Our proud stealth frigates fleet now fully operational
-
I dun think ST ship building capabilities are there yet, after technology transfer of the PVs, MCMVs, MCVs, FFGs. I guess they need more time. Which leads me to wonder is that part of the reasons that there was no replacement for Courageous.
They do actually have a good track record of building civilian ships and they do have a range of naval ships on offer. In addition, they have VT Halter Marine`s expertise to leverage on. The stealth ship designs on display recently in various defence expositions indicates that they have absorbed stealth tech well enough to offer them to international customers. That is pretty good though not as reputable as bigger international firms. Come to think of it, RSN is practially homemade now; Formidables, Victory, Fearless, Endurance and the spanking new sub rescue ship
-
The idea of a stealth warship does take advantage of that situation, especially in tropical waters. If the radar signature is reduced to the level that can be "eliminated" as clutter, the warship is practically invisible to radar unless the operator intends to contend with a more confusing clutter returns. I think the word I'm looking for such adjustments is "gain."
Exactly why the Herakles was selected due to excellent littoral cap. Plus it is inter-operatable with both types of Asters(15s and 30s).
-
Herakles Radar is just a S Band AESA radar that is rotated at 60rpm. It's great versus our neighbours, but don't count on it being as great as the Aegis. Not least, rotating the radar itself reduces the sensor resolution, and also response time.
I dont think RSN had Aegis in mind when they build 3200 ton ships. That said, the Formidable is arguably the most capable ship right now in the region bar the new Australian AAW and contestably the best ship in its class.
-
Originally posted by Fratboy:
I dont think RSN had Aegis in mind when they build 3200 ton ships. That said, the Formidable is arguably the most capable ship right now in the region bar the new Australian AAW and contestably the best ship in its class.
Do you honestly think the USA would even export this technology to us?
-
Originally posted by 16/f/lonely:
Do you honestly think the USA would even export this technology to us?They probably would, sans the codes for the Aegis software itself.
-
Originally posted by Fratboy:
Understandably, Malaysia`s MMEA would need more flyable and maritime assets given the breath of maritime and longitudinal space they have to cover. However, my question is how many helicopters do they have ? And how numerically sufficient to cover the maritime borders of Malaysia ? Do you have the figures to lend credence to your argument as I do not know. Thank You.
gee.. its been awhile since navies fought ship to ship running naval fire battles. the last time i checked, most navies used ship launched ASMs and OTOH fighting, with helicopters providing ASW and targeting.
in case you havent realized
1) in any potential redland vs blue land scenarios. our naval assets are hemmed in on two fronts. needless to say, SoM and up the east coast of malaysia. blueland forces can only advance from so many points of entry. how difficult would it be to anticipate / track blue force support vessel movements ?
tell me. how difficult is it to monitor vessel movements @ chokepoints ?
2) while MMEA's assets are purely for civillian control/martitime enforcement. they represent a potential dual-role use. which presents a threat in a red-land/blue-land scenario.
coupled with electro-optical targeting systems for OTOH on the leiku frigates, they could possibly represent an additional threat dimension.
do the absolute numbers matter ? or is the potential threat that these platforms manifest more critical ?
all im saying is that does stealth really matter when there are plenty of dual-use airborne surveillance assets ? does a helicopter necessarily have to venture within the formidable class kill zone/envelope to detect the formidable class.
point here i made originally is : assets capable of detecting the formidable class exist. and that there are quite a few of these assets.
i dont contest your point about how blueland forces operate within a NCW framework and should have a shorter sensor-shooter loop blah blah blah and have better shooter-sensor intergreation (i.e better sit awareness). that really isnt my point
all i want you to consider is this. in any scenario, a potential redland maritime survelliance asset can easily fly low, using potential add on sensor suites to detect enemy threats.
these are not the only things avaliable,
a) commercial sat pictures are avaliable
b) redland has potentially greater helicopter / maritime survelliance assets to monitor us
c) potential of detection with eyeball mk I from HUMINT sources is always presentthe formidables can be found if wanted/enough assets to do so. not invisible. not invicible.
before you introduce the G550 CAEW and other air force assets, ild acknowledge, its not a certain probability, but a potential situation. my aim here is not to create a red vs blue scenario (which is explicitly banned in forum rules anyway) but to show the possibility of it.
like klausewitz stated,once the battle begins, all best laid plans are screwed up.
3) let me count thy choppers :
3 dauphins
? as 109
2 bombardier amphbuous aircraft.hint hint : google hard enough and you can find them easily. anyway, IIRC, JDW has also reported on MMEA's acquisitions.
what good are absolute figures ? they are simply numbers. its what you interpret out of them that makes sense. not the numbers alone.
why should i substantiate something that is well known and widely covered and practically public domain information ? its not as if im making some wildly absurd claim.
The Herakles has a range of 250km(from the manufacturer`s site). Furthemore, they are important nodal points in the net-work centric net of sensors which allow the latter to leverage on other sensors. Why is it that thay cannot detect RCS heavy objects like the helicopters or MPAs first as compared, in your own words, to MK1 eyeball detection system? Under such circumstances, the Formidables would locate the MMEAs helicopters and MPAs first would you not think so? In a war, they are simply dead without help from the navy and airforce.
as mentioned above, RMN's execution of a OTH missile firing using a helicopter electro optical system to guide the missile to its target represents a threat.
NCW yes. Airforce assets YES. Full spectrum conflict - Whatever you want to say. Ive made my point up above. the formidables arent invincible. like everything else, it has vulnerabilities.
now isnt it quite ironic that you'd expect the formidable to act in a NCW setting while expecting a potential adversary chopper (somewhat useful tactical asset given the age and reliabilities of the NURIs) to be thrown to the wolves ?
wasnt there several incidents in the cold war where low flying planes crept up undetected ?
1) the russian foxbat pilot who defected to japan flew low over the sea of japan to avoid radar detection and landed unannounced at a hokkaido airfield. to be exact, a JSDAF base in hakodate
2) IIRC, not exactly too certain, several USSR yak forgers made several low level sea passes to avoid US navy awacs to buzz/harass USN carriers.
Im not insinuating you are wrong or anything. its just a matter of perspective. I'm contextualising it at somewhat different level from you.
-
Well you know, there are a few ways to defeat our ships.
1.Submarine finds our ships
2. fighters launch as many missiles as our ships have Asters
3. Finally, either torp or launch another salvo of missiles.
4. Result: flaming hunks.
-
Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:
Well you know, there are a few ways to defeat our ships.
1.Submarine finds our ships
2. fighters launch as many missiles as our ships have Asters
3. Finally, either torp or launch another salvo of missiles.
4. Result: flaming hunks.
Flaming hunks like freedom4ever?
-
hehe. I asked a simple question because you mentioned that the MMEA had a large number of such assets. How many aerial surveillance assets does the MMEA has to cover Malaysia`s vast coastlines and SLOCs? So this is it;
3 dauphins
? as 109
2 bombardier amphbuous aircraft.to cover both East and West Malaysia? Im sure thier MK1 eyeballs will come in handy. They really need them. Anything more than that is simply speculation since they are not equipped with the necessary surveillance equipment to detect the Formidables at long range. Nor the necessary sensor net to tie these equipment all together. What happened to the large number of UAVs?
And yes, the Formidables will detect them first. Especially in choke-points with hundreds of other vessels; tired eyes...ehehe? And kill them first; if need be.
Of course numbers matter as well. Especially with the few numbers you already have versus those on stand-by and those under maintainence.
Pretty nice scenario. But you are right. You are thinking at another level. Add in the RSAF, it will not even look the same. And I did not posit a blue land versus red land scenario. You did. All I said was the Formidable will detect these aerial platforms first.
It is good to be vigilant. But let`s keep things in perspective shall we ?
-
Originally posted by Fratboy:
hehe. I asked a simple question because you mentioned that the MMEA had a large number of such assets. How many aerial surveillance assets does the MMEA has to cover Malaysia`s vast coastlines and SLOCs? So this is it;
to cover both East and West Malaysia? Im sure thier MK1 eyeballs will come in handy. They really need them. Anything more than that is simply speculation since they are not equipped with the necessary surveillance equipment to detect the Formidables at long range. Nor the necessary sensor net to tie these equipment all together. What happened to the large number of UAVs?
And yes, the Formidables will detect them first. Especially in choke-points with hundreds of other vessels; tired eyes...ehehe? And kill them first; if need be.
Of course numbers matter as well. Especially with the few numbers you already have versus those on stand-by and those under maintainence.
Pretty nice scenario. But you are right. You are thinking at another level. Add in the RSAF, it will not even look the same. And I did not posit a blue land versus red land scenario. You did. All I said was the Formidable will detect these aerial platforms first.
It is good to be vigilant. But let`s keep things in perspective shall we ?
sometimes if you get it, you would. if you dont, i shouldnt bash my head on a rock trying to convince you.
things are always put into perspective when u make them relative figures. didnt you understand my bit about absolute numbers ? and to top it all off. these are figures i did for 5 mins of googling. i remembered reading someone's post of JDR and there are plenty more assets. Paskal/PASCOM are also under a joint command of MMEA. MMEA also has surface vessels.
its easy to simply pounce on the numbers and not read up on something before commenting. its easy to ask for substantiation when the numbers dont really imply the threat they potentially propose. 3G saf has a pretty favourite phrase they like to use to descibe this situation dont they ? i think its called "force-multiplier"
isnt it fascinating that there are 0 helicopters in RSN inventory right now ? or for that matter, 6 frigates wont have any spares / reserve seahawks. pretty competent for a world-class NCW, fighting force eh ? quite ironic that you should bring up maintainence and units on stand-by. we obviously wont have any.
might as well have 1/6 of the frigate's ASW capabilities chopped off at any given moment. and that is a somewhat optimistic projection. anyone out here with figures for seahawk operational readiness rates ? and these assets arent even operational yet
thats just the MMEA. what about RMN helicopter assets ? sadly my friend, the battlefield is not simply about aerial survelliance. commercial satellite images ? HUMINT like fishermen and malaysian dockyard workers ?
you missed my point and missed it quite completely.
oh, i forgot about the coastal radar survelliance thing that uncle sam is building for them to help combat piracy. im sure that is a small inconsequential matter that is of no consequence to RSN naval planners. nothing but a trivality eh ? dial 1900 drop a bomb and it magically dissapears.
is NCW the magic solution to all answers ? shorten the sensor-shooter loop. provide the shooter with better sit awareness ? what about information saturation? commander has too many targets to shoot ?
and really, how much of it is a snazzy tag line for force modernisation ? there definitely has been an improvement, yes, last time it took a grunt 30 mins to get an arty battery on the horn, now it takes 30 seconds. but do remember. NCW isnt something magical that appeared recently. its something that merely shortens and speeds up the chain of command/field command.
i knew you'd bring in the NCW and RSAF and AWACS. but wouldnt that be escalating a humble discussion of how a supposed "coast-guard" MMEA asset, may end up detecting and providing targeting/ intel information for a potential adversary force, into a country vs country scenario ?
in any case, why would a formidable class air defence frigate be shooting at a civillian / non-military asset ? it definitely wouldnt be doing so unless it were an act of war, even if the aircraft has/had strayed into singapore airspace. it would meana aggressor action taken by the singapore frigate.
even under a hostile/war situation, shooting down a non-IDed bandit is a big no-no. afterall, it belongs to a civillian agency. and not a paramilitary organization. does the geneva convetion allow shooting of police/coast guards in wartime ? i dont think so.
problem with MMEA is that it straddles alot of grey areas. how do you classify a non-paramilitary unit that fields aircraft, rotary assets, patrol boats and has operational control over SEAL-type units ?
And yes, the Formidables will detect them first. Especially in choke-points with hundreds of other vessels; tired eyes...ehehe? And kill them first; if need be
oh, about the UAVs, i dont distinctly recall making any mention of large force of UAVs. but our good neighbours up north have been quick to show off "indigeneously" developed UAVs with press mentions of a potential coast-guard application. ild take these proclaimations with a big tablespoon of salt but nonetheless, a potential threat.
heck, put an aerostat somewhere in negri sembilan and they can see blueforce's every move. where is there space to hide ?
im not eager to postulate redland vs blueland scenarios but i think we shouldnt allow hubris to cloud the limitations of our platforms. rather, we should be very familiar of our platform weaknesses. capable, but never invicible.
-
For redland helos to search for us at low altitude, they might as well use shipborne radar. If the Helo stays low, it sees only as much as the ship does, hence it has to fly higher to look for the Formidable frigates.
Second thing is a tactical consideration. The Helo chopper has a significantly smaller radar than that thing mounted on the Formidable. The moment the chopper starts searching with his radar, ESM equipment on the frigate will light up, and the integrated system will provide the Formidable an "accurate" position of where the chopper is, and direct the radar to look for it there.
Here's where the stealth part gets fun. Assuming that our vaunted stealth capability is true, that we look like a fishing boat on radar, the chopper radar is gonna have to sort through the clutter of returns to look for the right fishing boat to shoot at and return the information to the host frigate.
By then, we'd probably have an Aster or AMRAAM in the air. Remember, our E-2Cs and G550s are gonna be under a JOINT Air Land Sea command structure. Also, my understanding is that the Aster is strictly for missile intercepts... though I cannot confirm this. However, logical understanding is that, AShMs launch platforms don't need to get within 40km to shoot you; the only hostile object "dumb" enough to get that close would be missiles.
Theoretically speaking, our Formidables don't even have to turn on their Air Search Radar to recieve an Air Picture of the situation. So even if they have their helos up and about doing an EO passive search, they are still being tracked by the eye in the sky, aka Sauron.
So far, my understanding is that the RSAF will ensure that nothing of theirs flies. So we can effectively take Helos out of the OTOH search equations.
-
Well, the Aster 15 can only hit targets up to 30miles or 30km (or nautical miles?) if I am not wrong. That is pretty short range for a SAM and given that Harpoons and Russian Supersonic missiles have ranges exceeding 100km, fighters are likely to launch missiles outranging the Aster.
Of particular concern though is whether the M'sians have supersonic missiles, and whether the Aster has been tested against such missiles. Won't look pretty if a bunch of Su-27s come along and launch a few supersonic missiles that breach our missiles and one of those things is more than enough to turn our ships into a mission kill. Not the least the wreakage and rocket fuel can do quite a bit of damage on their own. (in fact, that's a big reason against ever having battleships again). -
Its 30 km. Aster 15 is designed to be a point defence anti-missile system. That already exceeds the range of most similar systems eg RAM, barak, sea wolf etc.
Aster 30s are the tools for mid-ranged SAMs.
The first line of defence against anti-ship aircraft are fighters. Don't expect Formidables to operate outside fighter cover in wartime.
F-35Bs anyone?
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
For redland helos to search for us at low altitude, they might as well use shipborne radar. If the Helo stays low, it sees only as much as the ship does, hence it has to fly higher to look for the Formidable frigates.
Second thing is a tactical consideration. The Helo chopper has a significantly smaller radar than that thing mounted on the Formidable. The moment the chopper starts searching with his radar, ESM equipment on the frigate will light up, and the integrated system will provide the Formidable an "accurate" position of where the chopper is, and direct the radar to look for it there.
Here's where the stealth part gets fun. Assuming that our vaunted stealth capability is true, that we look like a fishing boat on radar, the chopper radar is gonna have to sort through the clutter of returns to look for the right fishing boat to shoot at and return the information to the host frigate.
By then, we'd probably have an Aster or AMRAAM in the air. Remember, our E-2Cs and G550s are gonna be under a JOINT Air Land Sea command structure. Also, my understanding is that the Aster is strictly for missile intercepts... though I cannot confirm this. However, logical understanding is that, AShMs launch platforms don't need to get within 40km to shoot you; the only hostile object "dumb" enough to get that close would be missiles.
< snip >You do realise when you shoot at the chopper you are announcing to the whole world? -
eh ?
@shotgun :
like i mentioned, my point being that the choppers present an additional means of targeting and sighting the formidable.
which is to say, they are a potential bunch of threats. my idea was to highlight the existence of this threat, but the potency of that threat cannot be simply disregarded. didnt want to blow this up into a scenario of , redland chopper enganges blueland forces, gets destroyed. just wanted to demonstrate the possibility of that.
with all due respect to the capabilities of NCW and joint operations, its pretty inconcievable that redland high command will simply chuck a targeting helicopter / useful helicopter asset without any form of cover or protection.
and a low flying chopper need not necessarily use radar to detect the frigates. FLIR can easily find it as well ? flying low would allow the redland chopper to use the electrooptical targeting systems for OTH missiles. what the chopper would face difficultly in distinguishing sea clutter, would likely occur for the formidable as well. two edged sword.
nightmare scenario is something say if HUMINT / commercial SAT images allow a blueland formidable frigate to be identified at a particular location.
a leiku moves into stand off position. MMEA chopper flies low to the supposed grid square. flies low over the sea (15m) targets the blueland frigate.
stealth provides our frigates with an better survivability but dosent guaruntee invicibility. which was my intent to show this. the helos may present some form of danger
@F_Ni read somewhere that the aster 15 &aster 30 has a record of skin on skin kills against supersonic test drones. think it was a defence news article and somewhere else on the other milnuts site.
-
Originally posted by slim10:
Its 30 km. Aster 15 is designed to be a point defence anti-missile system. That already exceeds the range of most similar systems eg RAM, barak, sea wolf etc.
Aster 30s are the tools for mid-ranged SAMs.
The first line of defence against anti-ship aircraft are fighters. Don't expect Formidables to operate outside fighter cover in wartime.
F-35Bs anyone?
That limits the operation range quite substantially. The F-35C is actually a better deal because the USN insisted on longer range.
-
Originally posted by sgstars:
@F_N
i read somewhere that the aster 15 &aster 30 has a record of skin on skin kills against supersonic test drones. think it was a defence news article and somewhere else on the other milnuts site.
Well, have they tested the missile against a Klub? Also, how fast is the drone? Some of the missiles can dive at Mach 4.5 to 5.
-
Air cover. Formidables won't need to go around shooting down helos.
That's what the fighter force is there for...
Formidables main role is data node and escort/patrol duties. Detecting craft that enter the patrol area and allowing the best asset to tackle the threat. An approaching helo will take 20-30 min to come within 100km of the FFG from 200km range. A RSAF fighter could be there in less than 5.
In wartime, FFGs can even act as bait. Go active to attract the suks and then bushwhack with a F-35 stealth ambush. If that fails, then hope that Aster-15s and decoys/chaff works as advertised.
Difference in combat radius not significant between F-35A (610nm), B (500nm) or C (640nm). Its only 600+ km to Kota Bahru from SG. Otherwise air refuel can takeover.
If F-35B can operate from small ship eg endurance LPD, then even got mobile air cover anywhere around world.
-
@F_N
seems complicated. i havent read the ASTER perfornance articles in JDW so i'd refrain comment.
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/20080606/page2.aspx
potency of ASTER seems to be in question here.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=awst&id=news/100305p02.xml&headline=European%20Missile%20Defense%20Efforts%20Move%20Slowly%20Forward
-
Originally posted by sgstars:
@F_N
seems complicated. i havent read the ASTER perfornance articles in JDW so i'd refrain comment.
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/20080606/page2.aspx
potency of ASTER seems to be in question here.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=awst&id=news/100305p02.xml&headline=European%20Missile%20Defense%20Efforts%20Move%20Slowly%20Forward
I doubt the M'sians have a hand on Mach 4 missiles, but Mach 2-Mach 3 is possible. The Moskit can be launched from Su-27s if I am not wrong.
But the Aster hasn't been subjected to as much vigorous testing as comparable Russian or US systems. Not the least the hodge potch of European radars, half of them rotating. You really wish the Europeans got a handle on the reluctance to spend on defence and get their program management away from the need to spread the work around.
-
Originally posted by slim10:
Difference in combat radius not significant between F-35A (610nm), B (500nm) or C (640nm). Its only 600+ km to Kota Bahru from SG. Otherwise air refuel can takeover.
If F-35B can operate from small ship eg endurance LPD, then even got mobile air cover anywhere around world.
Operating aircraft at sea is very different from operating from land. We have no experience with operating aircraft on sea, and a slight mistake can see jet fuel combusting away. Nevermind that our pilots have no experience landing an aircraft on a tiny landing spot.
-
Agreed. But there's a lot of things SAF/RSN haven't done which they are now doing.
RSN operating subs was laughed at in the 70s as being too ex (so was MBT ops, come to think of it). Now RSN does.
ASW helo ops are new as well. So is the concept of attack helos, rdf etc.
Even refuel helo at sea is a relatively new capability with the endurance LPDs.
SG has a lot of helo pilots capable of landing in tight spots. Never been a problem.
RSN already operate aircraft (helos) at sea and over sea. A lot of countries are looking at the capability.
Australia is looking at putting F-35Bs on their canberras. Korea on their Dokdos.
One day, even MV-22s may enter SG service. Don't try and SG'll never have experience of operating aircraft at sea. Just a question of making the first step.
Only question of whether anything will happen is cost vs advantage.
-
One important point though, the Canberras and the Dokdos have a large hanger deck in comparison. The second is that fuel used in helicopters is different from fuel used for aircraft. Very different handling. You also need things like air filters and ventilation ducts to ensure the jet fuel doesn't accumulate in the hanger. To make our LPDs (which are small in comparison to the Canberra and Dokdo), capable of handling aircraft, you have to do substantial amount of changes.
Also, I question the usefulness of having 2-4 miserable craft (4 is very very very optimistic) per LPD out at sea. There's not a lot these aircraft can do other than hope the stealth works as advertised and their engines don't release too much heat.
-
Nah, the Endurance LPDs can probably handle at most 2 F-35Bs and more likely only 1.
Same concept with CAM ships during WW2. Shoot down the scouts/MPAs that look for ships in wide oceans. No one (not even USAF) can send sqn sized forces across the open seas just to look for ships. Can't shoot down MPAs with ships or helos (too slow). No MPAs, no eyes = no where to look.
If RSN wants to operate more F-35Bs at sea, then it will need dedicated light CVs or LHDs.
-
Why does RSN try to be stealth as much as possible?
In most of the time of combat patrol,this red dot country
is very poor in navy fire power,unlike
US Navy and other big countries which sail in a powerful group!!
Therefore,(i copy cat from
http://www.kockums.se/aboutkockums/navalstealthmain.html)
we try to create a ''advantage zone ''as wide as possible!!
Pl replace Visby by RSN ship.Pl note i am NOT saying RSN ship
is as stealth as Visby.I dunt want get into trouble of OSA!!
So,let say RSN sail alone or in a pair,we can
“see but not be seen”!!
http://www.kockums.se/aboutkockums/navalstealthmain.html
@@@@@@@@@@@
u can know more by reading
http://www.kockums.se/sitemap/sitemap.html