Singapore's Next Generation Fighter

last SG · 2004-03-08T17:15:05+00:00

Agree that the ILS alone would swing it all to the F-15E. Even politically it maybe a better decision though the benefits would not be as great as South Kore...

Old Bird SG

If the shape of the P51-D Mustang was retained but the insides were modified with the latest air interdiction weapon systems, the engine redesigned and souped up... all the good stuff... would it not be possible for it to stand up against the fighters of today??
How about building it with high tech superplastics and and give it stealth qualities??

It would probably turn circles on the inside of an F16 even!!

So what am I trying to say?? The airframe and design is a proven airframe. In the F16.net.forum there is a picture of an IAF F15 that returned after a midair collision with its right wing completely ripped off leaving only about a foot at the wing root!!!. As long as its large stabilator is intact the F15 can fly - that is testimony to a sound aerodynamic design.

What makes an aircraft stealthy or not is the kind of composites used to manufacture it or else just give it a radar absorbing material coating!!

It may be an Eagle you are looking at on the outside but the insides and blackboxes are not the same anymore. Who knows what is the F15T capable of??

No foreign air force has bought the Typhoon or Rafale yet. Singapore should not be dumb and get suckered enough to buy a fleet of these and then after that pay the price of a finding out the teething troubles that come out with every new plane, car or product. And everyone knows that the subsequent model would be an upgrade based on improvements to screwups discovered in the original.

It would be a sad day if there are yet to discovered airframe design problems suddenly crop up after we have bought the jets. Typhoon and Rafale have not clocked enough years on their airframe to convince that they are good soundly designed planes, planes with good systems and gimmicks in them maybe but not good airframes yet.

So don't write off the F15T yet. Airframe battle damage survivability needs to be considered too.

duotiga83 SG

a serious mistake......Typhoon has a firm order from Austria in Tranche 2 while Greece is on hold.

sbst275 SG

What are you talking abt?

F15T speed, range is better than F18

F15
Speed: Mar 2.5
Range: 5400km (1 of the highest)

F18
Speed: Mar 2 (Hornet is less than 2)
Range: Less than 3000km

SibeiSuayKia SG

i rather take EuroFighter...cause britain is smart they oredi 80% on completion only left on those high tech stuff which is crucial is not finished...but by 2007 i think the problems would be solved when delivery comes

F-15 is proven but cannot pull high Gs cause of its large body
the design is not as aero-dynamic also
We might have to use it against F/A-18 in the future...
judging by how we use it ...it might be a very fair fight cause both fighters appear around that period..

But the F-22 / EuroFighter -->> ( 4 nations ++ radar , AESA and SEAD and AIM-120 AMRAAM and the latest stuff we might be able to use it )

imagine at 2015 we got upgraded eurofighter without problems
instead of using it in live combat...its also quite similar in training exercises or manoevures.
and not to forget another squadron of F-22.

sometimes...
New stuffs need not necessary mean good and
old stuffs need not necessary mean bad..

FA-18 and F-14 is a carrier strike fighter
dun forget ^.^

if they just purchase the F/A-18 and don't forget it needs
a short run way it could be deployed very fast compared to F-15/F-16 which we has

wow if F-15 really had 5400km of range + our use of KC-135 air tankers i think we can even strike some places in the pacific ocean..

eurofighter SG

I think the things here in the topic is damn lame. F-22s for RSAF? Stop dreaming. I think you guys should go do some reading before posting here otherwise the whole forum will be filled with rubbish.

Obersturmfuhrer SG

In the end the plane is just a high-tech machine. The technology only makes the job of the pilot easier and gives him the edge against his adversaries. Untried machines may yet be proven superior to their exhalted (sometimes overhyped) peers during actual conflict. Don’t forget, every plane is untried at the initial part of their lives, you don’t immediately become an expert when you start on something, do you?

Viper52 SG

That is just plain dumb. and shows a serious lack of knowledge of aerodynamics too deep to rectify here. I would suggest you read deeper into aerodynamics before continuing. Oh...and at the same time, some basic physics to start off first.

You're suggesting the impossible.

What makes an aircraft stealthy or not is the kind of composites used to manufacture it or else just give it a radar absorbing material coating!!

Again, a terrible lack of knowledge is being displayed. Materials and RAM are just 2 of the factors. And not the primary factor to boot. The primary factor in stealth is shape, namely lack of sharp edge and corners. More reading up on your part needed.

[/b]It may be an Eagle you are looking at on the outside but the insides and blackboxes are not the same anymore. Who knows what is the F15T capable of??
[/b][/quote]

The insides might be new, but the fact is the concepts on the outside is still old...and as recent events have shown, starting to get long in the tooth.

Its just one of the many factor that require consideration. If we select it just because of this but loses out in all others then we, to use a local term, have stamps over our eyes.

The pros and cons of each contender is already discussed in depth on this topic many times before, as well as on the other forums.

Viper52 SG

It's already started, which is why I prefer the new forum nowadays, as well as its features.

Viper52 SG

Well said, to take it to the extremes, if no one was willing to experiment with new technologies and new ideas, the mainstay in airforces would still be the Fokker Eindecker, tanks would be the old "Mother" types, and we'd still be using Lee-Enfield bolt-actions. Rolling Eyes

Old Bird SG

Just wondering if there is anyone in here who is part of the team that is evaluating the 3 airframe types?? Are some of you here the test pilots too, coz you guys also talk alot about air combat manoevures too.

Some of you guys posts very indepth and interesting articles about the 3 aircraft design backgrounds. Really makes me wonder if this is a forum for qualifed aircraft design engineers.

Come to think of it, how many of you guys here are CAAS or FAA qualified aircraft maintainers??

Anyone in here whose work is directly invovled with the rectification of our current supersonic aircraft platforms, and I don't mean as Crewchiefs but I am more interested in the opinions of those who actually rectify the aircraft?? I am talking about people who talk maintenance based on actual experience.

These are the people who should be commenting on the possible selection winner. All talk here is about aircraft capability, has anyone talked about the maintainability?? So what if it has all the gimmicks on board it ain't worth a jacksquat if the plane cannot even leave the ground because maintenance on the jet is difficult. High tech equipment equals high tech problems too.

If there are none, then we are all armchair engineers and Playstation test pilots, all commenting based on what we have read only.

Viper52 SG

Hang on a second, you mean we aren't allowed to post opinions and points of view here, unless we're qualified to? Well then, it looks like we're gonna have to shut down the forum won't we?

As for new = gimmicky = difficult to maintain, why not try the USN's recent experience on for size? They were facing severe problems funding and maintaining the *old* F-14 Tomcat, and were facing serious serviceability problems. When the USS Abraham Lincoln and Nimitz took their *gimmicky* new Super Hornets to war, it was immediately noticed that the new aircraft, while not as capable as the Tomcat in some areas, particularly range, aircraft availability, sortie completion and overall efficiency rates went sky high. I dunno, but there *might* be a lesson in that story there somewhere? Now I'm no fan of the Super Hornet, and in terms of asthetics, will take the Tomcat and "Legacy" Hornet over the Super Hornet anytime, but I gotta admit that it is time the Tomcat should be allowed to retire gracefully.

As for being qualified and having maintenance experience, I have had shop floor (both "outpost" and depot level) front-end maintenance experience on heavy duty vehicles, so I guess you can say I know which end of the screwdriver is which, and I know the difference between something which is "easy to maintain" and "simple to maintain". And my current job requires me to have more than just a little knowledge of FAA, CAAS, JAA and EASA (and DCA) regulations. My company (who's parent is a global engine manufacturer with a big stake in Singapore's aviation engine market) is looking to secure approval for me to sign airworthiness certificates. Oh, and theres the small thing of me having a degree in Aeronautical Engineering as well. And I know of at least one other regular here who has a fair bit of Aviation Operations experience as well.

So, am I qualified to discuss this topic, O Wise Old Sage?

kingkhong79 SG

The F15 is not obsolete. When we are talking abou choosing the NGF, it's not just a choice of the airframe.Considerations in the areas of availabilty of subsystems such as armaments,missiles,navigation/targeting systems developed for the aircraft are also very important.Compatibility of aircraft with existing equpment is also highly desirable.In our case,choosing the F15 will be a great advantage for the RSAF since existing missiles and electronic equpment like navigation/targeting pods for the F16s can also be used on the F15.On the logistics point of view,the F15 is definitely a winner.And remember the aim120 missiles, they are also cleared for firing by the F15s.comparatively,On the other hand,choosing the rafale or eurofighter will be a logistical nightmare.existing systems and missiles in our inventory may not be compatible with these 2 aircraft and probably, the RSAF will have to obtain a whole new set of inventory specifically for the eurofighter or rafale.oh and tat definitely means keeping a separate inventory at least for the ammunition for the built-in guns.of course, keeping a separate inventory may not be a critical factor in choosing the NGF but the total life cycle cost (TLCC)must definitely be one.it doesnt take a mathematical genius to calculate tat the TLCC for the F15 will be the lowest simply because there are that many more F15s flying in the air around the world compared to the rafales and eurofighters.The F15 will continue to be the mainstay of the US and Israel air forces at least for the next 15years,so we can definitely expect more F15 upgrade packages like radars being developed in the future.At this point in time,it is quite impossible to calculate the TLCC for the EF or rafales.Problems inherent in the EF have yet to be solved so the EF is alr out of the race for our NGF.France is the only operator of the rafale currently but we can definitely be sure tat the french will charge a premium for the rafale spares just like when they charge our army exorbitant prices for amx10 spares.Therefore based on price alone,the F15 wins any day.

Low price alone obviously is not enough in arguing for the choice of F15 for our NGF.Performance is also vital.In this respect,the F15 also wins interms of the payload it can carry and the range it can go.Initially i was expecting the RSAF to go for more F16s but of course we now know that the F16 was dropped.the dropping of the F16 in the selection speaks volumes for wat the RSAF wants.It wants an aircraft that can carry more and fly further than the F16.The aircraft will be used primarily for deep strike interdiction.Your might argue tat among the 3 aircraft the F15 has the largest radar cross-section but i do not think that is a big problem since flying at low level with a comprehensive suite of radar jammers,this problem will be largely nullified.anyway the EF and rafale are not that stealthy even though they r more stealthy than the F15.Being more stealthy doesnt help tat much in avoiding detection with the advances in radar technology.Recall tat the F117 was shot shot down over yugoslavia even though it was supposed to be a stealth plane.Admittedly, the F15 may not be as capable in a dogfight when compared to the RF or rafale but this may not be a deciding factor in choosing the NGF.tat is beacuse dogfights may become less relevant in the future due to more air-to-air engagements taking place at beyond visual range.The RSAF doctrine is to take out the enemy aircraft on the ground before they managed to take off and then to mop up any remaining aircraft that managed to take off at beyond visual range.Dogfights will be the last resort.the F15 can perform this role very effectively and of course it can carry more aim-120s compared to the EF or rafale.

Anyway I'm very sure the RSAF has chosen the F15 already.Why did you think singapore was so active in supporting the american war in iraq,sending in LST and air tankers for missions in iraq.this is all part of the agreement in exchange for the americans selling us the F15.Why did u think PM Goh and Teo chee hean visited the US recently?To seal the F15 contract before the November Presidential elections in America of course.oh and of course,as part of the deal in supporting the americans in iraq,the aim-120s will now be on singapore soil already.For multi-billion deals,the mindef will always stick to the tried-and-tested and battle-proven like the F16 and apaches.It wont be any different this time.

As for u saying the F15 is obsolete and no match for the EF or rafale.i suggest u should refer to the israelis for confirmation.

duotiga83 SG

most of you all forget 1 thing about F-15 is the most expensive airframe among 3 of the aircrafts.......

duotiga83 SG

and pls people...don't say RSAF have selected F-15T ALREADY....just like the rumour about Blk 60 F-16E/F selected in the top 3 NGF Rolling Eyes

sbst275 SG

Nope, in terms of total pricing, the EF2000 is the most ex.

Why, the Euro currency has shot up

sbst275 SG

Rather, MINDEF is happy with the F15T

The EF2000 is gonna to get the most attention after 1 report

LazerLordz SG

I totally agree that the RSAF should get the F-15S.One might comment that the EF2000, or the Rafale F3 may be newer in design and have more new-fangled stuff.However, we should not forget that this is primarily a programme which will bridge the gap between our Vipers and the JSF.The F-15 already outperforms the aircraft we currently have, and is quite nicely configured to take over the deep strike/bomber role that the A4SU currently undertakes.The Eurofighter may be able to supercruise but we should not base that as one major criteria for selection.After all, why bother trying to develop a comprehensive air-to-air refueling system from scratch and learning all its salient points when you are only concerned with combat radius based on fuel amount from take off.Rafale is not battle-proven and the EF2000 has already met with many hiccups.When it comes to the Army, singapore may take their chances with indigenous equipment.But when it comes to aviation, I do not think the policy of the ministry is that of risk-taking, especially when the risks do not constiute any radical experimentation in the form of unknown technology.The Israelis use the F-15 and I feel we may see their magic done on some Eagles that are flying our way probably quite soon. Cool

Viper52 SG

Sigh...the defenders of the F-15 keep on flogging the same dead horses here, from Page 1 of this thread to now. I'm tired to repeating the same old facts again and again, so I'll keep my answers short and snappy.

The logistical commonality is a plus in the Eagle's favour, but these must be balanced with the fact that qualitatively, the European equipment is newer, and are all as good if not even better. The AIM-120 is a classic case.

At this point in time,it is quite impossible to calculate the TLCC for the EF or rafales.Problems inherent in the EF have yet to be solved so the EF is alr out of the race for our NGF.

5 years is quite a bit of time to iron out bugs.

Have stated my case on this. Both payload and range are not that important considerations any more.

Initially i was expecting the RSAF to go for more F16s but of course we now know that the F16 was dropped.the dropping of the F16 in the selection speaks volumes for wat the RSAF wants.It wants an aircraft that can carry more and fly further than the F16.The aircraft will be used primarily for deep strike interdiction.

I have seen a lot of news articles pointing to the fact that air-to-air is primary, with strike as a more secondary concern. Please get your facts right before plucking nonsense out of thin air (as usual).

Low level? What decade do you live in? I've addressed this issue a while back on this thread. Stop whipping the deceased mare.

Comprehensive suite of jammers? More so than Rafale?

That bit of lower RCS might make the difference is seeing and shooting down your opponent in BVR.

Did you realise how much effort went into shooting down that *ONE* F-117? Besides, the American's complacency made it a lot easier for the Yugoslavs

Admittedly, the F15 may not be as capable in a dogfight when compared to the RF or rafale but this may not be a deciding factor in choosing the NGF.tat is beacuse dogfights may become less relevant in the future due to more air-to-air engagements taking place at beyond visual range.

Yup. Thats the same reasoning that saw both the US and USSR ditching guns on their most modern fighters in the 1960s. The Vietnam happened...and the rest, as they say, is history.

Yes, thats probably why the RSAF is so keen on setting up ACM fights against the French, Americans, Australians, British, New Zealanders (previously) and Indians. Rolling Eyes

the F15 can perform this role very effectively and of course it can carry more aim-120s compared to the EF or rafale.

More effective than Typhoon and Rafale? I'd like to see concrete proof of that statement. Or are you indulging in fact-plucking again?

And again Rolling Eyes

Why did you think singapore was so active in supporting the american war in iraq,sending in LST and air tankers for missions in iraq.this is all part of the agreement in exchange for the americans selling us the F15.Why did u think PM Goh and Teo chee hean visited the US recently?To seal the F15 contract before the November Presidential elections in America of course.

Well talk about reading too much into something! Laughing

[quote]
As for u saying the F15 is obsolete and no match for the EF or rafale.i suggest u should refer to the israelis for confirmation.
For being obsolete, when did I say that?

As for being no match, why? Did the Israelis pit their F-15s against the Typhoon and Rafale?

Sheesh... Rolling Eyes

duotiga83 SG

for your info, pls refer to JDW i have the article here want me to quote?? Rolling Eyes

Old Bird SG

Viper52,

You talk I listen.

Yep, you are right. This is a forum where anyone and everyone can talk like a rocket scientist.
Your current job requires you to have a little knowledge of FAA, CAAS etc etc.....
Mind you a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

I just asked a question about the qualifications of the people in here .... no need to get your knickers all twisted. You qualified, you qualified, it was my personal opinion only. I hope I am entitled that.

Just because I put forward some of my views on an aircraft other than your favourite it does not mean you can put me down like as though you know everything about aircraft maintenance and aircraft design.

For that matter you don't even know what my profession is.

There is no need for you to comment about what I said about souping up the P51-D Mustang. What I put forward was a scenario. No country keeps their aircraft stock standard, meaning having all OEM parts in them. There are always modifications done to suit the orbat. This is what gives them the edge over the neighbours. You always want them to think you have only the basic platform. So a Mustang may not just be a Mustang, neither an F16 be only an F16 or an A4 just a standard A4.

So if Singapore were to buy the F15, it would never be stock standard too.
It could be modified to a point it would kick the hell out of the Rafale and Typhoon. Lets not question the possibilities and capabilities of the after market black boxes.

And just because you do not agree with my views... it does not mean it is dumb. And there is no need for you to tell me that I need to read more about aerodynamics, done enough of that in my life time.

So, like you said, this is a forum where anyone can put forward their views, it does not give you the right to shout anyone down who does not agree with you just because you are a moderator here.

And I never claimed to be a "Wise old sage", those are your words. And frankly, I think you are getting personal to a point of attacking an individual. I would not stoop that low so I still address you as Viper52.

Best regards.

« Previous Page Next Page »