Wild ideas in regards to design or upgrade any equipment in

SingaporeMacross SG

I know, modify the A4 to use Russian Plasma Stealth Generator and use Russian Ion Drive....hey the technology exsists...

http://www.aeronautics.ru/plasmama

Or buy Mig 1.42.... Idea

http://www.geocities.com/redstaraf/mig_142.html

duotiga83 SG

i all sudden think of 1..sound crazy.......here goes...

design an underground take off system, when take off, the takeoff will use catapult system and angle at 35 degrees? this wil b effective if the strip of the base is destroy Razz

how bout submarine cum carrier? same concept as above, except that wjem no activities, the ship can go underwater? Mr. Green

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

1.8km long ship which carries the firepower of several US naval task forces. Carrier cum arsenal ship. Crewed by 350.

SingaporeMacross SG

Wha if that ship is finished, Singapore is also finished.

duotiga83 SG

i mean realli wild ideas....does not realli mean for sg.......if for sg gd loh......i mean real WILD IDEAS u can think of.....extreme etc wad so ever..... Cool

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

The largest ship planned is the Freedom Ship… 1.4km long I think…

foga SG

perhaps upgrade the A4a into unmanned aircraft for recon missions?

SCAR SG

how about a missile capable of DNA recognition...
It will home in on the DNA of the subject/ target.

Perfect for the current Iraq war.. just send in one missile to go after Saddam....
Mr. Green

ntu slacker SG

e U.S Crusader program to be re-activated… by singaporeans

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

Hamster warrior, the ultimate weapon.

buzz SG

Idea 5:
RSAF should fit all our fighters still left in Singapore with JATO/RATO and launch them on zero length launchers!
BTW IMO Mindef should treat the Searcher UAVs more like SAMs. I cannot understand why they should use runways?!!! What a waste of resources.........and a drain on productivity not to mention the operational constraints

foga SG

brudder you can launch them like SAMs but how are they gonna come down? paracutes?

buzz SG

brudder you can launch them like SAMs but how are they gonna come down? paracutes?

UAVs should be launch as far forward as possible. U can recover them further behind either using runways or parachute/airbag or even net landing.......

Idea is to push the UAV to the area of ops for them to come online as soon as needed. Providing support from further behind is definitely not responsive enough ........not to mention the support staff required. Also they can loiter longer less time spent on transit.

Got to treat them as if they are arty. If the guys want visual or other intel then rain UAVs down on them!

|-|05| SG

possible with an attached rocket booster but the thing is our UAV and indeed most of the UAV's are prop powered not ram-jet or jet power meaning going too fast might damage the prop engine(dont quote me on this though)

SingaporeMacross SG

Maybe next time you’ll see infantry in battle armour…..jet pack, laser, NBC protection, Reactive armour…..

buzz SG

I remember seeing Pioneer UAVs launched from a tripod on the battleship New Jersey using rocket boosters. They were recovered with net landing albeit with slight damages. I think in Lebanon?

UAVs are created to provide REAL TIME visual intelligence over the battlefield. So any ops to get them in the air faster, stay up in the air longer OVER the area of interests is the MINIMUM performance required.

Every other thing should not be important to them.

laser51088 SG

Hey I like the oil rig idea. . . I once read a novel with roughly the same idea, with choppers and V-22 Ospreys operating off the oil rig, 6 stinger missiles fitter on V-22, if i remember it was fired out from the back of the plane. . .

the intention was to use the setup for border patrol and surveillance purposes

i think its possible to stick a couple of long range SAMs on the rig too, maybe with a couple of anti-ship missiles. . . starting to sound like a fortress at sea, prob is that it'll still be sunk by a sub.. . . Razz , maybe it needs some sonar. . . heehee

the submarine-cum-carrier idea ain't so wild, its been done before. . .

done by the Aussies in 1970
and the airplane that flew was an A-4. . .but it wasn't exactly a carrier, more of the WWII type of camship, with a catapult to launch the A-4 off the deck of the sub
http://www.skyhawk.org/2C/aus_sub.htm

also been done by the japs in World War II
H.I.J.M.S. I-400 Submarine-Aircraft Carrier
Carried 3 torpedo bombers
http://formen.ign.com/news/29277.html?fromint=1

also done by the British in 1927
M.2 Submarine with a hanger for a seaplane
(it sunk in 1932 cos someone opened the hangar door while the sub was still partially submerged)
http://www.divernet.com/wrecks/wtour5799.htm

so some of your ideas ain't so wild after all! but then again, I couldn't find an actual submarine aircraft carrier with a proper deck for launch and recovery, the Jap one is the closest to it, it had a crane for retrieval of the torpedo bombers after they landed on the surface of the sea. . .but it proved the impracticability of such a boat, was a white elephant most of the time. . .

buzz SG

Actually I had the Mobile Offshore Base (MOB) in mind but the oil rig is easier and faster to implement though it has to sit on the sea bed.......and would probably be a sitting duck for a sub.

I also thought of having more landing pads to support the DASH instead of V22 as the main means of patrolling the waters.

http://www.gyrodynehelicopters.com/dash_history.htm

I thought the DASH a wonderful idea. Too bad the USN scrapped it.

SingaporeMacross SG

I know! Copy USA’s future plan by installing rail guns….

laser51088 SG

lol, 350 only?? It'll be more than twice of 3500, yep, thats more than seven thousand-strong crew needed.

A 1.8 km long ship will be a damn nice target for anything, one shot and kaboom. . ., one hole in the ship, another shot and wham, yet another hole. . . basically the ship will be a frigging metal wreck the moment war starts, u could probably not use in shallow waters cos of size, so why bother with it?

My idea is having Destroyer sized ships, with a Mk16 24 cell SM-2 launcher, 2 CIWS just in case, 1 76mm gun, 16 cell Harpoon VLS, with 16 cell ASROC and some chaff launchers onboard. It'll most likely be abt 6000 tons. . .

Get 12 of these in 2 squadrons, plus abt 12 600 ton patrol vessels like the victory-class in 2 squadrons and 6 600 ton ships in 1 squadron optimised for anti-sub warfare and any navy for defence purposes doesn't have to worry already. . .

If its a small country like Singapore, a good choice would be 1,200 ton ship with 16 Harpoon in Mk 141 free standing canisters, 76mm gun, and 2x 16-cell Barak, with 2 Mk 32, Surface vessel torp tube with 6x Mk50 lightweight torps, erm, or can u fit that into 1,200 tonnes? hmmmm. . .oh yah, no helicopter deck, save space. . .

i like the ticonderoga cruiser's complement of weapons, covers all ground. . .and does it very damn well. . .

another idea is the trimaran hull design. . .being researhed by the British. . . sounds very promising. . .

moving away from the navy, i pretty much like the CV90. . . a great idea would be a whole army, espcially for a small country like singapore, to have an entire army all based on the CV90 or similar chassis, as far as tracked vehicles are concerned anyway, for singapore, we could have a whole army based on the bionix chassis, simplify maintenance, upgrading or automotive components , whatever. . ., keep wheeled vehicles like LSV, 3 tonner, AMX-10, artillery, and junk everything else. . . get the Bionix as APC, IFV, Tank destroyer(light tank), mortar carrying vehicle, recovery vehicle, engineering vehicle, erm okay, maybe except engineering vehicle and artillery, i think firing a 165 mm demolition gun on the Bionix chassis will cause more damage to the Bionix than anything else around it, fit a 155mm 52 calibre gun on Bionix and u see the vehicle topple over on its on. . .

forgot abt this earlier: fit air-con onto Bionix first!

« Previous Page Next Page »