The issue with ST is that they have very little in-house
capability to research and develop products. A lot of their
products were based on technology they purchased from abroad. Take
the drive train of the Terrex. That was purchased from an Irish
company. ST is more like some... salesman that goes around selling
stuff they didn't invent. Throw in their notorious QC problems for
extra kick. Never mind that it is likely the right people don't get
credit either. *grumble*
all very true and valid points. but lets look at some other
defence projects for example. take a look at the M1 abrams.
how much of their parts and technology is uniquely american ?
the chassis was derived from joint US-german research project to
produce a tank (manufactured by chrysler yes, but based on
US-german technical cooperation)
the gun for the M1A2 is a licensed built L44 from KMW.
truth is, as weapons system become more complex , it not longer
seems feasible to construct all components in house.
just look at the recent 787 / A380 and F35 manufacturing
process. they are not even located within a single country but
cross continental, global efforts to harness the best possible
synergies.
that being said and done, ST eng is a pretty diverse firm isnt
it ? maybe the weapons side (is it ST kinetics ? not sure) has more
of a "buy and resell" business model, presenting very little
originality and extremely little value add.
but the other aspects of the conglomerate are pretty solid and
strong. ST aviation has a strong solid reputation for good work. ST
marine derives most of its revenue from rigs and oil exploration
work conversions. in short, a pretty good blue-chip firm with
strong fundamentals from non-core defence sectors.
i m not being pro ST or anything. i do think that they have alot
of issues especially with their weapons development (i think the ST
kintetics branch basically relies on SAF spending to survive)
but the fact is that ST's main areas are non-defence related.
and they do provide some form of overlap / synergies with defence.
Its basically turning to the most efficient solution avaliable
since what the SAF wants, ST engineering is able to provide within
its various commercial divisions.
if ST eng were to survive on arms sales alone, ST eng would die.
traditionally strong arnaments manufacturers come from countries
with large militaries and a strong domestic demand.
As for know how to build stealth ships, very few. It is likely
the US and Europeans are pretty good at it, since they are great at
material science thus RAM materials. The US of course remains the
world leader at it.
yeap. but how many countries posess the technology and are
willing to export it pretty liberally in terms of sales ?
the frogs are known to be indiscriminate with sales , but such
indiscriminate sales often comes with a price. America can be
pretty stingy with technology when they want to be.
SG isnt exactly very stringent on Arms exports and whom we sell
to as well. just look at the amount of small arms flooding Burma
and used by the Junta and the anti Junta rebels.
in that sense, yeap, we might have obtained ourselves a niche
market segment, but nontheless, a segment that gives us a precious
foothold to exploit the possible "troubled peace" scenarios that
most people envisage for the next 50 years
