Future Weapons of SAF

last SG · 2009-01-14T09:38:51+00:00

I am not trying to argue we should have just questioning now that we have a larger and heavier armour force how does SAF going to support and maintain at the...

gd4u SG

Some equipment can last up to 20-30 years with upgrades - just look at our AMX13, F5s etc So I think a lot of the new stuff we get now or in new future will still be around in 20 to 30 years time.

Air Force

We will have F35s & probably some F16s. Maybe even Typhoons in future ?

Upgraded AH64s will still be around. New gen of utility helis needed to replace Super Pumas.

Maybe A400s to replace C130s

UCAVs to replace Fokker 50s.

Further upgrades to G550s - perhaps will be unmanned in the near future.

I dun think we will be getting A400M since RMAF are going to have it too. (Just my 2cents worth, although we do have some similar equipment). U talking about the Fokker50 MPA?? UCAV sounds good, i was thinking they might get the still developing Kawasaki XP-1.

Hopefully the FSG to replace the Class30 Trackway. PSB2 for a stronger brigding option ..
http://www.kmweg.com/gb/frame.php?page=23
http://www.kmweg.com/gb/frame.php?page=25

Arapahoe SG

just thought of something how did SAF move the 2A4 to Australia?....... By LST?

slim10 SG

Commercial shipping.

Commander31 SG

You know, the digital SAF uniform should have green or brown boots. It will further enhance the camoflage.

touchstone_2000 SG

hmm IIRC Minister for Def has mentioned about interest in A400M. Not surprising since a C130 is way too small and a C17 is way too big not to mention about cost.

The only alternative is an Antonov An-70?

slim10 SG

Commercial airlift. SIA cargo has 14 B747-400F with 110 tonnes payload (more than AN-70). SIA is also retiring their remaining fleet of B747 which can be converted to -400F freighters.

Buy AN-70 = white elephant. Problem with military transport is use for short time in 1 year, then no use for rest of the year. Even if in use, 90% of time, fly half empty so wasting fuel and capacity. Commercial airlift, not in military use = commercial use. Also SIA/Silkair got different aircraft for differing loads so fly full or near full (and also SAF will support SG economy).

SAF has no role (except tanker) that can't be fulfilled by commercial lift. Need to evacuate, use airbus/boeing aircraft. Transport personnel? fly airbus/boeing even more comfortable than C130 or A400M. Even C-130 get converted into supplement tanker.

In war, SAF no need to transport anything by aircraft.

One possibility, SG will get MRTT to replace KC-135s (1959/60s built) and use for specific transport needs (already super exp). KC767/777 or A340 MRTT. KC-777 good as long range to support US-SG redeployment. Tactical LAPES missions, SAR, use C-27J otherwise use CH-47. C-27J super cheap compared to C-130/A400M and in use by USAF and many other countries.

Arapahoe SG

didn't mean to change topics but isn't it wise to acquire military transport plane that could carry 2A4? ( I assume that C130 not able to fit) outsource during peace time but not sure if is wise during tension time?

slim10 SG

KC-135 can use for 80 year life. RSAF KC-135R built in 1959, 61 and 63 (2). So can use up to 2039, 2041 and 2043 but still think more likely replaced over next decade or 2.

C-130B built in 1958 and 1960 so just as old as KC-135s.

slim10 SG

In normal time, not all L2A4 deployed overseas. Just enough for training needs.

During potential tension, L2A4 won't be deployed overseas. Tension also unlikely to be shorter than time taken to transport back via SIA cargo (6 hours to australia, 1-2 hours to load and 6 hours back).

In wartime, even military transport aircraft got problem on landing. Also, how many AN-70 can SAF afford? got a lot of other things to spend on. Definitely cannot match number of B747-400F. At the same time, even commercial aircraft nowadays equip with self protection eg flares. See IAI/Elbit offerings...

Would RSAF prefer more F-35 or AN-70 to carry L2A4? More fighter plane definitely better than more transport aircraft. Also, if L2A4 not outside SG, then AN-70 become white elephant again.

slim10 SG

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3898951&c=EUR&s=AIR

Quite ironic that A-330 is offered in place of A400M due to A400M production delays.

gd4u SG

Ie to say, further commercialising (aka outsourcing) our medium transport and airlift roles? Hmm, nice idea. But there would still be a need to carry out strategic airlift needs. The C-27 is good, but it still looks abit old to purchase already ...

slim10 SG

The C-27J was selected by US Army and USAF for its future cargo aircraft in 2007 and 1st aircraft only delivered in Sep 2008. I don't think it is a bit old.

http://www.c27j.com/

In fact L-3 is also entering the C-27J for the USAF combat rescue tanker comp which will allow for in-flight and ground refuel (cue C-130 role replacement).

http://www.c-27j.com/files/4_20060405045219.pdf

Did I mention STOL capability?

I did a more detailed analysis here. 1/3 to 1/4 price of C-130 but 1/2 the capability.

http://militarynuts.com/index.php?showtopic=2314

spartan_6 SG

I dun think e 2 Vastergotland subs will be replaces in 30 years time, they will most likely operates along e 4 new AIP subs

And E AA guns wont go, no air defence is complete without AA guns

6 new stealth corvettes will most likely end up looking likee Visby

E mistral & Python 5 will replace e Rayrider

spartan_6 SG

BTW B747-400F have problem transporting MBT

1)No ramp or lift capable of lift MBT

2)Floorboard not strong enough & modifying e floorboard will take LOADS of time & effort

slim10 SG

Yup, you are right about the loader (max 60k lbs for tunners or something like that).

I disagree on the modification bit though (won't take that much time and effort and certainly not as much time and effort as building new C-17s). Its not modifying the entire aircraft and loading isn't that major an issue to overcome (80 ton cranes to lift MBT onto a constructed fixed platform capable of carrying 6X tons at fuselage height). Commercial solutions include:

100 ton Lifts:

http://www.nauticexpo.com/prod/paolo-de-nicola/travel-lift-23347-185523.html

100 ton pullers on the platform.

http://www.posilock.com/100_Ton/100ton.htm

But the difference in opinion is irrelevant per below so I won't go much into it.

Seen the cost of a C-17 lately? US$350m each....

http://www.dsca.mil/PressReleases/36-b/2008/NATO_08-32.pdf

Ultimately, its far cheaper to buy 24 new Leopard 2s and base them permanently in Australia just for training (probably cost US$100-200m or something) rather than buying transport aircraft just to ship them back once for an event ie war that may not happen (or even to do modification, if required). MBT numbers not that significant just to justify the transports. Nah, ultimately still commercial shipping or even LSTs. DSTA/Mindef aren't dumb.

Some interesting links on the issue from CK & gang (aside from the standard rhetoric, there are some interesting facts):

http://www.ausairpower.net/wp82-draft.pdf

http://www.ausairpower.net/May-the-Force-Be-With-You-Cooper-P.pdf

http://www.ausairpower.net/API-Tanker-2000.html

Fingolfin_Noldor SG

I dun think e 2 Vastergotland subs will be replaces in 30 years time, they will most likely operates along e 4 new AIP subs

And E AA guns wont go, no air defence is complete without AA guns

6 new stealth corvettes will most likely end up looking likee Visby

E mistral & Python 5 will replace e Rayrider

The hull life of the submarines is unlikely that long. We'd have to replace them by some time in 2020-2030.

spartan_6 SG

It not only e floorboard tat needs mod, it affects e airframe

I agree e Vastergotlands maybe they wont be around in 30 years time but they surely will be around for another 10-15 years or when e news class enter survice, e Navy plans 2 operate a 6 boat fleet

Anyway i will like any comments about my points

spartan_6 SG

Ya e C-17A r not cheap but they r sure r useful for bringing our AH-64D,CH-47SD,T/A-50 or M-346 back home maybe leasing of only 4 aircraft is logical

Not 2 worried about our Superpuma, our LST will do

slim10 SG

The navy plans to operate a 4 sub fleet.
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_event…

The B747-400F airframe is already stressed to carry 110 tons.

I agree with idea of leasing. USAF/RAAF may support SG by transporting the AH-64s and CH-47s back via their C-17/5s (which they have a lot more). If I understand correctly, that’s how the AH-64s were deployed from to SG in 2006.

The AH-64/CH-47s with external tanks can redeploy back to SG on its own steam from Brunei, Thailand and even India (via a stopover in port blair). Only those at Silverbell will probably need to be transported.

Under PPP, RSAF may not own the jet trainers. The jets will not likely be used in SG. If T-50 is purchased, it can also deploy on its own steam from Korea (via Taiwan and Brunei w 3 tanks).

In any case, there will be contingency planning to ensure that in any crisis, a significant proportion of the fleets will be in SG.

Arapahoe SG

i am just looking at the current usage of Armour in the various Training ground. Namely : S.A. Aus, and India.

In time of crisis in SG you need heavy lift within a short period of time to move Asset from different direction back to SG. To scramble for heavy lift in time of needs may be hard to come by as there are other countries may have the same requirement or vendors may refuse to fly over hostile airspace.

It may be a bridge too far.

« Previous Page Next Page »