Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Singapore Airshow 2014

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Nick C View Post



    Our 16s are powered by PW F-100-PW229s whereas our 15s are powered by GE F110-GE-129Cs
    Thanks Nick C. Corrected a misconception!

    Comment


    • #32
      there was talk of RSAF ordering A330 MRTT, as the much anticipated KC-135 replacement, but nothing formal came out of Airshow.

      My speculation on the C-130 replacement is on A400 rather than C-17 - latter is (rumoured) to be less capable in taking-off/landing in unprepared air-strips (pls correct if I'm wrong); and will risk of ingestion for jet-engine (C-17) degrade performance in tactical conditions compared to turbo-prop (A400)?

      I'm guessing the VTOL consideration might not figure highly for RSAF - the doctrine appears to favour long-range engagement of enemy forces (hence F-15, F-16) and air-tight layered defences to prevent enemy damage against air-fields (and hence requiring diverse dispersal of a/c, a la tennis-court dispersals for Harriers). Can I point to Tengah and PLAB' having substantial no. of dispersal and hardened shelters to further support this? But these are all the speculation of an enthusiast

      Comment


      • #33
        I was under the mistaken impression that the F15 was chosen over the F18 Super Hornet for the sake of engine commonality.

        Looks like it wasn't an important consideration. I found this link about F15SG

        Comparison between F15E and F15SG


        And a recent 60 Minutes report on the F35

        http://www.cbsnews.com/news/f-35-joi...er-60-minutes/
        Last edited by 9V-SIA; 28 February 2014, 11:33 PM.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by jammed View Post
          My speculation on the C-130 replacement is on A400 rather than C-17 - latter is (rumoured) to be less capable in taking-off/landing in unprepared air-strips (pls correct if I'm wrong); and will risk of ingestion for jet-engine (C-17) degrade performance in tactical conditions compared to turbo-prop (A400)?
          Wouldn't the C130J make a great replacement for the C130 classics ? It's an updated of the workhorse with a tried and tested predecessor. The A400 was fraught with delays during its development and only a handful of air forces have ordered it.

          The C17 seems too big of a plane for RSAF. Read somewhere that Boeing would be closing down C17 production in a few years time.

          Comment


          • #35
            Yeah I was wondering abt that too - given SAF is always ahead of the tech curve and C130 is a real workhorse, esp called upon peacetime tasks like HDAR in the region. I thus speculate that not deciding on J any earlier must arise from consideration for another platform, and delay not least due to complications in A400 project line. Else, with so many operators of C130J already and not tooany reports of hitches, surely RSAF wld have decided upon it. Am I making sense?

            Comment


            • #36
              The line is closed. Boeing is looking to sell 13 "white tails". Special offer price?

              http://www.ibtimes.com/can-boeings-b...-force-1514388

              Comment


              • #37
                The C-130 replacement is not a near term requirement for RSAF. The current fleet of 10 is about to complete the modernisation and standardisation program which should allow these old birds to fly till the mid 2020s. There's a greater need to replace the KC-135 (rumoured MRTT order) and the F-50.

                The F-50 could be replaced by the P-8 (assuming RSAF & RSN wants ASW & MPA), G550 MPA (Mexican solution), SC-130J Sea Herc solution (RORO allows double up as transports), and second hand P-3 orions (upgraded to Lot 2).

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Nick C View Post

                  The F-50 could be replaced by the P-8 (assuming RSAF & RSN wants ASW & MPA), G550 MPA (Mexican solution), SC-130J Sea Herc solution (RORO allows double up as transports), and second hand P-3 orions (upgraded to Lot 2).
                  I catch no ball..

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by 9V-JKL View Post
                    I catch no ball..
                    Imagine this is the World Cup.
                    F50=current world champions

                    P8=Germany
                    G550=Argentina
                    SC130J=Brazil
                    P3=Italy

                    Who will win the World Cup?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Spain, of course

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Nick C View Post
                        The C-130 replacement is not a near term requirement for RSAF. The current fleet of 10 is about to complete the modernisation and standardisation program which should allow these old birds to fly till the mid 2020s. There's a greater need to replace the KC-135 (rumoured MRTT order) and the F-50.

                        The F-50 could be replaced by the P-8 (assuming RSAF & RSN wants ASW & MPA), G550 MPA (Mexican solution), SC-130J Sea Herc solution (RORO allows double up as transports), and second hand P-3 orions (upgraded to Lot 2).
                        true re KC135, i agree. On MPA, both P3 and P8 will be a bound up from current F50. One intriguing question when F50 was selected in the 1990s was - where's the MAD? where's the sonarbuoys? Perhaps anti-sub role was only in concert with surface vessels and priority was regular eye-ball (aided by radars, cams what-not) maritime surveillance (and ELINT, SIGINT etc).

                        In that regard, P3 and P8 with their MAD and sonarbuoys - and much further operating radius - will be an exponential leap from F50, not an unfathomable prospect given RSN's tendency to try out intermediate platforms before taking on eventual equipment (eg. subs). So i'll say P8

                        Not familiar with G550 MPA and SC-130 tho that will provide eqmt commonality with RSAF's AEWC and C-130 platforms.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by jammed View Post
                          true re KC135, i agree. On MPA, both P3 and P8 will be a bound up from current F50. One intriguing question when F50 was selected in the 1990s was - where's the MAD? where's the sonarbuoys? Perhaps anti-sub role was only in concert with surface vessels and priority was regular eye-ball (aided by radars, cams what-not) maritime surveillance (and ELINT, SIGINT etc).

                          In that regard, P3 and P8 with their MAD and sonarbuoys - and much further operating radius - will be an exponential leap from F50, not an unfathomable prospect given RSN's tendency to try out intermediate platforms before taking on eventual equipment (eg. subs). So i'll say P8

                          Not familiar with G550 MPA and SC-130 tho that will provide eqmt commonality with RSAF's AEWC and C-130 platforms.
                          IIRC, when the F-50s were selected the MCVs were RSN's ASW mainstay until their recent upgrade where the ASW kit was removed.

                          Actually unless RSN changes it's perception on the utilisation of sonobuoys for ASW in the SCS, the SC-130J and P-8As will be less than ideal since they rely on sonobuoys for their capabilities. The P-8I and P-3C have MAD. P-3Cs can be acquired rather quickly, only issue is the the newer frames from the boneyard have already been snapped up by the Taiwanese and Koreans. Not sure how effective is the P-8A's hydro carbon sensing suite (MAD replacement) but P-8I is the alternative if they want a 737 baseline.

                          Personally, I think we will go for more tacos.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Nick C View Post
                            IIRC, when the F-50s were selected the MCVs were RSN's ASW mainstay until their recent upgrade where the ASW kit was removed.

                            Actually unless RSN changes it's perception on the utilisation of sonobuoys for ASW in the SCS, the SC-130J and P-8As will be less than ideal since they rely on sonobuoys for their capabilities. The P-8I and P-3C have MAD. P-3Cs can be acquired rather quickly, only issue is the the newer frames from the boneyard have already been snapped up by the Taiwanese and Koreans. Not sure how effective is the P-8A's hydro carbon sensing suite (MAD replacement) but P-8I is the alternative if they want a 737 baseline.

                            Personally, I think we will go for more tacos.
                            this is way beyond me, but for all the sake of pure speculation:
                            - could RSN's initial decision away from MAD and sonarbuoys due to shallow waters around SGP (Malacca Straits, Sth China Sea)?

                            - i imagine P-3 is already pretty dated, and any serious multiplier effect can only be achieved with P-8, and the wait is tolerable with F50 providing more than the status quo, no?

                            - qn: will P-8's 738 frame be an easier (read: cheaper) maintainence for ST Aerospace with MI also heading twds 738? i'm assuming ST is providing the maintainence for RSAF and SQ, correct me if i'm wrong

                            All in, with replacement prospects for KC-135 and F50 facing a timeline (I wont say its urgent at this moment) and C-130B/H over the horizon (again, they are still pulling more than their weight), we are looking at quite huge budgetary expenditure, T&D and equipment integration. Which means no urgency on F-35. my 20c

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by jammed View Post
                              this is way beyond me, but for all the sake of pure speculation:
                              - could RSN's initial decision away from MAD and sonarbuoys due to shallow waters around SGP (Malacca Straits, Sth China Sea)?

                              - i imagine P-3 is already pretty dated, and any serious multiplier effect can only be achieved with P-8, and the wait is tolerable with F50 providing more than the status quo, no?

                              - qn: will P-8's 738 frame be an easier (read: cheaper) maintainence for ST Aerospace with MI also heading twds 738? i'm assuming ST is providing the maintainence for RSAF and SQ, correct me if i'm wrong

                              All in, with replacement prospects for KC-135 and F50 facing a timeline (I wont say its urgent at this moment) and C-130B/H over the horizon (again, they are still pulling more than their weight), we are looking at quite huge budgetary expenditure, T&D and equipment integration. Which means no urgency on F-35. my 20c
                              Don't think it has anything to do with the shallows.

                              The P-3C upgraded to Lot 2 (+RSN requirements) is still a rather capable aircraft (No doubt our F-50s have quite a bit of Mexican tech inside but they are fast approaching 20 y.o. + Fokker has already bitten the dust)

                              MI 737 - SIAEC
                              P-8s will probably be ST (so no advantage here)

                              DM has officially disclosed the MRTT order & the additional 2 S70Bs today.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                ah, thanks for clarifying those. Yes, found out that RSAF is ordering A330 MRTT.

                                But what excited me was the bit abt a larger ""studying carefully the need for LARGER LSTs that can carry MORE HELICOPTERS" with the scale-up Endurance 160 being a through-deck - interestingly, Defense News predicted this, complete with picture of the E160 model, here: http://www.defensenews.com/article/2...pore-s-Future-

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X