ozelot.
  
  The PK of Igla is abt 60% and 40& with ECM but when 2 missiles is launched , it will increase by another 50%.
  
  According to what I have heard , Igla was chosen becos it is cheap, in fact very much cheaper than for example the Mistral, one of the VSHORADs in our inventory.
  
  So using surplus hull of M113s with the introduction of BX, Mechanised Igla means great saving for SAF than to buy foreign system.

  Actually, after reading the above post, i tend to agree that the Igla/M113 combi seems to be the best.... u r right, we can always upgrade the missile while retaining the rest of the system....
  
  hmm.. i wonder why they didn't have a gun/missile combi....
  
• justcooler

  12 Feb 07, 15:04

  How you classify the procurement as a blunder are totally influence by
  1) Personal perspective (the organisation, weapon and seller)
  2) understanding of the weapon system
  3) what role does the weapon plays, integrate, deploy, etc, etc...
  4) How much you know about the whole picture
  
  SAR 21 is a very good example, heard of it, read it on review, not till my 2nd incamp did i really have the chance to play with it.
  
  Personally i found it very accurate (tested in 100m only, never try the run down), easy to handle, versatile. But never used it in under continuous exerices condition. Location of switches are all around the place, and lots of small parts and compartments to clean.
  
  But confidence level with SAR21 is till low. i will still prefer the m16. Does this mean that the 21 is a worst off weapon then 16, NO. It is just perference and confidence level.
  
  Further, one of the many weapon system that is made in singapore and selling worldwide.
  
  What we procure will be tested by us, and in time upgraded to more advance level that suit our need. Else why are we spending so much on defence. It is also another business
  
  
• storywolf

  12 Feb 07, 15:08

  I am not sure if what you folks mention as blunders !!!
  
  First A4- skyhawk
  I happend to talk to the pilots who flew them, I can tell you non of them want to trade it with a hawk 200 ! With the upgrade, they basically even out manuover the f-5 !!! If the pilots who flew it feel it is good, then why we call it a blunder based on some hear say of some folks.
  
  SAR-21 Assault Rifles:
  If it been review by top defense magzine, and give top points by gun expert. Also remember the SAR-21 has different version, just because you do not like the standard version as some feel it is heavier does not mean it is not a good design. Basically I have feedback from reservist who just did their shooting, they all say, their shooting have improve with SAR-21. Also it do away with zeroing. So i do not think it is blunder.
  
  Vastergotland SSKs:
  Basically Singapore did the right choice, buy some old sub as cheap training subs first, save the money and wait to see if there is some new tech sub that is more suitable in future. Why should we jump in to buy new gotland and let new birds bang it around, better wait , which i see viking sub is the more interesting choice for us.
  
  Quad SA-18 SAMs on M113 APCs
  M113 upgraded have very good manuvourability. Also SA-18 are very very effective , cheap and good. What the problem with it ? As long as it can do the job and good.
  
  F-15,
  It beat the competition - range, radar, weapon range, endurance, power, weapons load ....... so what so people say - a eurofighter will outturn it ? Can the eurofighter outturn missile from F-15 ?
  
  
• storm_freaky13

  12 Feb 07, 21:09

  Originally posted by storywolf:

  Vastergotland SSKs:
  Basically Singapore did the right choice, buy some old sub as cheap training subs first, save the money and wait to see if there is some new tech sub that is more suitable in future. Why should we jump in to buy new gotland and let new birds bang it around, better wait , which i see viking sub is the more interesting choice for us.
  

  Yes good point, just like say if you were a father and your son just got his driver's license. I think most will buy cheaper car and test run first. Instead of getting a ferrari straightaway, op to buy a WRX first. Test test and see how it goes and let 'your kid' familiarise with a sportscar first.
  
  I personally dont see how the F-15T/SG is a blunder. Combat proven, state-of-the-art and a menace in the sky. Singapore is known to buy their weapons smartly and I think on this case it is. Old shape but its materials is very different from the older models.
• SingaporeTyrannosaur

  12 Feb 07, 22:18

  Have you noticed this curious disease called locallymademustsuckitis? Where some Singaporeans deem it fit to find the most bizzare reasons to reject and critique any locally made things.
• Shotgun

  12 Feb 07, 22:35

  Originally posted by gary1910:

  Actually the Mechanised Igla do not operate alone but as a batt perhaps 4~6 with a mixed of IFU (Intergated Fire Unit) and WFU(Weapons Fire Unit) and not neccesary together but spread out to cover the AO.
  
  Weapon Fire Unit (WFU ) has the 4 Igla lanuchers, IRST optronics for targeting ,and network computer....
  
  Next we have the Intergrated Fire Unit (IFU), it's not only have what the WFU have as montioned above but extra thing like the surveillance/search & tracking radar( the dustbin like radardome), IFF and battle management system ( a wireless network computer).
  
  So for example now say a battery of 6, and say 2 IFU and 4 WFUs in that battery and they are operating together with CAD giving air defence cover for the CAD in that airspace sector.
  
  So it represent a great improvement over the RBS-70 on V200 with Giraffe radar.
  
  And the system itself does not mean that it could only operate Igla, if it is neccessary , it could be upgraded with other better VSHORAD missile in the future while retaining the all the other major system like radar, BMS, IRST optronics etc.
  
  In fact , it is quite similar to the German Ozelot.
  
  The PK of Igla is abt 60% and 40& with ECM but when 2 missiles is launched , it will increase by another 50%.
  
  According to what I have heard , Igla was chosen becos it is cheap, in fact very much cheaper than for example the Mistral, one of the VSHORADs in our inventory.
  
  So using surplus hull of M113s with the introduction of BX, Mechanised Igla means great saving for SAF than to buy foreign system.

  60%?
  
  more like 48% MAX for unprotected fighter targets, and with counter measures, 30%.
  
  The Igla-S however, may have a higher pK.
  
  Still, its been good insight.
• gary1910

  13 Feb 07, 00:10

  Originally posted by Shotgun:

  60%?
  
  more like 48% MAX for unprotected fighter targets, and with counter measures, 30%.
  
  The Igla-S however, may have a higher pK.
  
  Still, its been good insight.

  The data is from Armanda Int'l Complete Guide to Land-based Vshorad and Shorad Systems, 2002, claimed by the manufacturer Lomowhich is likely for the export version Igla-1.
• CM06

  13 Feb 07, 11:53

  Originally posted by Shotgun:

  60%?
  
  more like 48% MAX for unprotected fighter targets, and with counter measures, 30%.
  
  The Igla-S however, may have a higher pK.
  
  Still, its been good insight.
  
  Originally posted by gary1910:
  
  The data is from Armanda Int'l Complete Guide to Land-based Vshorad and Shorad Systems, 2002, claimed by the manufacturer Lomowhich is likely for the export version Igla-1.

  Actually 48% is data closer for 1 igla. Our current policy to is to launch two to engage each target. I have seen for myself the "stats" it's better than what you guys think. Not as good as what i prefer...but hey its good enough.
• Gooseliver

  14 Feb 07, 07:00

  <>
  
  How do you identify micro cracks? Eyeballing cannot reveal cracks, they may be just cracking of paintworks. To inspect cracks on aircraft structure, you need to do different types of Non Destructive Inspection by stripping of paintworks or radiographic inspection
  
  No reason to believe the F404 thrust is too great for the frame. Anyway, the main structure were strengthened and primary structure like the wing spars (front and rear spars) were also replaced during the upgrading. More importantly, the upgrading processes were implemented at different stages inorder to equip the workforce with the know how before we could handle more advanced platforms like F16 and F15. Basically, they were stripped to bare metals, re-strenghtened structurally and completely re-wired.
  They are amazing and kept vigil over our airspace for 30 years !
  Well they are still flying but doing a different role...
• Shotgun

  14 Feb 07, 08:52

  Originally posted by CM06:

  Actually 48% is data closer for 1 igla. Our current policy to is to launch two to engage each target. I have seen for myself the "stats" it's better than what you guys think. Not as good as what i prefer...but hey its good enough.

  That would depend largely on how the 2nd Igla would bracket the target wouldn't it?
  
  In any case. Dispensing of IRCMs such as flares is common and in some cases done on intervals due to the nature of IR-missiles such as Igla. (for low flying CAS aircraft) Hence, pK for unprotected fighters is hardly a good measure. When the aircraft comes in low, they will be dispensing flares and chaff in and out.
  
  eg. When attacking, they will be dispensing CMs at intervals. On weapon release, they'd climb and dispense larger quantities at shorter intervals. Hence, you really have to catch the pilot napping in order to use statistics for unprotected fighter targets.
• spiderweb6969

  14 Feb 07, 16:30

  we used to own a number of 160mm heavy mortar, not sure if it's Tampella or Soltam, but i think it was in service for a short time during the late 80's....could it be the mortar is a procurement blunder?
• gary1910

  14 Feb 07, 18:23

  Originally posted by spiderweb6969:

  we used to own a number of 160mm heavy mortar, not sure if it's Tampella or Soltam, but i think it was in service for a short time during the late 80's....could it be the mortar is a procurement blunder?

  I believe they have been returned to Israel, could be only on lease.