Exocets???

tankee1981 SG

This newspaper article from Agence France Presse on August 31, 2000 claims that Singapore bought Exocet MM-39 missiles to arm the stealth frigates. This is despite the fact that the official surface to surface missiles which Mindef announced is the Harpoons. Anyone can verify this news?

http://www.singapore-window.org/sw00/000831af.htm

tankee1981 SG

It is possible that they have mistaken the Aster 30 missiles which we eventually bought from the French at that point of time. I am just wondering if the purchase of Exocets claimed by the article is real. Very Happy

spencer99 SG

I know there is MM38 - shipbased or landbased version
AM39 - Air launched version
MM40 - shipbased version.

I didn't know they have MM39 exocets.

actually we have 2 types of anti ship missle now. it would be good if we have a

Black Aces SG

Originally posted by tankee1981:
It is possible that they have mistaken the Aster 30 missiles ...

Most probably is that the French ecomomic daily La Tribune mistook the Aster 15 (isn't this the Aster version (15 rather then 30) that the RSN bought?) for Exocet.

Eventhough the Israeli paper (Haaretz) reported this, one can deduce this as the BARAKs 'lost' to the Asters to arm the FORMIDABLEs. Remember RSN ships (esp the Victory-class) are armed with BARAKS for point-defence, whereas the FORMIDABLE-class are armed with Aster 15 (for point defence).

Therefore IMO, I believe the 'secret weapon' that the French daily claimed is the Aster 15s rather than the Exocets. P/s note that the Agence France Presse reported this BACKKKK in Aug 31, 2000. Remember the RSN was then (currently also?) the 1st International customer for the Aster 15s.

Joe Black SG

Can I also point out that Exocet MM-39 is an air-launch version. MM-38/40 are surface launch.

There were rumours that RSAF actually acquired some air launched Exocets for the Super Pumas as early as the 90s, but I have yet to see any evidence. It is a known fact now that RSAF in fact has air launch Harpoon.

As for Aster 15, it is a fire and forget missile compared with the Barak which needs a fire-control radar to illuminate the targets. Thus, each Victory class MCV has 2 of these radar, one facing forward, and facing rearward, sandwiching the main mast.

tankee1981 SG

Thanks for the info guys, yes its Aster 15 instead of 30. It is a fact that we can deploy the air launched version of the Harpoons from the Fokker 50 MPA, now we also know that the Exocets mentioned in the article is an air launched version, my question is whether its possible to have 2 types of air launched anti-ship missiles in our arsenal? Maybe one to arm the Super Pumas and the other to arm the MPA? Very Happy

^Delta^ SG

Its definitely possible to have 2 types of anti-ship missiles for 2 very different platforms. Consider the fact that the Soviets deployed more than 5 types of anti-ship missiles of different ranges and capabilities in the 1980s. One may question the matter of support and logistics but missiles definitely are not as maintainence intensive as aircraft.

Harpoon missiles, being of American origin, arm the Fokker 50 MPA fleet which have a APS-134 search radar each. Integreting Exocets with the Super Pumas would be an easy process considering that both are of French origin.

Just an interesting point to share, the Aster 15 SAM is also a potent anti-ship weapon as it can fly a sea skimming profile at 4 times the speed of sound. Keep in mind that our Barak missiles have been tested against surface targets and have proven effective. Such concepts of using SAMs as short range anti-ship weapons will increase the surface warfare capabilities of many navies.

tankee1981 SG

Originally posted by ^Delta^
Just an interesting point to share, the Aster 15 SAM is also a potent anti-ship weapon as it can fly a sea skimming profile at 4 times the speed of sound. Keep in mind that our Barak missiles have been tested against surface targets and have proven effective. Such concepts of using SAMs as short range anti-ship weapons will increase the surface warfare capabilities of many navies.

This is definitely intresting! Does this mean that potentially any missiles can be use in a role other that its intended one with changes in the programming of the guidance systems? Very Happy

^Delta^ SG

Actually no changes are needed. If a Aster 15 missile can intercept incoming sea skimming missiles which travel from Mach 0.8 to 2.0 depending on the type, hitting an enemy ship which travels at most 40 knots would not present a problem at all. Wink

You can look up on other naval SAMs too. The Americans are known to employ their Standard SM-1/2 SAMs as anti-surface weapons as well, so do the Russians with their SA-N-6 Grumble missiles.

blackchickenahkai SG

anyone rmbred the Falkans war?
kinda ring a bell..exocets..hmmn..
sounds like argentine's war ship is using it..scared the hell out of british's air craft carriers Laughing

so anyone have a pict of it? mind posting?

|-|05| SG

The british pulled out their carriers of 2 ships were sunk. 1 of which was a rather new ship the HMS Shefield i believe?

spartan6 SG

I heard we r interested in Exocet MM-40 Block2 , a supersonic version Neutral E AM-39 is air-lanched,SM-39 sub-lanched but no MM-39 Shocked .Unlikely we will buy e normal MM-40 but Block2 possiable

spartan6 SG

There is rumour tat e RSN plans 2 use e harpoon on our frigate in land-attack if needed by rewriting it guidance program Confused

spencer99 SG

If I am not wrong the french delivered four air launched exocets to the Argentines and also a number of Super Etendards

They were used in 3 seperate attacks, of which two were successful.

The first attack was aimed at one of the carreirs of the naval task force. but it hit the Type 42 destroyer HMS Sheffield. That ship caught fire and sank. Apparently, the warhead didn't explore but the fuel from the missle causes uncontrollable fires.

The 2nd attack hit the merchant ship Atlantic Conveyor. This was a container ship redesigned to ferry helicopters and harrier jets.

The loss of this ship severely handicapped the heli lift capability of the ground forces in the Falklands as almost all the helicopters (chinooks and Wessex) were lost.

tankee1981 SG

Will it be a good idea to have both the Harpoons and another type of anti-ship missile (such as Exocets) in our arsenal? Reason being that if one type is being used, the enemy will be more likely to escape from an anti-ship missile attack once they have learned how to jam the guidance system. Having another type even in smaller quantities can act as a backup (such as being able to be deployed on the Seahawks which is in turn deployed from the frigates armed with Harpoons) should the first type failed. Of course this will bring about the problem of additional logistics and maintenance. Very Happy

Lakiun SG

hmm juz 2 cents of my opinion….another possible way of hitting a target is to design a missile dat not only skim to itz target but a min or at certain distance b4 the missile home in, an operator from the ship guide it to home in by having realtime camera which cuts off video tranmission seconds b4 hitting rather den it homes in by itself. This prevents the possibilty of the missile being electronically jammed by the ship to be hit. The only way such final operator guided missile can b defeated is thru CIWS. My guess an operator guided control might come cheaper den the final automated homing guidance system fitted into most cruising anti-ship missile.

Arthas79 SG

Just an interesting point to share, the Aster 15 SAM is also a potent anti-ship weapon as it can fly a sea skimming profile at 4 times the speed of sound. Keep in mind that our Barak missiles have been tested against surface targets and have proven effective. Such concepts of using SAMs as short range anti-ship weapons will increase the surface warfare capabilities of many navies.

Can`t remember if there is a conversion program Falcone. But that idea is certainly cool. I believe it will certainly happen in the near future(if it has`nt) just like the American Standard and Barak. Afterall, they`re in competition.
I would have preferred ESSMs and Standards for the Formidables but if i could hazard a guess, it`s probably to circumvent the Malaysians in buying the Asters. For the lack of a better choice, they are faced with a system already in used by a potential rival and a contemporary system in the ESSMs and Standards(probably never...) which they will find hard getting thier hands on; or just too cumbersome to maintain given the country of origin linked as it is to thier foriegn policies among others.

Im eagerly waiting for future add-ons on the Formidables though.