Possibility of military collaboration with China?

last SG · 2011-12-11T17:44:04+00:00

Wow, talk about super idiot, inverse square energy loss law in A-level physics, and I suspect even secondary physics students will know of it.Swakoo, careful...

weasel1962 SG

There's already 97 F-35s ordered under the LRIP. That doesn't count the Israeli and Australia (14) orders which have been made.

The F-35A minus tanks will have the same range as the F-16C/D with tanks and way more than previous fighters eg F-5s. The RSAF F-16C/D & F-5s have been used as a strike fighter. If the F-35A doesn't have enough range, the past & existing Singapore Air Force has a big issue.

As to Alize's qn on how the Indians do it. That's the problem. They went ahead with the Su-30 and ended up with low serviceability rates in really inane issues like tyre shortage. That's why the 126 plane MRCA order will end up with French or EU. The 5th gen Pak-FA programme is really high risk from that perspective. No reason why it can't end up like the LCA that's going to be way obsolete by the time its fully inducted.

I like the S-300. I read somewhere that Singapore took a long hard look at that (together with the Patriot). I can understand why its not inducted. The US will never allow a Russian system used by the Chinese to have access to US-based IFF codes which I think SG uses. Its different with an igla directed by ground/AEW control that already does IFF. Too much friendly fire risk with a 100-200km ranged missile. Patriot too ex so we still have I-hawk.

Underpaid SG

weasel, they ordered it. Any idea when they are going to “receive” it? My estimate is 2018-2020. As I already mentioned also, we don’t really know the capabilities/liabilities of the F-35 too.

As for the comparison with the F-5 and F-16, you do realise those 2 are interceptors in concept? It’s not only the range, but also the payload, interceptors tend to have a higher payload vs total mass and lower number of weapons per fighter too. The PvM affects range and performance. And yes I’m also worried about the payload on the F-16s too, though I do understand it’s due to Singapore’s need to multi-role. (2 bombs for the F-16. 4 max… well… maybe 6 if you really squeezed the pylons and want to take a performance penalty).

And I do agree, pity on the S-300, though my suspicions are that IFF is not really the main concern, any proper radar should already come with the ability to do target identification and tracking as a stand-alone, not an add-on, unless it’s a civillian search radar, I’m not sure about those.

weasel1962 SG

The first production F-35A has already been delivered (and some of the lot 2 as well). Normally 2 years from contract. Lot 5 contract just got issued a couple of days back.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/in…:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post:d13182c0-eb51-41ec-a502-b73a7a83bf6c&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

The thing is that low rate production (LRIP) aircraft are not fully combat capable. It was meant to be retrofitted as technology are signed off. That’s why the new chief of the programme was complaining over concurrency issues recently ie that it cost too much to retrofit.

LRIP will cover over 8-9 batches. Thereafter it will be a MYP or multi-year programme which will attain a fully combat capable block. That’s when most countries will await to buy. Those that signed up to the original F-35 partnership programme are allowed to buy LRIP aircraft. That includes the lowest level participants (SCP) which comprises both Israel and Singapore. Israel chose to buy LRIP aircraft and is targeted to receive their in 2016 though they are worried it will be delayed. LRIP aircraft are also more expensive.

Singapore maintains an SCP office in Washington just for this programme.

As for the F-5/F-16, I agree in part. However, Singapore chose esp for the F-5E to turn it into a strike fighter, whereas F-16 was originally designed as such. The F-5E can carry the centreline MER (multiple ejector rack) that can afford 6×500b Mk-82s or possibly JDAMs. The A-4s carry the MER as well. That’s besides the 2 weapons pylons which are Maverick-capable.

The F-16 normally carries 2 tanks with 2 weapons pylon + 2 wingtip amraams/aim-9s. With CFT, its actually sufficient range to strike within Peninsular malaysia with 4 weapons pylons and no wing-tanks. The RSAF operates it with TER (triple ejector racks). With 2 pylons, that carries 6x mk-82s, JDAMs or the new Laser JDAMs. The LJDAMs are really a step up in capability. Unfortunately, its only 2x GBU-12 paveways per TER due to clearance issues. Its more than enough considering targeting issues. The F-16 was originally designed for single target alpha strikes per pass, though it can make more than 1 pass per mission. The F-15s on the other hand is now capable of multiple PGM target strikes per pass. That’s a scary capability to take out 12+ targets in just 1 pass.

The S-300 can do IFF. However, whether it can pick up IFF signals from NATO-based IFF transponders is another issue.

Underpaid SG

What A-4s…

If there was a choice between using the F-5 or the F-16 for a bombing run, I’d agree, the F-16 is the better choice, the F-5 truly is a terrible choice for a bombing run. I also suspect the choice to make the F-16 the bomber of the RSAF instead of the F-15 is probably that 1) The F-15 might be more valuable in the air-superiority role and 2) The high thrust to weight ratio of an “interceptor” would allow the aircraft to return to normal flight faster than a heavier fighter as well as being more agile. (Actually, I think the F-15’s T/W ratio is better, but it’s probably more needed in overwatch.)

Nice to know the F-35 is FINALLY being delivered, even if it’s the lego form, but still doesn’t make me a fan, let’s be honest, Washington and Congress has a cap on how stealthy they allow a plane for export, and it’s this cap that really turns me off and one of the reasons I’m avocating other sources. If your supplier deliberately handicaps your product from being the best, it may be time to go around, under, or over the wall instead of through it. Not just China, if the Russians can give us a good product, why not? (Though maintainance issues and compatibility that weasel mentioned are a factor too, though compatibility can be solved with software redevelopment/adaptors.)

alize SG

Is our Igla's cueing radar of Western origin? I don't know of any other country that provides a radar for their Iglas.

Underpaid, the F-35 is really more comparable to the F-16 than the F-5. The F-5 was a cheap fighter to be given away as foreign aid and was never used by the USAF except for evaluation in Vietnam. The F-20 and F-16/79 were intended as its successor in the 1970s, since President Carter originally did not clear the F-16A for export. They would have come to reality in the event F-16s were not cleared for export by the Reagan administration.

Underpaid SG

Yeah alise, export and usage wise, you’re right, I was refering to the info-con idea of the F-5, that they don’t export tech that they would be worried about losing, hence the weaker capabilities of the F-35 compared to it’s parent F-22.

weasel1962 SG

Is our Igla's cueing radar of Western origin? I don't know of any other country that provides a radar for their Iglas.

There was talk of it being blindfire radar but I don't think so. The system seems to be based on the Strela-10M system which had a 9S86 snap shot radar and now combined with the launch module and control equipment. The radar, if anything, may be an updated variant but I'm guessing here.

Ukraine and Czechs produces radar for the Iglas as well.

The F-5 was used by the USAF in the aggressor squadrons. In fact, the USN/USMC bought the swiss fleet of F-5s in 03-05 period to carry on their top gun training.

alize SG

Btw, it was stated on Wikipedia that China pressured Singapore to withdraw from Starlight and offered a training area on Hainan island. Singapore said it would withdraw and train in neither country.

The article was since edited away. Was this true?

PS. ironic that Singapore PRs will get to see the inside of a Taiwanese camp. Wonder how the Taiwanese feel about that.

Underpaid SG

Well, Ex Starlight is still going on, to my knowledge, so my guess is that it was a fake article from an anti-China … zealot? It would be bad for Singapore to cut and run so fast from a long term friendship, it gives a very bad impression that a little pressure, and Singapore dumps it’s friends.

BTW. Blindfire radar? Isn’t that a contradiction in terms? Razz

sgdiehard SG

How did China pressure Singapore we dont know. But even before Singapore officially recognized PRC, Deng offer Yunnan and Guangxi province, 2 provinces, for SAF! But Singapore politely rejected the offer. We didn't want to enhance the impression that Singapore was a third China.

Now Philippines is trying to pull Asean into its conflict with China over the South China Sea, it is definitely not wise for us to put our soldiers anywhere in China.

Hainan is not a good place, still suffer from typhoon every now and then.

weasel1962 SG

It would be ironic if its a China national who is the Singapore PR. Its not exactly critical ROC installations that we're talking about.

Country's interest are like commercial interest. Saw how fast Evergreen cut and ran to Pasir Gudang?

Blindfire is an oxymoron but one that Singapore uses.

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_events/nr/1997/nov/26nov97_nr/26nov97_fs.html

alize SG

It would be ironic if its a China national who is the Singapore PR. Its not exactly critical ROC installations that we're talking about.

Country's interest are like commercial interest. Saw how fast Evergreen cut and ran to Pasir Gudang?

Blindfire is an oxymoron but one that Singapore uses.

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_events/nr/1997/nov/26nov97_nr/26nov97_fs.html

I'm not in the know, but weren't those unfortunate SAF soldiers who got hit by the F-5, adjacent to an airbase?

SAF soldiers wear ROC uniforms in Taiwan. A Chinese spy with the right appearance and in ROC uniform might be able to venture quite far into ROC camps.

weasel1962 SG

I've been to ROC for missile live-fire. What one doesn't see are the clearances that happen before entry. Not so simple.

Having access to a storeroom adjacent to an airbase is not exactly the same as having access to the airbase itself. I'm not so sure SAF has that kind of free access to critical installations.

alize SG

I've been to ROC for missile live-fire. What one doesn't see are the clearances that happen before entry. Not so simple.

Having access to a storeroom adjacent to an airbase is not exactly the same as having access to the airbase itself. I'm not so sure SAF has that kind of free access to critical installations.

Milan?

Underpaid, so Starlight is still going on?

Rapier was originally an optically tracked, command guided missile. The Blindfire radar was for use in bad weather.

weasel1962 SG

Not milan.

There's a nice focus on air defence units in December issue of air force news. Shows the new Spyder with 4 Pythons. Guess where the Derby has gone....

Underpaid SG

Starlight? Only time I heard it stopped was during SARS period, quarantine lockdown. Was just being cheeky about the Blindfire radar, don’t take it too seriously.

I remember the F-5 incident, the storeroom was in the base, the storemen who got hit were authorised to be there, just right place at the wrong time.

Derby? Scrapyard. Razz Oh wait, that’s the wrong kind of Derby… lol. Makes me wonder what the Spyder uses as a FCU. Radar Spyder? lol.

weasel1962 SG

"The base" was definitely not in an airbase.

The base that the F-5 crashed was in Hukou army base. That houses a ROC armour brigade and training detachments for SAF. Not exactly the most critical of installations.

Note that the press release stated procurement of Spyder system which would likely have come with a truck mounted CCU mounting a EL/M-2106 tracking radar. So far the RSAF has been very careful with pics of anything other than the launcher including the FCU. Applies to other SAM units.

Official release acknowledges the radar-guided Derby is part of the acquisition.

alize SG

I have noticed the Derby is never exhibited publicly, but if it is acknowledged, what is the point of hiding it?

weasel1962 SG

I have noticed the Derby is never exhibited publicly, but if it is acknowledged, what is the point of hiding it?

They have been pretty open about it. Example here showing the 2 missiles.

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/content/dam/imindef_media_library/photos/news_release/2011/nov/16nov11_nr.jpg

alize SG

I thought you were implying earlier that the Derby has gone somewhere. What did you mean to ask to guess?

« Previous Page Next Page »