RSAF seahawks-MR-60R?

spartan_6

18 Oct 10, 16:32

Every1 seem 2 be talking about why our seahawks does not have sonobouys n does not appear 2 carry MAD, could they actually be MR-60R (ex-strikehawk) ? which e US r replacing its SH-60B with.

Can any1 confirm on this

spartan_6

18 Oct 10, 16:52

SORRY guys, it been confirm tat our seahawks r NOT MH-60R, closer cross-referance show tat e position of e FLIR turret is different also e ESM suite is different n our seahawks does not have engine exhuast heat suppressers

Sepecat

19 Oct 10, 07:57

Very surprised that we got a watered down version of an ASW heli. given that RSAF / RSN usually go for most advanced or well equipped versions of aircraft. Sonobuoys are especially critical to successfully prosecuting submarines.

I guess the heli also not equipped with the Penguin missile.

weasel1962

19 Oct 10, 12:25

The sonobuoys vs dipping sonar debate has been long-running ie more than 30 years. Sonobuoys are in terms of life time cost are essentially very expensive because they are generally expendable (and in addition to the receiver equipment needed). Once dropped (and there only 25 per helo), it ties the helo to that general area cos one still needs to be around to capture data. Today, there are recoverable sonobuoys (nor is it 100% recovery) but again the process of recovery is tedious and at the same time, inefficient for a frigate that is constantly moving. Whereas in a protected passage mission, a dipping sonar allows the helo to follow the ship for the endurance of the helo ie no need to go back to vessel to reload. Most importantly, the latest dipping sonars like the Helras, are advanced low frequency which have coverage way beyond what 25 traditional sonobuoys can provide ie extremely long range. That's why manufacturers are pitching dipping sonar only helos. Helras has up to 60nm range scale (111 km!) with bi- and multi-static function. In other words, it is also heard not only by the formidable which launch the helo but any other vessel/a/c that has the receiver. The Europeans have been crowing about how this has changed the ASW dimension and their ASW capabilities etc. Having both capabilities is of course preferable (and there is no reason why it can't be retrofit). Having said that, I'm sure RSN/mindef/dsta did their sums b4 hand. As for MAD, there's still the F-50s.