Republic of Singapore Air Force Discussions

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Just really an FYI - saw the Gulf Stream today doing "approaches" to Paya LeBar Air Base - actually flew over head as i was walking to work (as in right over me -- work in the SINGPOST "Saucer" for those who know) -- side mounted radar shows up quite well in silhouette :).

Also very quiet ..... unlike the F-16s practicing for National Day.
Somehow, as yet, I have managed not to see the Gulf Stream. Sigh, must remind myself to look up to the sky more often when I 'm around that area... :D
 

SGMilitary

New Member
Somehow, as yet, I have managed not to see the Gulf Stream. Sigh, must remind myself to look up to the sky more often when I 'm around that area... :D
LOL....the F-16s will ROAR with NOISES..ha.haaa....but I'm really hoping the

RSAF will procure up to 60 F-15s comprising of 24 F-15SG & 36 F-15SE..

What about the advanced trainer contest? Will it be M346 or T-50?

The total aircraft to be procured is rumored to be 24 in two batches.

What about the Israeli SPYDER air defence system? Did the procurement

go through?

Does anyone have any information on the RSAF replacement for I.HAWKS,

RBS 70 & 35MM guns?

Regards.
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #283
LOL....the F-16s will ROAR with NOISES..ha.haaa....but I'm really hoping the

RSAF will procure up to 60 F-15s comprising of 24 F-15SG & 36 F-15SE..

What about the advanced trainer contest? Will it be M346 or T-50?

The total aircraft to be procured is rumored to be 24 in two batches.

What about the Israeli SPYDER air defence system? Did the procurement

go through?

Does anyone have any information on the RSAF replacement for I.HAWKS,

RBS 70 & 35MM guns?

Regards.
Why would you want an F-15 fleet of two different standards? Would it not make sense to consolidate on one standard?

The Silent Eagle fleet, being the preferred standard in the ideal world of course...
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Why would you want an F-15 fleet of two different standards? Would it not make sense to consolidate on one standard?

The Silent Eagle fleet, being the preferred standard in the ideal world of course...
+1 :D

I would be grateful if we can find the money in our limited defence budget to stand up a 2nd squadron of twenty-four Strike Eagles. And of course, the F-15SE's features make it look mighty attractive.
 

Red

New Member
+1 :D

I would be grateful if we can find the money in our limited defence budget to stand up a 2nd squadron of twenty-four Strike Eagles. And of course, the F-15SE's features make it look mighty attractive.
Are`nt the current F15Es convertable to F15SE? However, Im not sure if it would be meaningful for us to do that if we have already achieved our original aims of purchasing the F15s.

You would be surprised as a second squadron of F15SGs is likely. We will not get the F35s anytime soon. Again, it depends on the threat environ. Can anyone be certain that the monies for such purchases come straight from the military budget alone? :)
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Are`nt the current F15Es convertable to F15SE?
The Silent Eagle concept (click to see the DT thread on the topic) includes both CFTs and canted tails. The canted tails is a structural change and with this change Boeing will also need to remove ballast weight as the balance is altered. For more details see the Boeing presentation and the video below.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kn6nx_GGERQ"]Silent Boeing Eagle Video[/ame]

However, Im not sure if it would be meaningful for us to do that if we have already achieved our original aims of purchasing the F15s.
My wish is for the RSAF to operate Silent Eagles is based on technology lust - it is not entirely based on rational thinking. :D

You would be surprised as a second squadron of F15SGs is likely.
I think there is a trade-off cost to a second squadron.

In the case of Singapore, if we acquire more F-15SGs beyond the current 24, it would mean that the 'Silent Eagle' may compete against F-35 sales to Singapore. Let me explain. We intend to replace our two current F-5 squadrons. IMHO, one of the F-5 squadrons will be replaced by the F-35. The question, that RSAF will need to ask itself is whether we are going to buy more F-15s OR F-35s for the other F-5 squadron. Further, if I were given a choice, I would also want to acquire more Seahawks - as we have only 6 at the moment.

We will not get the F35s anytime soon. Again, it depends on the threat environ.
I hope we get it, given the changing geo-strategic environment. The sand dispute is a good reminder to ensure we have a big enough stick, should we need to use it.

Can anyone be certain that the monies for such purchases come straight from the military budget alone? :)
If the RSAF buys it, they will have gotten the money from the defence budget allocation. Traditionally, we have spent about 4.5% to 5% of our GDP on defence.

What I'm afraid is that we may be skirting close to our self imposed limit of 6% of GDP on defence (with the decline in our GDP in this recession) given that we are spending S$11.4 billion on defence in 2009. Keep in mind, we also have to pay for the G550 CAEWs that are being delivered between now and 2010 (and those new toys are not cheap too).

Edit: We should not forget that we also have to pay for the Archer Class, the Leopards, and ACMS just to name a few.
 
Last edited:

Red

New Member
The Silent Eagle concept (click to see the DT thread on the topic) includes both CFTs and cantered tails. The cantered tails is a structural change and with this change Boeing will also need to remove blast weight as the balance is altered. For more details see the Boeing presentation and the video below.

Silent Boeing Eagle Video



My wish is for the RSAF to operate Silent Eagles is based on technology lust - it is not entirely based on rational thinking. :D



I think there is a trade-off cost to a second squadron.

In the case of Singapore, if we acquire more F-15SGs beyond the current 24, it would mean that the 'Silent Eagle' may compete against F-35 sales to Singapore. Let me explain. We intend to replace our two current F-5 squadrons. IMHO, one of the F-5 squadrons will be replaced by the F-35. The question, that RSAF will need to ask itself is whether we are going to buy more F-15s OR F-35s for the other F-5 squadron. Further, if I were given a choice, I would also want to acquire more Seahawks - as we have only 6 at the moment.



I hope we get it, given the changing geo-strategic environment. The sand dispute is a good reminder to ensure we have a big enough stick, should we need to use it.



If the RSAF buys it, they will have gotten the money from the defence budget allocation. What I'm afraid is that we may be skirting close to our self imposed limit of 6% of GDP on defence (with the decline in our GDP in this recession) given that we are spending S$11.4 billion on defence in 2009. Keep in mind, we also have to pay for the G550 CAEWs that are being delivered between now and 2010 (and those are not cheap too).
Yes, you are right. I think that there is a real possibilty that the purchase of more F15SGs will be juxtaposed against the purchase of more F35s. However, I am not confident that we would be able to get F35s(<2014) so soon although that is my preference. The F5S/T will be retired in 2013-2014 period. The gap would have to be filled by another jet.

The other issue that is worth considering is the total fighter complement. RSAF has largely kept to approximately 140 plus fighter complement over the years. It is a good number vis-a-vis attrition losses, maintainence and training overseas. I reckon we would maintain that number especially since SEA is not getting any more peaceful and I would not be surprised that it goes up. It is not for nothing that the RSAF has indicated interest for as many as 100 F35s. You can say that the F15s can do much more than the old Skyhawks but air frame numbers matter as well and there are arguably more things to shoot these days as well. If we are not buying more F35s, than we would buy F15SGs.

I do not think the math behind military procurement has been revealed. As such, I am not all that certain if special procurement budgets were aside to buy the things the SAF needs. As it is, the SAF already deploys a wide range of high end equipment more analogous of country with a bigger budget.However, I admit that cost is relative.
 
Last edited:

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
The other issue that is worth considering is the total fighter complement. RSAF has largely kept to approximately 140 plus fighter complement over the years. It is a good number vis-a-vis attrition losses, maintainence and training overseas. I reckon we would maintain that number especially SEA is not getting any more peaceful and I would not be surprised that it goes up. It is not for nothing that the RSAF has indicated interest for as many as 100 F35s. You can say that the F15s can do much more than the old Skyhawks but air frame numbers matter as well and there is arguably more things to shoot these days as well. If we are not buying more F35s, than we would buy F15SGs.
With the changes in technology, we may not need so many aircraft to do the do the same job. It has been estimated that precision-guided munitions (PGMs) allow a five- to eight-fold reduction in bomb expenditure to achieve a target effect similar to that achieved by the best non-guided methods. (The advantage may be somewhat less for area targets.) In the Gulf war to OIF percentage of precision-guided munitions grew from 8% to 68%. The number of fighters and bombers deployed by the United States declined from approximately 1,100 for the 1991 Gulf War to 655 for the 2003 war. And deployed aircraft were worked much harder in 1991 than in 2003: about 1.3 sorties per day per plane versus 0.9. What this means is not only less bombs per target but also less sorties are needed. We need to ask if we really need 1 for 1 replacement for RSAF squadrons.

But you are right in that I do not know the math behind our military procurement and force structure requirements for the RSAF.
 
Last edited:

Red

New Member
With the changes in technology, we may not need so many aircraft to do the do the same job. It has been estimated that precision-guided munitions (PGMs) allow a five- to eight-fold reduction in bomb expenditure to achieve a target effect similar to that achieved by the best non-guided methods. (The advantage may be somewhat less for area targets.) In the Gulf war to OIF percentage of precision-guided munitions grew from 8% to 68%. The number of fighters and bombers deployed by the United States declined from approximately 1,100 for the 1991 Gulf War to 655 for the 2003 war. And deployed aircraft were worked much harder in 1991 than in 2003: about 1.3 sorties per day per plane versus 0.9. What this means is not only less bombs per target but also less sorties are needed. We need to ask if we really need 1 for 1 replacement for RSAF squadrons.

But you are right in that I do not know the math behind military procurement and force structure requirements for the RSAF.
Yes. As per the need for 1 for 1 replacements, It is a relevant question; I`d agree. My personal opinion is that it is close to a "yes" given the changing climate in SEA and east asia in general. Everyone else is getting more meat. It does not mean that we should invariably do the same but we need to hedge against possibilities.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
The other issue that is worth considering is the total fighter complement. RSAF has largely kept to approximately 140 plus fighter complement over the years.
Mr Teo Chee Hean (the DPM and Defence Minister) in one of his recent speeches dropped a hint that with the changes in technology, we may not need so many aircraft to do the do the same job.

Red, I remember seeing the figure of 167 (from a presentation) a while ago. Is the 140 a reduced figure from the 167? I'm a little confused.

Everyone else is getting more meat. It does not mean that we should invariably do the same but we need to hedge against possibilities.
I've just seen a SEA defence expenditure chart (from 2001 to 2010) posted by YF in another forum which shows that you are right. The defence expenditure of Indonesia, Thailand and Malaysia are all trending upwards, with Thailand and Indonesia having the more dramatic up trend. However, I think that the up trend is not caused by local competition, rather, it is a reaction to the even more dramatic up trends in defence spending in the rest of Asia.

In that thread on Singapore defence budget, there is also a Jan 2009 article by David Boey which argues convincingly for our constant and steady defence spending approach.
 
Last edited:

Red

New Member
Mr Teo Chee Hean (the DPM and Defence Minister) in one of his recent speeches dropped a hint that with the changes in technology, we may not need so many aircraft to do the do the same job.

Red, I remember seeing the figure of 167 (from a presentation) a while ago. Is the 140 a reduced figure from the 167? I'm a little confused.



I've just seen a SEA defence expenditure chart (from 2001 to 2010) posted by YF in another forum which shows that you are right. The defence expenditure of Indonesia, Thailand and Malaysia are all trending upwards, with Thailand and Indonesia having the more dramatic up trend. However, I think that the up trend is not caused by local competition, rather, it is a reaction to the even more dramatic up trends in defence spending in the rest of Asia.

In that thread on Singapore defence budget, there is also a Jan 2009 article by David Boey which argues convincingly for our constant and steady defence spending approach.
Yes, you are right. That is the number of combat jets revealed by DSTA/DSO?SAF(?) in a presentation from 2006. Still, it goes to show the number of combat aircraft that the RSAF deployed at one point of time.

140 plus is an approximate number currently. Im not privy to actual numbers.

I believe the advent of the PLAN and PLAAF in SEA in large numbers would probably push the RSAF to maintain those numbers. Not to contest the PLAN and PLAAF but to help the balance of forces in SEA together with every lesser country in the region.

I note the likelihood of expanded air forces in the region with more sophisticated combat jets and equipment as fortunes improve and the latter cope with the rising giant in china as well.

I would agree with you that the RSAF can do much more now per plane. But the threats have just about got more diverse as well.

Teo Chee Hean had also mentioned that Singapore would raise the 6 % GDP defence cap if required. Whilst it might seem not usual, Singapore has a different cost structure(being the way it is) and it might not be appropriate to compare it with other countries per se.
 
Last edited:

Kip

New Member
Hi. Just a quick question that I'm sure will seem stupid to those in the know, but... has the Singaporean air force (or Army or Navy) ever killed anyone (other than in training accidents)?

You have some great kit (equipment) but I'm wondering if it has ever been used in anger.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Hi. Just a quick question that I'm sure will seem stupid to those in the know, but... has the Singaporean air force (or Army or Navy) ever killed anyone (other than in training accidents)?

You have some great kit (equipment) but I'm wondering if it has ever been used in anger.
1. We were in a shadow war with Indonesia during the Konfrontasi (1963 to 1966), as Sukarno (then President of Indonesia) was opposed to the formation of Malaysia.

(i) On 10 March 1965, Indonesia marines bombed MacDonald House on Orchard Road. Throughout the Konfrontasi, 37 bombs hit Singapore, the worst single incident being the MacDonald House bombing. Arising from the bombing, two Indonesia marines were arrested and hanged on 17 October 1968. As a result, 400 students in Jakarta ransacked the Singapore Embassy as retaliation and attacked our diplomats.

(ii) The First Singapore Infantry Regiment (1 SIR) and the Second Singapore Infantry Regiment (2 SIR), were placed under Malaysian command and deployed in various parts of Malaya to fight the saboteurs. 1 SIR was deployed in Borneo and 2 SIR in parts of Southeast Johor. LT-GEN (Ret) Winston Choo, who later became Chief, General Staff was a Platoon Commander of 11th Platoon, Charlie Company, 1 SIR during the Konfrontasi. BTW 2 SIR suffered some casualties during their deployment in Malaysia.​

2. On 31 Jan 1974, the Shell Oil Refinery (at Pulau Bukom Besar, south of Singapore) was subject to a blotched attack by 4 terrorists: 2 from the Japanese Red Army (JRA) and 2 from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). This is also known as the Laju Incident (see link for President S.R. Nathan's and the SAF's role). No one was killed. Thereafter, the JRA and PFLP terrorists were escorted out of Singapore and the hostages taken were released.

3. On 17 March 1985 and on 21 December 1986*, Palestinian terrorists set off more bombs at or around Faber House, along Orchard Road in Singapore. We believe the bombs were targeted at the Israeli embassy (then located at Faber House) but no one was killed. One of the Palestinian terrorists, Fuad Hassin al-Shara confessed to the bombings when he was captured by the Israelis in 1991.

4. On 26 March 1991, four Pakistani terrorists, claiming to be members of the Pakistan People's Party (PPP), hijacked SQ 117 from Subang Airport in Kuala Lumpur with 129 passengers and crew.

(i) On 27 March 1991, members of our Special Operations Force (SOF) stormed the plane, killing the four Pakistani hijackers and freeing all passengers and crew. Kindly note that Singapore only officially acknowledged that the SOF existed as unit in 1997, as such, all prior news releases attributed the action to our Commandos.

(ii) The late Ms Benazir Bhutto issued a denial of PPP's involvement. However, it should be noted that Asif Ali Zardori, the husband of the late Ms Bhutto and current President of Pakistan was included among several Pakistani prisoners whom the hijackers of SQ117 wanted released.​

5. I also note that on 9 August 1991 (on Singapore's 26th National Day), an airborne assault exercise, codenamed Pukul Habis (Malay for 'Total Wipeout') was conducted by Malaysian-Indonesian paratroopers in a drop zone just 18km from Singapore in Johor.

IMO, from that year, Singapore and Malaysia bilateral ties were set on a downward trend for the duration of Tun Dr. Mahathir's (Dr M) term as PM of Malaysia (See water dispute backgrounders - 2003 ISEAS article and 2004 Harvard article). In fact, Dr M was reported by Raja Petra Kamarudin to have said:

“Please never mention Singapore in front of me again. Don’t you know we are at war with Singapore?”​

According to a Singapore defence correspondent:

"...The SAF's response [to Ex Pukul Habis (or Ex Total Wipeout in English)] was measured and confident. It triggered an Open Mobilisation on the eve of National Day. The move was calculated not to escalate tensions. But it signalled also Singapore's determination not to welcome a Trojan horse on its doorstep..."​
6. As this is a thread on the RSAF, I should mention that on 9 July 1997, in Operation Crimson Angel, the 122 squadron of the RSAF and other security elements of the SAF conducted two waves of air evacuations using our C-130s to evacuate 400 Singaporeans from Phnom Penh as the security situation in Cambodia deteriorated. Technically, this was not a combat operation.

7. According to a senior Malaysian Armed Forces (MAF) officer, the MAF was put on alert in late 1998 as politicians argued over the status of the Customs, Immigration and Quarantine (CIQ) checkpoint. Military officials on both sides privately acknowledged that heightened military preparedness did occur. It indicated a tacit acknowledgement on the part of Malaysia's defence officials that they could not allow the CIQ issue to flare into a casus belli.

8. Since 2003 the RSN, the RSAF and our army have deployed, in a series of low profile missions (in what we try to present as theoretically non-combat roles), to both Iraq and Afghanistan. It is important to remember that Singapore is located in a predominately Muslim populated region and our support for the US is not appreciated. The various information releases reflect this concern and the desire to downplay any potential shooter role. As one American noted:

"One of the great undiscussed aspects of the coalition of the willing for Iraq has been the steady contribution of Singapore's Navy for security for the Iraqi oil platforms KAAOT and ABOT... specifically providing the Iraqi Navy with a base at sea for training and operations. This isn't a small thing, by using large amphibious ships as forward bases, the Iraqi Navy saves 3 days round trip to and from port for provisions..."​

If you may remember, the RSN deployed our ships (from 2003 to 2008) to defend the Iraqi oil platforms (which were subject to suicide attacks by dhows in April 2004). It was by chance that our ships were not at the Iraqi oil platforms during the April 2004 suicide attacks. For more details, see the Singapore Mindef video below:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ay_t0GPaY_U"]In the Service of Peace[/ame]

There's also an ISAF video of our guys deployed as part of a NZ led Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) in Bamiyan (see Wired article for details):

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjO0I976KHI"]SG & NZ Troops in Afghanistan[/ame]

9. Beyond sending small groups to PRTs, medical teams, civilian aid and education effort (in Conflict & Peace studies), we are also planning the following future military deployments:

(i) a KC-135 (something we have been doing in the past);

(ii) a UAV Task Group (something new); and

(iii) a Weapon Locating Radar team to Tarin Kowt to deal with increased rocket attacks and enhance force protection measures of the ISAF personnel deployed there (also something new).​

* Note: The 21 December 1986 bombing occurred slightly more than 1 month of the then Israeli President Chaim Herzog's visit to Singapore in November 1986. BTW, there were orchestrated protests in Malaysia over Chaim Herzog's visit and I also note that Malaysia has diplomatic relations with the Palestinian Liberation Organization.

P.S. When the 26 Dec 2004 Tsunami struck, the SAF mounted its biggest-ever rescue and relief operation, Codenamed Operation Flying Eagle, with over 1,500 personnel deployed, three Endurance Class LPDs, twelve helicopters and eight transport aircaft. The main missions were in four locations in two countries - Medan, Banda Aceh and Meulaboh in Indonesia and Phuket in Thailand. The RSAF also flew supply and support missions to Sri Lanka, the Maldives and Mauritius. Here's a video (you'll need broadband to see) and an ebook of our contributions.
 
Last edited:

SGMilitary

New Member
The Silent Eagle concept (click to see the DT thread on the topic) includes both CFTs and canted tails. The canted tails is a structural change and with this change Boeing will also need to remove ballast weight as the balance is altered. For more details see the Boeing presentation and the video below.

Silent Boeing Eagle Video



My wish is for the RSAF to operate Silent Eagles is based on technology lust - it is not entirely based on rational thinking. :D



I think there is a trade-off cost to a second squadron.

In the case of Singapore, if we acquire more F-15SGs beyond the current 24, it would mean that the 'Silent Eagle' may compete against F-35 sales to Singapore. Let me explain. We intend to replace our two current F-5 squadrons. IMHO, one of the F-5 squadrons will be replaced by the F-35. The question, that RSAF will need to ask itself is whether we are going to buy more F-15s OR F-35s for the other F-5 squadron. Further, if I were given a choice, I would also want to acquire more Seahawks - as we have only 6 at the moment.



I hope we get it, given the changing geo-strategic environment. The sand dispute is a good reminder to ensure we have a big enough stick, should we need to use it.



If the RSAF buys it, they will have gotten the money from the defence budget allocation. Traditionally, we have spent about 4.5% to 5% of our GDP on defence.

What I'm afraid is that we may be skirting close to our self imposed limit of 6% of GDP on defence (with the decline in our GDP in this recession) given that we are spending S$11.4 billion on defence in 2009. Keep in mind, we also have to pay for the G550 CAEWs that are being delivered between now and 2010 (and those new toys are not cheap too).

Edit: We should not forget that we also have to pay for the Archer Class, the Leopards, and ACMS just to name a few.

As far as I'm aware the F-15SE is convertable to F-15E configuration depending on mission requirements.As of now, current F-15E(F-15SG is a variant of F-15E) operators are given the option to convert their F-15E to F-15SE configuration. RSAF will most likely convert her current inventory. As highlighted in aviation week interview several years ago, RSAF will procure between 40-60 F-15 and depending on the development of JSF, the upper limit is 80 F-15.
Currently, the RSAF fighter aircraft inventory is as follows:
1. 24 F-15SG
2. 62 F-16 BLOCK 50/52+
3. 44 F-5S
TOTAL - 130 excluding 12 F-16 BLOCK 50,on lease from USAF and based in US,18 TA4SU ADV TRAINER in FRANCE,not to mention retired
60 A4SU.
It is possible for the RSAF to procure 100 JSF in future as replacement for F-16 & F-5.The JSF will be augmented by 60-80 F-15.Total inventory between 160-180.

Regards.
 
Last edited:

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Thanks for the reply, in particular for the count of our legacy aircraft like the Skyhawks and F-5S.

As far as I'm aware the F-15SE is convertable to F-15E configuration depending on mission requirements.
3 points to note:

(i) The Silent Eagle is only a concept at the moment and has not completed development (so the final specifications may change depending on customer input). It was reported that potential international customers also have expressed interest in what other payloads — a side-looking radar or broadband electronic jammer, for example — could be suitable for carriage in the conformal fuel tank (CFT) bay.

(ii) The Silent Eagle concept revealed by Boeing, shows CFTs that allow for internal weapons carriage. As we both agree, CFTs can be swapped.

(iii) However, the Silent Eagle also has outward-canted V-tails. And as I mentioned before, the canted tails are a structural change (and hence the F-15E is strictly speaking not swappable as the F-15SE, with just a change in the CFTs).​

If Boeing does not implement the outward-canted V-tails (slanted at 15 degree angle) there will be 2 consequences:

one, the RCS of the Silent Eagle will go up; and

two, Boeing will not be able to remove the existing ballast (which means no fuel economy savings).​

As of now, current F-15E(F-15SG is a variant of F-15E) operators are given the option to convert their F-15E to F-15SE configuration.
I have explained why you cannot just convert the F-15E to a F-15SE with just a change in the CFTs alone. However, you can mount a CFT that allow for internal weapons carriage onto a F-15E. This means that it is still a F-15E, though an upgraded one.

In fact, Boeing had previously revealed that beyond the AESA radar (including the option of the APG-82 - the same radar system selected for the USAF's F-15E radar modernisation programme), there are other small internal differences between the F-15E and other variants like the F-15SG. I note that Boeing only specified that the F-15SG has 25% more cooling capacity that the F-15E (but provided little or no further details of the differences).

RSAF will most likely convert her current inventory. As highlighted in aviation week interview several years ago, RSAF will procure between 40-60 F-15 and depending on the development of JSF, the upper limit is 80 F-15.
I will be happy if the RSAF can acquire another 24 Eagles to have a total fleet of 48 (rather than the higher numbers mentioned).

It is possible for the RSAF to procure 100 JSF in future as replacement for F-16 & F-5.The JSF will be augmented by 60-80 F-15.Total inventory between 160-180.
Our current force structure is 7 squadrons (and our former Chief Defence Scientist indicated that at one time, our total fleet strength was 167 fighters). Realistically, I think that the RSAF will not acquire more that 1 squadron of F-35s before 2020. IMHO, more F-35s beyond the first squadron will only be acquired as the F-16 are retired. However, our F-16s are not due for retirement for a long, long time to come.

Further, as I explained in an earlier post, I don't think we will need 1 for 1 replacements. Therefore I cannot see an increase of numbers to 180, given that the replacements are much more capable aircraft. I would rather send the money to increase our defence capability in other ways.
 
Last edited:

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Thanks for that OPSSG.
No problem, my pleasure. :)

That does put things in perspective.
My earlier post deliberately did not deal with maritime security issues in Southeast Asia (which includes the policing of boundary disputes in the waters off Pedra Branca {or what Malaysians like Mahathir still call Pulau Batu Puteh}, naval incidents at sea, piracy in the Malacca Straits & 'hot pursuit' rights and finally the related issue of deterring potential maritime terrorism), which I thought would be more appropriate in the RSN thread. Fyi, in 2008, RSN ships escorted 1,900 merchant ships and accompanying sea security teams (ASSeT), boarded and accompanied 1,100 selected vessels using Singapore's ports - so it is a busy little navy.
 
Last edited:

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
In September 2009, it was announced that Singapore will renew the pilot proficiency training program for US$250m. It should also be noted that the RSAF is also paying another US$75 million to lease F-16 aircraft from the USAF and for other related support and services at Springfield Air National Guard Base. More details of Singaporean F-16 pilots and weapons systems operators (WSO) training in continental United States (CONUS) can be found in this DT Pix thread (see post #15 for more info). Of note is the presence of instructor WSO and the joint training opportunities with the USN/Marines for maritime air interdiction. BTW, it was also mentioned that there are currently 12 'Singapore owned' block 52 F-16C/Ds based in CONUS.

I think this is a good move as paying US$75m for to lease ex-USAF F-16s enables some or even all of the existing 'Singapore owned' F-16s based in CONUS to return home. This will lead to an increase in the total number of F-16s based in Singapore.
 
Last edited:

SGMilitary

New Member
In September 2009, it was announced that Singapore will renew the pilot proficiency training program for US$250m. It should also be noted that the RSAF is also paying another US$75 million to lease F-16 aircraft from the USAF and for other related support and services at Springfield Air National Guard Base. More details of Singaporean F-16 pilots and weapons systems operators (WSO) training in continental United States (CONUS) can be found in this DT Pix thread (see post #15 for more info). Of note is the presence of instructor WSO and the joint training opportunities with the USN/Marines for maritime air interdiction. BTW, it was also mentioned that there are currently 12 'Singapore owned' block 52 F-16C/Ds based in CONUS.

I think this is a good move as paying US$75m for to lease ex-USAF F-16s enables some or even all of the existing 'Singapore owned' F-16s based in CONUS to return home. This will lead to an increase in the total number of F-16s based in Singapore.
There is an article in one of a leading Defence journal mentioning that the RSAF is operating 74 F-16 C/D Block 50
/52+ and the RSAF is keen to procure C-17A Globemaster and Boeing is pitching for the RSAF to procure more F-15 focusing on the newly unveiled F-15SE. The article also mentioned that RSAF had procured Israeli made SPYDER air defence system to replace their Rapier 2000 missile which will be kept in storage. The RSAF will also be sending RFI to replace I.HAWKS & RBS 70.Anyone have any information on the development above?

Regards.
 

Red

New Member
In September 2009, it was announced that Singapore will renew the pilot proficiency training program for US$250m. It should also be noted that the RSAF is also paying another US$75 million to lease F-16 aircraft from the USAF and for other related support and services at Springfield Air National Guard Base. More details of Singaporean F-16 pilots and weapons systems operators (WSO) training in continental United States (CONUS) can be found in this DT Pix thread (see post #15 for more info). Of note is the presence of instructor WSO and the joint training opportunities with the USN/Marines for maritime air interdiction. BTW, it was also mentioned that there are currently 12 'Singapore owned' block 52 F-16C/Ds based in CONUS.

I think this is a good move as paying US$75m for to lease ex-USAF F-16s enables some or even all of the existing 'Singapore owned' F-16s based in CONUS to return home. This will lead to an increase in the total number of F-16s based in Singapore.
The 12 CONUS F16 C/Ds were initially leased planes and Singapore exercised right of purchase with the usual upgrades. Total F16 numbers should be 74 currently.

I share your sentiments that they will be going home whilst RSAF would probably lease 12-20 more F16 C/Ds for training in the US. 74 in home bases in the main island once the 12 jets state-side return. It does not make sense to operate from two bases in the US.
 
Top