Stealth warships to form core of Singapore navy

last SG · 2003-11-15T00:14:14+00:00

Actually RSN & any navies has exercise on ship to ship transfer at sea for training. Commercial or miltary oilers r meant for refueling of ships at high...

cavsg SG

Rare glimpse of S'pore's naval research given by Defence Ministry, which says homegrown technology is a must

By David Boey

SINGAPORE'S new fleet of stealth warships will form the backbone of the 'next generation navy', carrying the latest in weapons and sensors.

To add firepower to the six 110m warships, which will come into service from 2007, defence planners are looking into arming them with more agile anti-ship missiles that fly faster than the speed of sound.

The first of the Republic of Singapore Navy's new squadron of frigates is still being constructed in France and the others here.

Yesterday, Permanent Secretary for Defence Peter Ho lifted the usual veil of secrecy from some of Singapore's ongoing research into new naval technologies.

The RSN's future would be underpinned by developments in areas to do with stealth, electronic warfare, unmanned systems and guided weapons.

In his opening speech at the 9th Naval Platform Technology Seminar yesterday, Mr Ho said that the Ministry of Defence would continue investing in certain areas of defence research and development, even though new technologies can be bought from the world's arms market.

Mr Ho, a government scholarship holder who was trained as a naval officer, spoke to more than 500 navy officers and defence engineers from 30 countries at the seminar.

While Singapore buys whatever and whenever it can off-the-shelf, he said there was an 'irreducible' minimum that the country had to invest in such research to stay ahead, even if the technologies later become available on the market or obsolete.

'That is a price we have to pay in order to develop and sustain our defence technology capability,' he said.

For example, in the 1980s, DSO National Laboratories developed an unguided bomb made into a smart weapon by fitting it with a camera to direct it to its target. This became a 'learning project' for DSO's young engineers and scientists, just out of university.

'It was not rocket science,' he said, and the outcome was simply a prototype.

But it gave the engineers and scientists an excellent learning opportunity in design, testing and evaluation.

Now a project to develop a rocket-powered target drone, which could be used as a 'live' target for guns and missiles, has also reached the prototype stage.

That project helped engineers build up knowledge in specialised areas of weapons engineering linked to aerodynamics, flight control, navigation and guidance, all crucial to developing unmanned systems.

Mindef has examined the scope for using a high altitude, long endurance unmanned aircraft as a flying radar station.

'Investments in time and resources have to be made now to seek innovative responses,' said Mr Ho.

http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/topstories/story/0,4386,219436,00.html?

cavsg SG

ZaoBao also had an article talking about the aster on our ships

http://www.zaobao.com/sp/sp005_121103.html

babelfish translated version

http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/urltrurl?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.zaobao.com%2Fsp%2Fsp005_121103.html&lp=zh_en&tt=url

IAF SG

Hope they will reveal something about the stealth covettes (ala the swedish visby) one of these days

Btw, this David Boey is like the ultimate insider - i mean, he gets the scoops on military news and was also an important source for huxley's book on SAF. Have to admit that i envy that guy - doing something that most of us nuts can only fantasize abt Razz

duotiga83 SG

I think we are heading towards Stealth warfare in both air, land and sea Cool

Joe Black SG

Well, it seems that this confirms the Aster SAM on the Delta Frigates that we so constantly read from other publications. The only thing that is unclear from this particular article is that will RSN also purchase Aster 30 and field a mix of Aster 15 and Aster 30 on each ship?

In the ST version, I wonder if ST Marine is also secretly building or designing a new class of stealth corvettes for the RSN on top of the Delta frigates. I felt that there were some subtle hints but I don't know if I am being overly "sensitive" or this is indeed the case.

YourFather SG

What missiles do you think they were referring to in the passage, the part which said they were investigating supersonic anti-ship missiles? IIRC, there are currently no western anti-ship missile which is supersonic, and I dont think there is any planned, right? Those that were planned, like the NSM, were canceled, is it not?

YourFather SG

Joe Black SG

Well, the French's Anti-Navire Futur (ANF) anti-ship missiles might have been shelf - it doesn't mean that the French will not provide Singapore some technical know-how to develope one.... at a cost of cost... It should not be impossible to extend a MM-40 Exocet to fly above Mach 1 given it is already doing 0.9 Mach.

RSN may also explore the possibility of getting one from other source such as the Taiwanese Hsiungfeng-3 missiles, or Indian's Brahmos.

foxtrout8 SG

IMO , both are rather new and unstable plateform. In view of known technology collaboration with our two western allies , it is undoubtable that our future ASM will certainly be from either the French or the American source.

The French system is relatively flexible as Singapore had gone upfront to sent up long term scientific researches with our french counterparts. The last time i heard about the ANF is that it was shelved due to funds and security problems. Singapore can retrigger that project by injecting funds and researchers into that much needed pool. With so much talks about intimate collaborations with france , i believe we can tailor the ANF to meet our interest as well as their's.

Some other missile plateforms to consider for our Deltas is the Exocet Bk3 , the Harpoon Bk2 and the Polyphem-S to replace our Gabriel SSM.

solaris SG

Pardon my ignorance....when I was reading that statement on acquiring supersonic missiles....the first thing that popped into my mind was the SS-N-22 Sunburn

foxtrout8 SG

The Sunburn is a Russian supersonic Anti-ship missile. As far as the general media is concern , russia is a eastern country , not a western country.

solaris SG

Well yes that is true but in the article itself there was no mention that the weapon would have to be from a western source. It is not unprecendented that the SAF might use Russian equipment. If the Israelis can successfully integrate Russian equipment, there is no reason why DSTA would be unable to do so with the help of foreign expertise. Is there a operational Western supersonic SSM? I do not think the SAF would develope a de novo a supersonic SSM and hence it must be purchased commercially

foxtrout8 SG

Frankly speaking , i never heard of the israelis intergrating russian equipment ( missile?) onto their ships before. If it is true , it surely a fresh news for me.

Speaking abt Singapore's ASMs , i will certainly not put my bet on the russian SSMs. Firstly , intergrating the Russian equipment on board our western builded ship is relatively troublesome compare to just adopting western models which in my opinion aint inferior to the russian models.

Secondly, Russian equipments (their naval missiles)are rather unstable (IMO) , untested and we do not have a hand in them. I believe that the ASM on board the Delta will undoubtfully be a french or american model. I will say that models from those two countries will be attractive because of the collaboration between Singapore , france and US. Not very much on the Yankee's side, but for the French , they might even willing to let us manufacture their missiles here in Singapore(Who knows yeah?). Of course end to end we still have to look at their missile's capabilities. As far as i know , the current Exocet and Harpoon are one the world most recognised and deadly missiles in the market. Lets not forget that the French had their research on the ANF , if the acticle is true on our need for supersonic missiles, i will put much bet on the ANF. But i doubt the ANF will surface so soon , so a ASM will still have to be adopt as a gap cover.

Thirdly , i doubt the whole article itself. I believe as far as our region is concern , i dun see a need for supersonic ASM. I do not know how accurate such missiles are , but the number of ships in our SLOC plus the number of islands fringing our water will make such engagement a dangerous one. Not unless u are engaging in the open south china sea , doubt we will have much chance firing one.

On russian Naval missiles :
http://www.wonderland.org.nz/rnss.htm

kopiosatu SG

so will these ships be headmasters or powermasters? Cool

man i spoil every topic

Joe Black SG

Logical prognosis.... but I would like to add some thoughts to this...

1. Exocets MM40 mk3 were unofficially announced as the ASM for the Deltas. The mk3 version is the latest, longest range, and meanest ASM from France. It has a 90KM? range and a speed far higher than Harpoon. > 0.9 Mach.

2. Supersonic ASM doesn't mean one has to fly at Mach 2. What about one that flies at Mach 1.1 to Mach 1.4? The whole idea is to ensure that missiles will arrive the target before the sonic boom to alert the enemies. Furthermore, one that flies faster also mean harder for the CWIS or SAMs to intercept, not to mention, "I can whack you before you return your punch" philosophy.

3. Why is it so difficult to develop and interim ASM? France can certainly push Exocet a little faster, DSTA can assist in development and research. DSTA can secretly learn to assemble and build, say the Taiwanese supersonic ASM. Afterall, it is very much Harpoon like in appearance anyway, wouldn't raise any suspicion.

4. Why can the Deltas carry a mix of supersonic and subsonic ASMs? Certainly can.

5. RSN is fast developing a green water, if not blue water navy. Its theatre of operation is non longer just Singapore Straits and the Melacca Straits. We should expect RSN to operate in the open seas of Indian Ocean and South China Sea. RSN has the obligation and tasks to protect Singapore's SLOC which is not just the mere 2 straits....

Just my 2 cents worth.

foxtrout8 SG

1. Exocets MM40 mk3 were unofficially announced as the ASM for the Deltas. The mk3 version is the latest, longest range, and meanest ASM from France. It has a 90KM? range and a speed far higher than Harpoon. > 0.9 Mach.

The Mk3 have a range of 180km and with a land ( coastal ) attack capability.

2. Supersonic ASM doesn't mean one has to fly at Mach 2. What about one that flies at Mach 1.1 to Mach 1.4?

Actually most russian supersonic ASM can attain a speed of 2.4 mach which is imcredible. By cruising at such speed , u can evade interception and even radar detection(?) , however the main point which i wanna say here is not about evading SAMs or CIWS but about how useful is such missiles in our crowded SLOC and neighbouring waters.

I can whack you before you return your punch" philosophy.

Yes , but that is a philosophy of vast water surface. But in our regional content , it will be a ' i score a civilian hit ' fact of life.

4. Why can the Deltas carry a mix of supersonic and subsonic ASMs? Certainly can.

Take a look at our Gunboats now. Even with the subsonic Harpoon missiles , our MGB have to be armed with Gabriel SSM for precision engagement in crowed SLOC.

U will see that the subsonic harpoon aint suitable for some of the engagement in our region and now u wanna intergrate Supersonic missiles? I doubt the supersonic missile will have any suitable chance for engagement in our region.

5. RSN is fast developing a green water, if not blue water navy. Its theatre of operation is non longer just Singapore Straits and the Melacca Straits. We should expect RSN to operate in the open seas of Indian Ocean and South China Sea.

Yes , but u have to understand that the subsonic Harpoon and Exocet also have the capability to engage targets in vast water , it aint obsolete. Look at the western navies who patrol international water more frequent ly than the eastern navy , do they have to adopt supersonic missiles? No.

Did the arm race during the cold war period make the Americans develope supersonic missiles? No. So the conclusion is , i agree that supersonic missiles are harder to intercept , harder to evade.But we must understand our needs and our wants. We must ask the following questions :

Do we really need supersonic missiles during our main patrol of the south china sea , the Singapore strait and the Malacca Strait?

How useful are such missiles?

Is supersonic missiles a need for power projections as a blue water navy? Why aint developed navies of the world replacing subsonic missiles with supersonic missiles?

Wat are the problems if we intergrate supersonic missiles , subsonic missiles and wire guided missiles onto our ship? Does that make sense?

Cheers,
My 5 cents.

foxtrout8 SG

Lets see this senario in the vast ocean :

A Delta Class Frigate was at a range of 200km from a destroyer armed with 8 sunburn missiles. The Sunburn missiles have a range of 150km , it can attain a speed of 2.4mach while cruising at wave level. If the sunburn was fired at our delta , it will certianly be high to intercept.

When our Delta frigate was within range of the sunburn, our ship was still safe becauseour stealth delta frigate cant be detected at that range of 150km. When our Delta Frigate was at 120km from the destroyer , the destroyer was within our Harpoon engagement range and we engage.

If we will to purchase the Exocet bk3 , we can engage at a range of 180kms , 30kms ahead of the Sunburn. Thus u can see that even without the long range of supersonic missiles , our stealthy Delta Frigate with good countermeasure system is still at the upperhand.

Second senario in a crowded SLOC :

Our MGB was patrolling the crowded strait of Malacca. A Destroyer armed with 8 Sunburns. At the range of 200kms , the destroyer detected our MGB and ordered an engagement at 150km. Within range, the sunburn was launched but due to it's supersonic nature , it scored a civilian hit.

At a range of 120kms , the commander ordered a harpoon engagement to the destroyer but was adviced not to as the destroyer is cruising among international ships , taking them as shields. The MGB streaked 40km from the Destroyer and launched a Garbriel missile , beautifully guiding the missile into the destroyer crippling it and order it's surrender.

Thus u can see that the use of supersonic missiles in crowded SLOC is almost impossible. With ships crowding the area and with the electronics on board our ships , a score from such missile is close to zero.

Conclusion , with high end electronic systems and stealthy features. Our ships armed with subsonic missiles aint at the losing end compare to large unstealthy ships with supersonic missiles. We can also concluded that short range wire guided missile is still a vital element in naval engagement in our region.

touchstone_2000 SG

Surface to Surface Missile Systems are the eaisest to integrate, because there is literally none. Everything is BVR or OTH?
From the detection side, all you get is the GPS or old fashion lat long coordinates from your spotters. The spotter isn't going to paint it with microwave or laser is it?
From the control side, all you need is the operator terminal.

Supersonic anti-ship missiles is something RSN has been tossing around for years. IMHO it has nothing to do with "hit you before you can hit me". It all has to do with the magical moment when the missile pops up on the horizon to impact. The shorter the interval, the lesser time the target has to react.

Sure the deck guns and anti-missiles have their hit probability. They are of no use if they are not fired.

foxtrout8 SG

Deleted.

wd1 SG

my 2 cents worth --

what's been established so far, is that shorter range wire guided missiles are still impt for engagements in crowded SLOCs like malacca straits and sg straits. that's very true. i think its why gabriel missiles are still carried by the smaller MGBs -- small enuf to wave in and out of merchant shipping, evade enemy fire and shoot them while they miss and blast some merchantman... MCVs may be a bit too big and used in more open waters, thats why they carry harpoon.

the new frigates are intended more for power projection in south china sea and indian ocean... so they need long-legged fast antiship missiles

but in my view what many ppl miss is harpoon is actually getting quite lousy compared to the new ones like Brahmos and sunburn. it's big and slow - vulnerable - and active radar guidance means the enemy knows once a harpoon tries to find him. i think any existing CIWS can chew down a harpoon easily. exocet may be harder, but no way u can stop a brahmos at the moment...

now alot of ppl must be thinking "but americans make the best weapons in the world, how come harpoon so lousy?? to this we must remb the americans make weapons for their own perceived needs, not anyone else's. one must bear in mind there is no navy with anywhere near the number of USN's major surface combatants, so USN doesnt expect too much antiship battles and isnt primarily an antiship navy.

To foxtrout8, this is my opinion ur qn the big navies dont expect ship-to-ship combat anytime soon, since their opponents dont really have so many big frigate-size and bigger ships. Besides they have carriers, which are much more effective vs ships IMO. As far back as WWII most ships were sunk by carrier a/c and subs, not other ships

look at USNs destroyers and cruisers -- burke and tico-class carry 90 and 120 SM-2s/tomahawks respectively but only 8 harpoons. theyre more geared towards land attack and air defense from soviet bombers carrying massive antiship cruise missiles. if anything the antiship burden is borne by their all-owning attack subs.

who are they defending then? their precious carriers of course. USN are basically carrier-centric, and their antiship doctrine doesnt say to sail up a cruiser within harpoon range of enemy ship and kill it. no they send up an F-18 sqn from the carrier and saturate-attack the enemy fleet. thats why they can afford not to upgrade their harps... coz they have lots of those already and can afford saturation attacks. there was a harpoon upgrade (block 2) recently that increased range, but they didnt buy it. thier surface ships' role in life is to protect their carriers and shoot tomahawks, not kill other ships.

but we cant afford to do what they do. cant afford to buy so many harpoons, and lousy subs. a monkey will come out of my asshole before we get an aircraft carrier.

so US doesnt bother to make a modern antiship missile and french cancelled theirs. now i said earlier abt USN defending vs soviet cruise missiles. thats what the soviets are good at -- they made their missiles to get past SM2, sea sparrow, seawolf, CIWS and whatever NATO used...

its wrong to say that everything american is better than russian. some things (like WVR AAMs archer!!) they are actually better simply coz they put more effort and money in them to beat NATO's weak points. so in this case barhmos/sunburn may not be a bad chioce, i expect them to be among the leading contenders. hsiungfeng 3 too. whatever the case, no more harpoon. expensive and lousy. it's time to move to the next generation - supersonic antiship missiles, which i feel are underrated and long overdue... MINDEF is spot on here.