- Class
- Anzac Class
- Commissioned
- 17 August 2002
More information on HMAS Stuart
Tim Huxley on RSAF
-
Tim Huxley has written a book on SG defence some times
back.I suppose he knows SG well.
But it may not be the case.
I have issue with this statement in this article.
SG is a little bit better than Oz in this category
called mid air refuelling.
Over the last decade, the RSAF has
developed capabilities that — at least, in
theory — place it in the same category as
the air forces of smaller Western countries
such as Australia and the Netherlands.start of quote
NEWS COMMENT
Air force muscle keeps s’pore safehttp://www.todayonline.com/pdf_main.asp?pubdate=20080829
The RSA F has a long-range strike capability as well
as solid defence system .Tim Huxley.
AIR power is a key component of military
capability, and since the 1960s, Singapore’s
defence planners have put great effort
into developing this city-state’s air force,
which celebrates its 40th anniversary this
weekend.
Four decades of effort have paid strategic
dividends: The Republic of Singapore
Air Force (RSAF) is vital in maintaining
the island’s security. Singapore’s defence
partners regard it highly.
Although Singapore’s leaders apparently
had plans for an air force from the time they
began thinking about how to defend the new
state in the immediate wake of separation
from Malaysia, it was only after Britain announced
it would be accelerating its military
withdrawal from Singapore in 1968 that
development of the Singapore Air Defence
Command or SADC (as the RSAF was known
until 1975) began in earnest.
Singapore’s air power build-up was
rapid. Early SADC recruits were trained in
Britain, which was also the source for much
of the fledgling air arm’s equipment.
By the early 1970s, the SADC had taken
over the four British air bases at Changi,
Seletar, Sembawang and Tengah, together
with the crucial air defence radar station at
Bukit Gombak.
By the 1980s, the RSAF had received
substantial numbers of United Statesbuilt
combat and transport aircraft, and
helicopters. These boosted its capacity to
defend Singapore’s airspace and to move
troops and equipment. But it was always
clear that, because it lacked strategic depth,
Singapore needed to deter enemies by possessing
the capacity to take the war to an
aggressor’s territory.
Air power, specifically the RSAF’s substantial
fleet of upgraded former US Navy
attack aircraft supported by an embryonic
in-flight refuelling capability, provided a
crucial means of doing this.
Over the last decade, the RSAF has
developed capabilities that — at least, in
theory — place it in the same category as
the air forces of smaller Western countries
such as Australia and the Netherlands.
The latest models of F-16C and D multirole
combat aircraft — some operating from
the new air base at Changi East — have
replaced the old A-4 Skyhawks, enhancing
Singapore’s deterrent by providing a precision,
long-range strike capability as well as
improving its air defences.
KC-135 in-flight refuelling aircraft have
expanded the RSAF’s capability for longrange
operations. In addition, Apache attack
helicopters allow the RSAF to provide close
air support for army operations much more
effectively. Large Chinook helicopters have
expanded battlefield airlift for troops and
equipment. Unmanned air vehicles (UAVs)
have become key elements of joint-service
operations, providing vital reconnaissance
and targeting data for the army.
The RSAF also supports the navy with
maritime patrol aircraft, and will soon fly
well-armed Seahawk helicopters on antiship
and anti-submarine missions from
navy frigates.
All this is in line with the 3G (Third
Generation) SAF concept, which prioritises
development of network-centric forces with
greatly improved firepower to compensate
for Singapore’s lack of geographical hinterland
and relatively small population.
Mindef has restructured the RSAF to
allow more effective use of its assets in
‘networked’ joint-service operations which
stress rapid sharing of intelligence and surveillance
data and precision targeting.
Five new functional commands have
replaced the previous structure in which air
bases were the main organisational units.
For example, Air Defence and Operations
Command — the air force’s “highreadiness
core” — will oversee peacetime
operational commitments, Participation
Command will focus on air-land operations
and Air Power Generation Command will
supervise air base operations.
The RSAF will soon benefit from important
new equipment. Gulfstream G550
airborne early warning aircraft will replace
the present E-2 Hawkeyes, providing muchimproved
surveillance and control of air operations.
Hermes 450 UAVs will also allow a
quantum leap in reconnaissance capability.
Twenty-four F-15SG Eagles — the ultimate
and most capable version of this
proven combat aircraft — will significantly
improve long-range strike capabilities.
In the longer-term, F-35 Joint Strike
Fighters designed for networked warfare
will expand the RSAF’s ability to disable
enemy forces, while new long-range air
defence systems may be able to protect
Singapore from potential missile attacks.
Benefitting from good equipment, highly-
educated personnel and extensive overseas
training and exercises, there is no doubt
the RSAF is a highly professional force.
Although it has deployed support aircraft
to assist security partners in Iraq and
Afghanistan, it remains true that it lacks
major operational experience.
Hopefully, it will remain the case that
its real worth lies in helping to prevent conflict
by deterring potential adversaries.
The writer is the executive director of
the International Institute for Strategic
Studies – Asia, the Singapore-based wing of
the independent security think-tank, the IIS .end of quote
http://www.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/326164
Zero certified air tanker in service for RAAF!
This tanker can fly but not certified by Oz aviation authority.
This show Oz think no one will knock on her door.
-
This show Oz think no one will knock on her door.
And who is going to knock on her door?
Your mysterous, "anyday", "anytime" redland forces?
Basically any hostile airforce trying to knock on their door will have to make a very long trip across an ocean, all the time under JORN and basically being forced to engage them at the very limit of their endurance while the Aussies have home ground advantage.
-
The tanker that RAAF is ordering is based on the Airbus A330. This is the one offered by EADS to the USAF to 'replace' the KC-135 used by the USAF!
These are modern advance airborne tankers that the RAAF is going to operate in the future.
-
The tanker that RAAF is ordering is based on the Airbus A330. This is the one offered by EADS to the USAF to 'replace' the KC-135 used by the USAF!
These are modern advance airborne tankers that the RAAF is going to operate in the future.
-
U can't use old reference and critics what was said in the past using current information.
-
you stilll not over it?
-
http://www.zaobao.com/sp/sp080830_514.shtml
Today zao bao shows the interview with RSAF Chief.
I put info which are not appearing in STimes below.
F35 decision time frame
It will be decided in 2 to 4 years if SG to buy F35.
The 100 F35 deal is not true.
Loss of pilots in 1970's
The level of aviation engineering in 70's could not be enhanced fast
enough,leading to few crashs.....
Training in overseas
He said,''like Ping Pong --Table tennis---'',u need training buddies
(of high level)to enhance our pilots ability.
Enemy must shot and scoot in 4 minutes
Or else they will be hitted by RSAF.
-
Enemy must shot and scoot in 4 minutes
Or else they will be hitted by RSAF.
There is no such word as "hitted".
And you never heard of this thing called electronic warfare and standoff munitions that can mess up your "shoot and scoot in 4 minutes" assumptions ah? While we may have one of the the densest air defence coverage in the world we are also limited by the fact that we are basically fighting from a very small island, and the enemy does not really need to aim anywhere to hit something.
-
The tanker that RAAF is ordering is based on the Airbus A330. This is the one offered by EADS to the USAF to 'replace' the KC-135 used by the USAF!
These are modern advance airborne tankers that the RAAF is going to operate in the future.
As usual, lionnoisy is too scared to mention this fact, given this will mean that the RAAF will actually have BETTER air-to-air refueling capacity then us.
-
Why make a big hooha about someone's statement? Lol...
And what's the point on comparing "Better air to air refuelling capacity" ?
Waste of time..
-
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
As usual, lionnoisy is too scared to mention this fact, given this will mean that the RAAF will actually have BETTER air-to-air refueling capacity then us.
RSAF is using KC 135 R.Right?
The capacity is almost the same but the range is half of Oz FUTURE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A330_MRTT.
Future is just a dream.When u need a weapons NOW,no point i give
you all the arsenals in US Army in the future,but nothing
now.When i deliver all the weapons in the future, u already die.
I think u will ,in exchange for future Star War wepaons,a M4
NOW,instead of the promised arsenals!!
If Oz dunt think nobody knock on her door because of the remote location,
then why they are spend A$6 billion in 2007 to buy Super Hornets
just for INTERIM purposes?The cant wait the F35 come!!
The best is no need to buy new tankers at all,if no body
will come to attack.
But u cant expect enemy will not come when u have only ONE
uncertified tanker!!
Also,they are seriously considering to buy 100 or 50 F35!!
JORN super radar
It this one will help to deter,track and lock in enemy,
then why should oz need to rush to buy Super Hornets and
to buy F35??
The attitudes to defence and mode/delay of acquisitiond
I find Oz is not serious in defense in reality.
Some times,like Super Hornets,they were too rush to decide.
Some times,like air tanker,they are too late to act.
On paper,oz can tell u they are under threats of rising PRC etc
As at today,(dunt tell me the heaven in the future),
there is only one air tanker can take off from oz soil,though it is
not certified to fly.
Financially,technologically,and politically they can acquire new air tankers
on time,before the old platforms retire one by one,and the last
one retired this year.The old tankers did not retire suddenly.
Oz can foresee the retirement schedule,but they act too late.
I find Oz are always bullied by US defense suppliers,
like in the ill fated Navy heli!!
Now Anzac Class frigate do not has heli to use and NOT
to be protected by the heli ASW capacity!!
Kaman Seasprite helicopters upgrade failed and all the birds
withdrawn from services!!!
u can say ANZAC still have other ASW gears.
But is it a crime the ship NOW is not protected by the designed
BEST capacity??
http://www.navy.gov.au/w/index.php/Anzac_Class
No naval heli to protect the whole class ANZAC frigates NOW!!
![[<>]](http://www.navy.gov.au/w/extensions/SemanticMediaWiki/skins/images/sort_none.gif)
Ship Pennant Class CommissionedHMAS Anzac FFH 150 Anzac Class 83234160018 May 1996 HMAS Arunta FFH 151 Anzac Class 91338120012 December 1998 HMAS Ballarat FFH 155 Anzac Class 108817200026 June 2004 HMAS Parramatta FFH 154 Anzac Class 10651896004 October 2003 HMAS Perth FFH 157 Anzac Class 115651440026 August 2006 HMAS Stuart FFH 153 Anzac Class 102950640017 August 2002 HMAS Toowoomba FFH 156 Anzac Class 11286936008 October 2005 HMAS Warramunga FFH 152 Anzac Class 98596080031 March 2001 -
RSAF the Best Air Force in the Universe.
-
Originally posted by maurizio13:
RSAF the Best Air Force in the Universe.
So sorry to burst your bubble. Its only in this quadrant of the galaxy.
The Malaysians have the best Air Force in the Universe.
-
If Oz dunt think nobody knock on her door because of the remote location,
then why they are spend A$6 billion in 2007 to buy Super Hornets
just for INTERIM purposes?The cant wait the F35 come!!
Don't grasp at straws lionnoisy, it's obvious that the Australians are gearing towards power-projection with their military developments.
Something that seems to be lost out on you.
-
Future is just a dream.When u need a weapons NOW,no point i give
you all the arsenals in US Army in the future,but nothing
now.When i deliver all the weapons in the future, u already die.
I think u will ,in exchange for future Star War wepaons,a M4
NOW,instead of the promised arsenals!!
Really?
So the A330 does not exist except on paper ah? Or is not the project already well on track?
So they day the Aussies get their A330 what are you going to say? That the RSAF made a bad choice jumping the gun?
So what about our 3G army? How come not developed yet? Going by your logic it is a useless dream then.
Lol, you type such a long post, but get owned in a few sentences.
-
On paper,oz can tell u they are under threats of rising PRC etc
As at today,(dunt tell me the heaven in the future),
there is only one air tanker can take off from oz soil,though it is
not certified to fly.
If the Australians are worried about defence then mid air refueling is not an issue, because they will be fighting from home ground advantage. Instead of wasting time and fuel on constant CAP they can use JORN to scramble and direct their aircraft as and when they need.
It is the agressor against them who will need to worried about air to air refueling, not them.
In fact, they fact they want a serious air-to-air refueling capacity means that have intentions to PROJECT their airpower.
The fact they are not getting our two-bit KC-135 and waiting for a better model is proof that they intend to have some serious regional power-projection capacity, something that the SAF cannot even dream to boast about.
Something that seems to be lost on you.
In fact if you studied the moves of the Australians carefully you'll realize that a lot of the points you try to raise actually backfire on you.
Financially,technologically,and politically they can acquire new air tankers
on time,before the old platforms retire one by one,and the last
one retired this year.The old tankers did not retire suddenly.
Oz can foresee the retirement schedule,but they act too late.
For the reasons above, they decided to play the waiting game for obvious reasons. The duh factor on this is so astounding I am surprised you can mess this up.
Let's see they had a choice:
Option A: Go lionnoisy "anyday, anyhow" war can break out panic and buy old KC-135s for millions of dollars only to need to replace them a bit later down the road.
Option B: Have some common sense and wait for a far better and modern model to come out.
Gee, tough choice.
-
So lionnoisy, in your opinion the SAF made a terrible mistake when it decided to wait decades before getting Leopard 2 MBTs? So in the meantime the SAF didn't really have any serious MBT at all!
How do you think up your points? Seriously it's not taking much effort to demolish at all.
Please answer.
Also you have not answered about degaussing metal hulls for minesweepers as well as the incredible advantages in performance the LCS have over our own ships.
-
I like the F-111.
-
Why all this emphasis on mid air refuelling? Are you retarded?
Think about this simple fact. Why did the Americans order the European A330 MMRT when they could have ordered the American Boeing tanker? Hmmmm. Instead of spending money on American planes they actually bought Euro. Something must have caught the eye of the Americans.
As for the ANZAC ships, Seahawks are still available for ASW ops, though the Seasprites would have been more capable with the Penguin missiles.
The Super Hornet appeared to be rushed. However I think there was a lot of backroom stuff happening since the Americans and Aussies work so closely together. The Defence dept knows something the rest of the world doesn't know obviously.
Gulfstream AWACS vs Wedgetails? Oh please, there's no comparison here. Gulfstreams are piss weak minijets vs a full sized plane. Which one will carry more electronics?
-
Originally posted by Asian Aussie:
Why all this emphasis on mid air refuelling? Are you retarded?
Think about this simple fact. Why did the Americans order the European A330 MMRT when they could have ordered the American Boeing tanker? Hmmmm. Instead of spending money on American planes they actually bought Euro. Something must have caught the eye of the Americans.
As for the ANZAC ships, Seahawks are still available for ASW ops, though the Seasprites would have been more capable with the Penguin missiles.
The Super Hornet appeared to be rushed. However I think there was a lot of backroom stuff happening since the Americans and Aussies work so closely together. The Defence dept knows something the rest of the world doesn't know obviously.
Gulfstream AWACS vs Wedgetails? Oh please, there's no comparison here. Gulfstreams are piss weak minijets vs a full sized plane. Which one will carry more electronics?
if oz dunt need air tanker,why did oz order in the first place?
Oz spend big buck on air tanker.But they allow a long void period
without it.This speaks volume oz dunt need air tanker lah.
Let me share with u some info of your powerful Wedgetails.
Oz is the first buyer is this class and faces problems.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/WEDGE061008.xmlhttp://www.defense-update.com/features/2008/july08/b737_aewc.htmlChallenging Integration Task
Being the first of its class, the Australian Wedgetail has encountered significant integration challenges that caused at least three years delay. As of July 2008, the system has not been declared operational. The problems are believed to be related to the intergation and performance of the radar, datalinks and electronic support measures. as well as software and hardware modifications. Fixes included engineering changes to the 'Top Hat' structure, were introduced as early as 2006 but until 2008 the program hasn't stabilized yet. Delivery of the first two aircraft is scheduled for July 2009. In July 2008 Boeing announced that the first two aircraft, equipped with the electronic warfare suite (but not the main radar or ESM) will be ready in early 2010, soon to be followed by the other four, to be delivered with full capability in 2010. The delay was the main reason for $248 million write-off announced by Boeing on the Second Quarter of 2008.
nnn
some times,it is not brave ,but foolish to be the first user.
-
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
if oz dunt need air tanker,why did oz order in the first place?
Oz spend big buck on air tanker.But they allow a long void period
without it.This speaks volume oz dunt need air tanker lah.
Let me share with u some info of your powerful Wedgetails.
Oz is the first buyer is this class and faces problems.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/WEDGE061008.xmlhttp://www.defense-update.com/features/2008/july08/b737_aewc.htmlnnn
some times,it is not brave ,but foolish to be the first user.
LOL...
and lionnoisy ...
ask why SQ bought the A380 and is their launch customer when there are so many problems with the air conditioning and reliability with the aircraft.
and we are the first customer for the G550 as well. we are getting it at the same as our isareli friends. our systems havent even arrived and been intergreated with our kits yet. we may yet have issues.
dont jump the gun and shoot yourself in the foot before you type your random rubbish.
AEW&C is a complicated thing. you realise how many subsystems are there to be intergreated ? how many AWACs manufacturer do you know ? AFAIK, there's only 3, Israel , Sweden (saab erieye) and the good Ole USA.
and almost every western aircraft project (military) has been delayed, overbudget or threatened with cancellation at some point in the project. big furry deal with the Wedgetail being late.
too scared of being pwned by sg tyrannosaurus so now running all over to other subforums and other old threads to post is it ?
-
please relocate to your thread and not bump old ones lionnoisy.
you have been warned.
-
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
if oz dunt need air tanker,why did oz order in the first place?
Oz spend big buck on air tanker.But they allow a long void period
without it.This speaks volume oz dunt need air tanker lah.
Let me share with u some info of your powerful Wedgetails.
Oz is the first buyer is this class and faces problems.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/WEDGE061008.xmlhttp://www.defense-update.com/features/2008/july08/b737_aewc.htmlnnn
some times,it is not brave ,but foolish to be the first user.
So many obvious flaws in that above argument that nobody should even bother wasting a thousand words on it, one picture will suffice:
