Typhoon costs US$204+m

last SG · 2011-03-20T23:47:51+00:00

Agree. Supercruise can't hurt either.We can't say singapore has a good fiscal track record simply because they avoid buying into anything experimental or und...

SBS2601D SG

What I'm saying is that the F-15 was the wrong purchase. It's such an old aircraft and it was bought because of SG-US links. The Typhoon is a more modern and advanced aircraft and incidentally it can fire any US missileso there no problem with that. And it's stealthier than the F-15

I would like to see a Typhoon shoot a satelite down.

That would not happen.

You know why?

I think you do.

The Typhoon simply can't do it. It lacks the initial acceleration the ASAT missile needs.

Its not to say the Typhoon sucks or what....it just wasn't designed to be an overkill airplane like the F-15 and F-22 were designed to be.

Old aircraft like the MiG-25 and the SR-71 still hold records btw, and these records are not irrelevant today. Dare you say that the MiG-31, as an interceptor is irrelevant today? Hardly. It fills niches that even the F-15 can't do. It just isn't a dogfighter. That's all.

When you consider what SG needs, and the fact that F-15 and F-16s were made to be compatible in missions and spare parts, it won't make sense to purchase the Typhoon.

But I don't mind in the least if RSAF purchases one for eyecandy purposes.

Underpaid SG

"I wish we had bought the F-4 instead of the A-4 back then"

We had money troubles then. Can't buy what you can't pay for. And our maintainance crews were new then too. Can't say it's "wrong" to wish for a F-4, but I'd probably say the A-4 was better for our conditions then.

When Singapore seperated from Malaysia, what do you think was it's economic situation? Remember, all $ went to the central government then, so I suspect we were actually broke, just that we hid it well. May be the reason for the pathatic $1 cash settlement for resettling people into HDB, I suspect we actually couldn't afford to pay more.

Darth_Revan SG

The Typhoon had no clear upgrade path (and even now, the upgrade path is at the sufference of member nations), and the Rafale was simply expensive because France was the only one selling it, and using it. The Typhoon was also too expensive because its first priority was jobs, and sales second.

weasel1962 SG

Yup, existing tech onboard the Typhoon isn't exactly cutting edge. Doesn't use the latest litening pod. Didn't integrate the AIM-120C-7 and a whole host of other munitions.

The UK still ended up still having to use Tornadoes for the strike mission against Libya from the UK including firing the stormshadows. Rather embarassing considering the missions F-15s and rafales have been taking.

alize SG

I wish we had bought the F-4 instead of the A-4 back then"

I know the problems, just wishing. The Egyptians learnt that when they went from MiGs to F-4s, Vietnam wanted to try but US didn't let them.

This is the first I've heard of the $1 cash settlement for resettling into HDB, but is consistent with current practice. Do you mean all the occupants of farms in Lim Chu Kang, Tekong, Jurong, and etc got $1 for example? When the govt acquires your land "for a public purpose", it will pay $1, and those people would still have to buy their flats. Did that happen? If not, I think it was only cos they couldn't afford it. Flats were $3000 back then but those farmers barely had tens. *Friends, please don't debate the rights and wrongs of the matter, I know we had to build a strong SAF first. I am only asking if this happened.

Underpaid SG

The $1 settlement isn't current, it was in the 60s? 70s?

Now we have 99 year lease, they don't even have to pay once it lapses.

alize SG

The $1 settlement isn't current, it was in the 60s? 70s?

Now we have 99 year lease, they don't even have to pay once it lapses.

Oh the British already introduced the 99 year lease long ago, to sell land at more affordable prices.

Nowadays the govt can still take back 99 year leasehold land as long as they gazette it as "for a public purpose" such as road widening or building MRT. The payment is $1. You only get a valued sum if you are not on the MRT site, but within 500m from it (cos that's not for a public purpose).

We were legally entitled to take part or all of the KTM railway land for $1. But Malaysia would have gone to the ICJ (like Pedra Branca) and humiliated us by getting a fair deal that we don't offer our own citizens.

Darth_Revan SG

Yup, existing tech onboard the Typhoon isn't exactly cutting edge. Doesn't use the latest litening pod. Didn't integrate the AIM-120C-7 and a whole host of other munitions.

It has integration problems of various types last I heard.

Underpaid SG

"Nowadays the govt can still take back 99 year leasehold land as long as they gazette it as "for a public purpose" such as road widening or building MRT. The payment is $1"

Any info to substantiate?

And I do agree the Typhoon would be a worrying buy.

alize SG

"Nowadays the govt can still take back 99 year leasehold land as long as they gazette it as "for a public purpose" such as road widening or building MRT. The payment is $1"

Any info to substantiate?

And I do agree the Typhoon would be a worrying buy.

This falls under the Land Acquisition Act.

Notification that land is required for specific purposes.

5. —(1) Whenever any particular land is needed —

(a) for any public purpose;(b) by any person, corporation or statutory board, for any work or an undertaking which, in the opinion of the Minister, is of public benefit or of public utility or in the public interest; or(c) for any residential, commercial or industrial purposes,

the President may, by notification published in the Gazette, declare the land to be required for the purpose specified in the notification.

Okay let's not deviate from the thread too much. Check it out at http://statutes.agc.gov.sg

How do you think roads get widened etc?

alize SG

F-15E went down in Libya with at least one intact AIM-120C

Not shot down, pilots ejected at high altitude => unexplained

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12819132

amanda.lu862 SG

F-15E went down in Libya with at least one intact AIM-120C

Not shot down, pilots ejected at high altitude => unexplained

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12819132

AIM-120C the long range version

Lots of potential buyers--but oops I read the US bombed the plane's wreckage

Underpaid SG

SOP for info denial.

weasel1962 SG

Link to the UK NAO audit report on typhoon.

http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/1011/management_of_typhoon_project.aspx

alize SG

Anyone saw the 2 Typhoons at PLAB on google earth? Near the running track and swimming pool.

It is being shown as the latest imagery, even though the imagery date to 7 July 2004.

alize SG

I predict our first stealth plane may well be the J-20.

1) SAF only buys mature weapons systems. When we buy the J-20, it might be 20 years from now but still good.

2) China may be assertive in 20 years and expect those calling themselves "friends" to take sides. We will hedge our bets. At most, the J-20s will sit around in their hangars doing nothing.

Supporting the above, Chinese AShBM may level the playing field against the 7th Fleet.

3) Chinese weapons may prove themselves as exports by then. We may start by buying trucks and Norinco ammo before moving up the tech ladder.

4) If SEA countries buy Su-34 or comparable bombers, we will need a similar capability.

5) Our population and leadership wil have significant pro-China leanings by then.

weasel1962 SG

SG won't get J-20. Whole air force infrastructure need to change. No commonality ie trainers, maintainers, parts. SG can't use China networks nor will give PLA access to SG networks so datalinks won't work.

Currently, F-15/16s using sniper pods can send video/data to SAF network. G550/E2Cs can communicate safely with the fighters.

The future F-35 will similarly be able to access internal SAF networks.

There is a possibility that J-20 avionics can be changed to a common architecture but that will require development (just for Singapore), increasing cost and risk. Same issues faced MY when they did that for their su-30s. Ended up with delays and eventual acceptance of a plane with potentially suspect capabilities.

alize SG

It is optimistic but new Chinese weapons will surely have a degree of limited compability with Western systems, for the sake of tradtionally Western-leaning but poorer countries. They supposedly can make compatible targeting pods.

Whether to our satisfaction is another question, but as a deep penetration bomber and not a fighter or CAS aircraft it won't rely as much on interoperability with other assets. Anyway it's unlikely.

weasel1962 SG

Unlikely even on a limited compatibility basis.

US weapons are targeted at China as a potential aggressor. They will not let China have access. Both parties are already engaged in a pseudo cyberwar online so their networks are targeted at defending against each other.

It will be strange if China relies on US systems eg GPS since service denial will happen if a war starts between the 2. Hence China has developed their own Beidou as an alternative to GPS. So all the GPS guided bombs = out of the window and new munitions need to be procured.

US will not allow SG to hook up Chinese systems to US ones or allow access to do so. In a 3G network environment where network is king, limited networking will actually be counter-productive even if the J-20 is a fantastic aircraft. Won't happen.

To be realistic, China is not going to provide their latest a/c which may be used in a conflict with US to be used by a country with such strong military ties to the US either.

alize SG

Perhaps in 20 years time the J-20 is no longer hot and it doesn't compare to the F-35 today anyway? I think if China sells the J-20, the US can only stop us until other countries buy it.

If countries like Thailand, Pakistan, South American and gulf states want to load US systems on Chinese platforms, the US is in no position to stop them. They are offering F-16/18s to India well aware they have Su-30s and an active defence industry that will one day merge the two. As defence costs increase, how else will countries fill their needs without going entirely Chinese/Russian?

That decreases US leverage even more and weakens the ally. Unless you're Israel, planes are no longer a cheap aid item. Even Taiwan must pay full price. I'm particularly eyeing Thailand. If Burma gets MiG-35s and Vietnam Su-33s, they'll be looking for something affordable yet better than the JAS-39.

« Previous Page Next Page »