Will Singapore have its first stealth plane?

weasel1962 SG

LO is the correct designation for these aircraft. F22 to F35.

"Stealth" is a marketing gimmick. Even the F-22 can be detected on radar... if you get in within 8 miles and are still alive. By then, you should be able to eyeball it. =D

Any LO aircraft can be detected on radar if you get close enough. The problem is how close and whether you are still alive by then.

Agree its a question of the potential opponents. If all one is going to face are Suks, then cost could be a prohibiting factor for LO ftrs. Considering the increasing range of missiles, might not be an issue.

However, in the context of the region with everyone (China, India, Japan etc) developing their own LO a/c, it would make future fighter choices moot for rsaf.

amanda.lu862 SG

However, in the context of the region with everyone (China, India, Japan etc) developing their own LO a/c, it would make future fighter choices moot for rsaf.

The F-35s are already facing production and costs problems. So best to stick to new half-stealthy aircraft like Malaysia is doing with its Su-30s

weasel1962 SG

The F-35s are already facing production and costs problems. So best to stick to new half-stealthy aircraft like Malaysia is doing with its Su-30s

The F-15s don't come cheap either. AESA radar, JHMCS, latest EW + missiles + munitions.

Old chinese saying. 1 cent money, 1 cent product.

The Suks are non-stealthy aircraft rather than half stealthy (unless you mean you don't see them in the air half as often as they are only half as reliable).

amanda.lu862 SG

The F-15s don't come cheap either. AESA radar, JHMCS, latest EW + missiles + munitions.

Old chinese saying. 1 cent money, 1 cent product.

The Suks are non-stealthy aircraft rather than half stealthy (unless you mean you don't see them in the air half as often as they are only half as reliable).

The Su-30s are just as modern--the 15 is a bloody old aircraft. SG shouldnt have bought it.

mancha SG

I think it won't be easy to steal from Malaysia anymore.

weasel1962 SG

The Su-30s are just as modern--the 15 is a bloody old aircraft. SG shouldnt have bought it.

Its not a question of modern but of capability. The airframe design may be dated but that has rarely been an issue for air combat. The aircraft being new builds are actually new. Both aircraft were designed for specific roles and excel at them. There are a number of capabilities built into the F-15SG that even the newer F-35s will not be able to fully replicate.

The 60 year old B-52s and KC-135s are far older yet the last pilot to fly the aircraft probably hasn't even been born yet.

Darth_Revan SG

Most Gen 4+++ aircraft don't really rank as stealthy. To be sure, the newer versions of the Sukhoi 35/37 use composites to reduce the signature, but that's about it.

But really, I don't think the RSAF wants to try something that our neighbours use.

amanda.lu862 SG

Most Gen 4+++ aircraft don't really rank as stealthy. To be sure, the newer versions of the Sukhoi 35/37 use composites to reduce the signature, but that's about it.

But really, I don't think the RSAF wants to try something that our neighbours use.

It stuck to US planes for political reasons. It could have chosen the a "little" stealthy Eurofighter but instead chose an old plane in the form of the F-15E. Those are definitely not steathly.

Non-plane wise the RSAF was comfortable enough to choose the Russian Igila over the American Stinger.

Underpaid SG

The Euro Typhoon was NOT stealthy. They tried, but the forward canards were too prominent, and removing them defeated the design purpose of the plane. They reduced the signature as best as they could, but it was not stealth or LO.

And parts commonality and ammo compatability are not political considerations.

amanda.lu862 SG

And parts commonality and ammo compatability are not political considerations.

It has a lower RCS than old fourth generation planes like the F-15E

http://www.eurofighter.com/capabilities/technology/design-features.html

http://eurofighter.airpower.at/faq.htm

IS not Was. Grammar

Yes parts commality are political considerations. That is a factor when you train with the Americans.

weasel1962 SG

Irrelevant discussion. The F-15SE features can be retrofitted which renders the F-15E with a significantly lower RCS than the typhoon.

btw, the first link does not state that the rcs is lower. It does state that LO tech has been implemented. LO tech has been implemented on board F-15s since the 1970s eg LPI modes for F-15 radars. A phased array radar is as un-LO as it gets (unless its switched off). If you understood what an AESA + onboard F-15 EW does, one would understand the context of rcs discussions.

the second link is a fan-site. Since its in German, it would be helpful if you can identify which part of it states a lower RCS pls.

BJK SG

It is foolish to purchase this expensive bomber. Who are our likely enemies? They are nearby, hence missiles, artillery are sufficient to incapacitate them. The West (US, UK) are differrent as they like intervention in other countries to show their prowess so that they can sell these military hardware. So far after the WWII, the West have been attacking weak countries ( Afghanistan, Kosovo, Iraq, Libya which in my view, not a good match to gauge their military superiority.

Underpaid SG

BJ, it can be used as a fighter too, and a fairly good one, though I do agree on the weaker countries part. We need a new bomber though as we retired our A-4s, so we have a job (ground support) but no plane to do it.

Aircraft have two big advantages over indirect fire.

1) The pilot actually "sees" or has radar contact with the target, so is much more likely to kill it, unlike artillery where you need a spotter to do target aquisition and BDA.

2) A plane can loiter around an area and perform interdiction. Arty cannot as it has to move to avoid counter fire.

weasel1962 SG

If one looks at the region, who has superior fighters? The F-15s are more than adequate to handle the current/potential russki-based threats. The funny thing is that some people swallow the propaganda about how good certain contemporary a/c really are but fail to realise that the F-15s not only matches their strengths but excels in a lot of other areas.

On cost, the F-15s replace older a/c on a several to one ratio. RSAF currently only bought 1 sqn of F-15s. There are already cost savings in terms of infrastructure, pilot training etc.

As to requirement, if one argues that Singapore doesn't need to defend its airspace, then of course, any fighter is a waste of money.

If one thinks that Singapore needs to defend its airspace, then the most cost-effective fighter is needed. A fighter that can excel in several roles is cost-effective. One cent money = one cent effectiveness. Singapore is a small country with a limited defence budget. Other bigger countries may be able to afford dedicated fighters and yet provide their armies with other kinds of support, but can Singapore?

alize SG

On cost, the F-15s replace older a/c on a several to one ratio. RSAF currently only bought 1 sqn of F-15s. There are already cost savings in terms of infrastructure, pilot training etc.

As to requirement, if one argues that Singapore doesn't need to defend its airspace, then of course, any fighter is a waste of money.

Especially the latest F-15s with AESA that the US is refitting to their fleet.

Limited defence budget- not exactly. The defence budget has been holding steady as a % of GDP. It used to be 25% and if encessary, we'll bring it back up again.

alize SG

The 60 year old B-52s and KC-135s are far older yet the last pilot to fly the aircraft probably hasn't even been born yet.

My money on the C-130 outliving them all.

amanda.lu862 SG

the F-15E/SG was the only pruchase that did not match the prevailing military hardware of the times. theSAF bought the F-16 when it was in its limelight. The frigates were sought after when it wa the era of new stealthy ships. And the Leopard Tanks were purchases because that model was up-to-date (andused during a UN peacekeeping mission). Only theF-15E, a 1980s fighter was pruchases two decades after it was rolled out, and chose over newer and equally advanced fighters like the Rafale and the Typhoon.

Underpaid SG

And what of it's air combat record? And the ability to 1:1 powerclimb? And wow, it's old blah blah. Does that mean our F-5s are unusable? I said it before and I say it again. In modern air combat, you don't fight the PLANE, you fight against the AIM. And the F-15 can spew a hell lot more missiles than either of the 2 planes you mentioned.

New does NOT mean better. Get that clear. And the Typhoon sale is a foregone NO, so forget about it. Remember, VERY weak air to ground capabilities, bad at multi-roles, which Singapore NEEDS. So no matter how uber it's air to air is, unless it can bomb better, its still going to be NO.

"the F-15E/SG was the only pruchase that did not match the prevailing military hardware of the times"

There are other reasons, some of which I only discovered by extreme chance and a seriously THACO meeting with an aircraft maintanence tech. Only that 1) the "competition" may not have been really a competition, and 2) the "times" may not be the timeframe you were thinking of.

alize SG

You know, you have a real tendency to support the exotic or underdog option for the sake of being different / contrarian. You're willing to go the different way because it's the only hope of it being the smarter way.

Which is cool if there aren't any very compelling reasons to the contrary.

I've been there. Now I'm in my twenties and it's just not so cool anymore.

You could field some incontestable arguments if you put your mind to it, but you're starting with the conclusions and not the reasons.

weasel1962 SG

Again incorrect. The F-15SG was pitched against all the best contemporary fighters available at that point in time (~yr 1999 to final selection in 2005). Unfortunately the fighters that weren't available included the F-35 and the F-22s.

Neither the Rafale and Typhoon were sold with an AESA radar which I don't think you understand the benefits of. In terms of munitions load-out, avionics, pilot training, maintenance, performance, future upgrade path and sustainability, etc, all of which are clear the F-15SG comes up on top in areas where it matters to the RSAF.

There are many reasons why the Rafale cannot find an external buyer and the Typhoon faces cuts from even its own users.

You have confused the F-15SG with the leopard MBT purchase which is a 2nd hand purchase as opposed to a newbuild. Also you have confused the F-15SG with the F-15E. Much in the same way the current F-16D Blk 52+ are definitely different and much more advanced that the F-16s of 20 years ago.

« Previous Page Next Page »