What is next platform SG will buy 2nd hand
-
Leopard 2 MBTs are also hardly defensive. Apache Helicopters are not exactly typical defensive weapons. What is to stop us from getting MLRS? It is in the pipeline definitely, but can't reveal more here.Originally posted by CM06:Processing abilities of a radar is one thing, however searching in both spectrum and 3d as well as anti jamming are things that can only come with newer tech.
We do not need MLRS. It's an offensive weapon. We have a forawrd DEFENSE policy. Ah see how MINDEF twist it if they ever get one.
Malaysia already has the ASTROS II for sometime. Not getting, they already have it. We will not buy Russian ones. MLRS are already a beast to maintain and very environmentally unfriendly.
And hey... Who cares about the environment when the survival of the country is at stake?
-
This kind of solution is excellent.Originally posted by Thrall79:Well, we `ll certainly buy more Leopard 2s. That was what Teo Chee Hean says in the budget speech. My guess is that we`ll probably get around >200. why is this? We already have a supposed holding of >120 Tempests MBTs for a period of time before Malaysia purchased the Twardies or any MBTs. This number seems about right. And in the case that Malaysia buys more Twardies, we can certainly expect more Leopards. It is also a certain thing that they will be upgraded to at least the A5/A6 standard as is the case with all 2nd-hand goods. If so, they will be the most powerful MBTs in SEA.
The other thing to note is that I hardly think the Leos are meant to replace the AMX-13s. We still have the new light tank project for that. i just love how MINDEF twists everything up. For all you know, they could even say the Tempests(they never denied the existence of these machines remember) will also replaced by the Leos and in the end we`ll probably have about 300 Leos just like the AMX-13s. Meanwhile, Mindef could call the light tank a multi-role armoured vehicle which is nevertheless armed with a 105mm/120mm gun like the US`s FCS. So ultimatelty, we`ll literally end up with a highly capable and numerically superior tank force.
With Mindef you`ll never really know and im really proud of them.
Very good.
Not good for the people who like to try to frighten us with flimsy threats. -
MBT, attack helis are still considered under a "defense" weapon. Anyway while theirs is a grey area(both defense&offense) of definition, what i meant was MLRS is purely offense in the weapons world..it's not and never considered a defense weapon that's all i mean. Procuring it just shows that Malaysia has offensive intentions lar!Originally posted by ^Delta^:Leopard 2 MBTs are also hardly defensive. Apache Helicopters are not exactly typical defensive weapons. What is to stop us from getting MLRS? It is in the pipeline definitely, but can't reveal more here.
And hey... Who cares about the environment when the survival of the country is at stake?
And when i say environmentally friendly, i mean it when we train, fire live round for training and Maintainence. Those solid fuel boosters are very hard to maintain and dirty to clean up...hence what i mean by environmentally unfriendly. Use in fighting okay..but day to day ...it's another story.
On other thing else, i believe we wont procure 300 Leos, it's a good tank, but it's not our tank. We will buy more but wont replace 1 for 1 Sm1. simply because leo takes 4 crew and SM1 3. A full leopard force will stretch our css elements but quite a bit afaik. Not to mention 3 Mbt we can get 4 LT...Mindef will always go for the LT for less manpower/more firepower balance. We will procure a bit more Leopards to firm up a full strength unit(+) level and leave it as that. The rest of the Sm1s will most likely be replaced with a locally produced LT. I bet the leopard purchase is also for other reasons related to our LT if my guesses are correct. (Germany dont have that many left to sell anyway since they might consider mothballing some for war reserves. the Leopard is a damn good tank after all!) -
We don't need MLRS. If you study closer it is more of a psychological weapon against Singapore more than a effective offensive tool. It is effective against Singapore because we are small den population easy to inflict mass casulty.
For us to have MLRS we would have a broader spectrum of targets and area to fire to. If you look at Herzbollah the damage on israeli are more psychological than tactical gain.
So if for some reason they press the button n decide to launch MLRS it is to invade Singapore. won't be surprise if some rocket landed in JB. Singapore Arty and RASAF will take care of those targets.
I think to balance the strike capability is to acquire Surface to Surface launch capability. In that case the entire western Penisula is within target. -
oh by the way if they use MLRS against Singapore...It would be Suicidal, a few image of HDB flats and CBD building collapse shown on BBC and CNN, ABC.
think about it....the news media around the world will chew them apart. Big country bully a small island.... Think of the political consequence if they use the weapon. -
my guess
a second hand AWAC platom as mentioned earlier on
recently dunno who annouced that E-2 will be phased out or upgraded soon
so ya..tts the only probable purhcase i could i tink of -
Sorry dude, there's few things i want to find out. Firstly, are you Singaporean? I asked because your terminology of our stuff is ...kinda odd... I'm talking about the post above the one i'm quoting like "Singapore Arty and RASAF" but that's just me.Originally posted by Arapahoe:oh by the way if they use MLRS against Singapore...It would be Suicidal, a few image of HDB flats and CBD building collapse shown on BBC and CNN, ABC.
think about it....the news media around the world will chew them apart. Big country bully a small island.... Think of the political consequence if they use the weapon.
Anyway, with regards to use of MLRS, no one in the right frame of mind would use that against civilians.
MLRS is an area suppression weapon. It is to denial the enemy of quick advance as well as disrupting and even destroying any remotely large gathering of enemy forces. Very good prepping for an assault by mechanised forces by "softening" defensive sites and blanketing laager areas.
Other strategies of their use include counter-battery fire from safety due to their usually longer range rockets vs artillery rounds. (15-80 km vs 10-30km) as well as a strategic targeting to wipe out enemy HQ that hide deep behind the front.
It is an extremely useful tool to have hanging on your belt.
And NO. It would be a break in Singapore Defense Policy should we ever acquire surface-surface launch capabilities like that of cruise missiles. It's threatening and puts the entire region into instability. How would your neighbour feel if you own a sniper rifle that can anytime hit him in the head? Bad idea. MLRS is not under this category. -
my guess
It won`t be second-hand for this one
a second hand AWAC platom as mentioned earlier on
recently dunno who annouced that E-2 will be phased out or upgraded soon
so ya..tts the only probable purhcase i could i tink of
It will be far better than the Hawkeyes -
Its unlikely that we procure 2nd hand AWACs.Originally posted by tek_koh:my guess
a second hand AWAC platom as mentioned earlier on
recently dunno who annouced that E-2 will be phased out or upgraded soon
so ya..tts the only probable purhcase i could i tink of
An advanced new system is needed to maximize the capabilities of our new F-16C/Ds and F-15SGs. -
i believe we will be using systems similar to Phalcon, using Active Phased Array Electronic Scanning Technology rather than a mechanically rotating antenna.
smaller platforms like Erieye(which i think is too small), or Wedgetail 737
-
oh by the way if they use MLRS against Singapore...It would be Suicidal, a few image of HDB flats and CBD building collapse shown on BBC and CNN, ABC.
Haiyah. Everything has roots and causes/indicators. Wars dont happen overnight. It takes time. When the call to arms is issued in malaysia(faced against an opponent like singapore as it is), Singapore and even other countries would be aware of it. By which time, the Astross would be long gone. Any decent military would keep stock of the movements of such equipment. You can`t hide military movements of that scale and it is equally hard to hide intentions for a conflict of that scale.
think about it....the news media around the world will chew them apart. Big country bully a small island.... Think of the political consequence if they use the weapon.
However, this is where the situation is different for Singapore and it confers a lot of benefit via Singapore`s smaller land mass and military doctrine. We can mobilize resources and assets so fast that it is nearly impossible for them to respond adequately. And we`ve been doing it so frequently, it is a hard take to tell if we`re really serious.
The Astross is more or less an effort to balance out thier relative lack of artillery pieces as compared to Singapore. But it`s inefficient. They`ll probably use it to shoot and scoot away on thier own territory while RSAF birds and other intelligence/surveillance assets are flying over-head. The poor drivers and men.
Im not sure if we will get any form of MLRs though; especially if our long range shots are delivered better, cheaper and with more precision via our planes and overwhelming artillery. At current force levels as compared to the Malaysians, we will be too over-powering to procure any MLRS now.
We will probably be getting some new long range cruise missiles to go with the F-15SGs like South Korea; Slam-ers or JASSMs. Im sure the Malaysians and Indons are looking at Brahmos though it will take them ages to decide on anything. -
IMHO, generally speaking:
1. UH-1H replacement. This was delayed due to F-15SG
Are we going for commonality for the Naval aviation and Air Force?
2. Transport aircraft C-130 is a bit small. The next higher model is either not available A-400 or too expensive C-17.
3. Introduction of GPS guided munitions from ST? -
1) UH-60 or NH-90 r possible choice
2) More second-hand C-130-30H or new C-130-30J
3)Longshot Range Extension System -
LALEE to replace E2C?
But the spec of LALEE was well written at least in 2001....
DATE:04/05/04
I want to see the images....
SOURCE:Flight International
Singapore details UAV programmes
Images of single fuselage vehicle displayed at conference; overall strategy to be based on "swarm and proliferation;
Singapore is continuing work on its Lalee long-endurance unmanned air vehicle requirement, but is some years from delivering a capability, says Maj Alfred Fox, director of the Singapore ministry of defence's newly established future systems directorate.
To perform airborne early warning, maritime and ground surveillance, and communications relay duties, the high-altitude system will work alongside Singapore's existing military surveillance satellite programme.
Initial Lalee concepts released in 2001 were based on a twin tail- boom design, giving rise to speculation that the air vehicle would be a derivative of the Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI)/EADS Heron/Eagle 1 system.
However, during a 21 April presentation to the Unmanned Vehicles Asia Pacific conference in Sydney, Fox displayed images of a single fuselage air vehicle with a large, underslung phased-array radar. The images indicate a radar configuration with a surveillance range of around 150km (80nm).
Fox says Singapore's overall UAV development strategy is based on "swarm and proliferation;, and that its planned Fantail and Skyblade systems provide the most immediate focus.
The army plans to acquire the Singapore Technologies Aerospace Fantail vertical take-off and landing UAV (VTUAV) to meet a requirement to conduct urban operations.
2.i hate SAF/DSTA disclose to non--Sporean about SG projects...
3.38. A UAV designed for a continuous coverage mission will require the operating cost per flying hour to be very low, below US$1,000, to be affordable. A continuous coverage station will require the flying of about 10,000 hours per year. The capital cost of acquiring the platform and payload, say at US$50m will be overtaken by the operations and maintenance cost after five years of operations.........
---http://www.mindef.gov.sg/nps/technical/paper1.html
NAVAL PLATFORM TECHNOLOGY SEMINAR 2001(Version 6.0)
Text of Address by Prof Lui Pao Chuen, Chief Defence Scientist
Naval Platform Technology Seminar 10th May 2001 -
1) Dont forget the EC-135 for parts commonalityOriginally posted by spartan6:1) UH-60 or NH-90 r possible choice
2) More second-hand C-130-30H or new C-130-30J
3)Longshot Range Extension System
2) I agree on this point..but more on the C-130J-030 since its a newer model..we might trade in the old ones for more new ones?
3) Hmm maybe we learn to make our our JDAMs guidetail kits? -
There are lots of army camps located near to residential areas. Seletar & Nee Soon are 2 of the many. Aim the MLRS at such camps & you wipe out the camps AND the flats there.
Would be a political disaster for horse country to have images of dying kids and women crawling out of burning flats shown all over CNN, BBC and heck, even Al Jazeera. -
Such rockets will not be able to make buildings like skycrapers collapse.
Neither can conventional ballistic missiles which are much much bigger. The war-heads are too small. It is the fuselage containing the fuel which makes them bigger. Can you collapse a building by firing an artillery shell/s at it? Answer: No. That is why it is called a pyschological weapon. The sooner people realise this, the better it is.
Like I said before, they can`t simply shoot and not prepare for a war prior to that. Simple logic. They can`t prepare for a war without making everyone aware in the world about it. The SAF would already be moving inland into Malaysia by then.
They need it to balance thier relative lack of fire-power artillery-wise. That`s why they bought it. -
But when the sh!t hits the fan,we will be well snug in our shell scrape and fire trench.. amnd yea,we will be moving inland into Country XXX and let them feel the heat... Before that our air force will be patrolling singapore...
-
It's not true.. WTC7 wasn't hit by a plane, rocket any BM , nor was it the closest building to the twin towers.. adding that there were just some minor fires going on in the corner of two stories.. in a few hours, It came down like match-stick block.
We can do the same.. making as hell sure nobody died.. It's proven possible. -
You can certainly bring down a large building using explosive demolition charges placed at the key places. Random artillery and rocket shells won`t; let alone tough and reinforced military structures. Of course, you can try firing hundreds of shells at a single large building to see if it topples. But what is the scenario here again ? Earthquakes stand a better chance at bringing down these large structures. And only major ones..
-
Unguided rocket is now considered as obsolete in the west due to the poor CEP .
For example, US army ROE for MLRS in Irag is that it should not be use against target near any civilian population becos of it's inaccuracy.
In fact, the US army has stopped buying any unguided rockets for their MLRS and now concentrating on their GPS guided GMLRS & ATACMS.
In fact , a few European nations have actually retired or sold their MLRS.
Another development in Europe was that there is movement there to ban the use of cluster munitions which is used in rockets system, the reason is becos of it's high dud rate, unexploded munitions are as deadly as mines against civilians.
So far , they are still debating there, Finland for example do not advocate the complete ban of ICM, especially not with self destruct/neutralise ICM.
( Finkand just bought 2nd hand MLRS from the Dutch, of course they dun wish ICM to be banned completely)
As I said , the latest trend for MLRS is LR GPS guided tactical missile with range above 100km and CEP of abt 10m.
AFAIK, US and Israel and Russian are developing or already developed them.
So if SAF are going for MLRS, we could get some 2nd hand US MLRS from Norway or Denmark which has retired them, the problem is, will we be able to get our hand on GMLRS & ATACMS?
Perhaps GMLRS but not ATACMS.
Another source for us is to buy brand new from Israel, I dun think I need to elaborate on the advantages of this move, perhaps we already did!!!
-
Israel develops MLRS? I thought those in their arsenal were bought from the yanks?
-
I think e EC-135 is a little 2 small
-
I don't remember flats near Seletar. In any case.. if I had an MLRS type weapon... I wouldn't want to waste it on flats and other targets of little military importance.
-
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
With the lack of news for so long (2 years), IMHO, this project is most prob cancelled.
[b]LALEE to replace E2C?
But the spec of LALEE was well written at least in 2001....
---http://www.mindef.gov.sg/nps/technical/paper1.html
NAVAL PLATFORM TECHNOLOGY SEMINAR 2001(Version 6.0)
Text of Address by Prof Lui Pao Chuen, Chief Defence Scientist
Naval Platform Technology Seminar 10th May 2001[/b]