Aster 30 Block 2 is intended for use against ballistic missiles (I'm not sure if it will also be anti-aircraft), & so far is a mostly a paper missile. An extended-range version of Aster 30 (achieved by flying slower, about the same top speed as Aster 15 IIRC) was mooted a few years ago, but AFAIK was shelved. Aster 30 Block 1 is plain Aster 30 modified to enable it to intercept ABMs, while retaining full anti-aircraft abilities. First test scheduled in a few months.
I think we are on the same page on this and I'm quite certain that Singapore is in part of US plans for coalition warfare by virtue of our geo-strategic location and our willingness to contribute (Iraq, Afghanistan, CTF-151 and PSI). In fact, during an interview with US media at Exercise Forging Sabre (click here for relevant DT thread with pictures - which shows the extent of our excellent military to military relations), US Army's Maj. Gen. Halverson said:
"To bring their capability, have the intellectual discussions, cross train, learn lessons, so we can all be much stronger in a coalition as we meet the challenges of the 21st century."
IMO, a complex topic with some attendant issues that are easily misunderstood by a causal reader. There are two things that causal non-Singaporean readers of this thread need to know:
(i) one, Singapore takes the position that Singapore's immediate defence is our own responsibility (what we need is access to appropriate technology so that we may contribute as a coalition member); and
(ii) two, for historical reasons, Singapore as a country, is a member of the Non-Aligned Movement (like Malaysia, Indonesia and India), so technically, Singapore is not a US ally, via mutual defence treaty obligations (but we are part of US coalition efforts and we host USN and USAF personnel in our bases). However, despite being not a US ally, US-Singapore mutual interests are well aligned.
(ii) two, for historical reasons, Singapore as a country, is a member of the Non-Aligned Movement (like Malaysia, Indonesia and India), so technically, Singapore is not a US ally, via mutual defence treaty obligations (but we are part of US coalition efforts and we host USN and USAF personnel in our bases). However, despite being not a US ally, US-Singapore mutual interests are well aligned.
Below is a link to a news report of the formal inauguration of the Peace Carvin V, F-15SG fighter detachment at the Mountain Home Air Force Base (MHAFB) that signified the partnership between US and Singapore. This event was attended by the US Secretary of the Air Force, Michael Donley and Singapore's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defense, Teo Chee Hean. Here's a link to the transcript of Teo Chee Hean's speech (which provides a short history of important relationship milestones). The Peace Carvin V detachment was established in October 2008 as part of the US Air Force's (USAF's) 428th Fighter Squadron and will operate up to 12 F-15SG fighter aircraft at the MHAFB for the next 25 years.
Idaho's NewsChannel 7 Report and Video footage
If you watch Col. John Bird, who was interviewed in the mid-point of the video, you will see that he mouths the word 'ally' and quickly recovered to say 'partner', when describing the US-Singapore relations. IMHO, this distinction exists because of Indonesia.
Last edited:
Short definitive answer - No idea.
(1) Singapore operates a mature and multi-layered Integrated Air Defence System (IADS) and has an air force that is fairly capable. The current IADS system lacks ABM capacity but we do have a Russian designed short range Igla missile in our SHORAD arsenal. The Igla missiles are mounted on M113A2s and the Singapore developed Mechanised Igla comes in two variants (click here for fact sheet). So I can't say that we will not use Russian SAMs but it is unlikely that we will consider the S300 due to integration issues with our IADS.
(2) Given Singapore's small size, we may have to consider a sea based platform if we want to guard against ballistic missile threats from North East Asia (i.e. North Korea). Given that we are within artillery range of Malaysia and Indonesia (and that these two countries do not have ballistic missiles, yet), any current potential local threat is more from rocket artillery and not ballistic missiles. This will change and I believe, in time, we also need to acquire some capability to defend against cruise missiles and low flying UAVs too (as China proliferates her technology in this area).
(3) The current Aegis/Standard Missile combination is too expensive for the RSN to acquire (however, I'm watching developments of the sea based PAC-3 closely) and we also have six Formidable Class ships who use the Aster missile. The Aster 30 Block 1 (mentioned by swerve in his post), when it is developed could be a candidate and offers the advantage of some logistics commonality. Our over-riding concern for ABM capability is cost and we have a limited amount to spend for missile defence at the moment (as we have other priorities) and there are also other candidates like the Israeli developed Elta EL/M-2080 "Green Pine" early-warning AESA radar/Arrow combination or even the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR/Barak 8 combination (given our G550 CAEW acquisition). Singapore is very interested in longer range radar technology and the radar is a key component in an ABM system.
Longer speculative answer:
(1) Singapore operates a mature and multi-layered Integrated Air Defence System (IADS) and has an air force that is fairly capable. The current IADS system lacks ABM capacity but we do have a Russian designed short range Igla missile in our SHORAD arsenal. The Igla missiles are mounted on M113A2s and the Singapore developed Mechanised Igla comes in two variants (click here for fact sheet). So I can't say that we will not use Russian SAMs but it is unlikely that we will consider the S300 due to integration issues with our IADS.
(2) Given Singapore's small size, we may have to consider a sea based platform if we want to guard against ballistic missile threats from North East Asia (i.e. North Korea). Given that we are within artillery range of Malaysia and Indonesia (and that these two countries do not have ballistic missiles, yet), any current potential local threat is more from rocket artillery and not ballistic missiles. This will change and I believe, in time, we also need to acquire some capability to defend against cruise missiles and low flying UAVs too (as China proliferates her technology in this area).
(3) The current Aegis/Standard Missile combination is too expensive for the RSN to acquire (however, I'm watching developments of the sea based PAC-3 closely) and we also have six Formidable Class ships who use the Aster missile. The Aster 30 Block 1 (mentioned by swerve in his post), when it is developed could be a candidate and offers the advantage of some logistics commonality. Our over-riding concern for ABM capability is cost and we have a limited amount to spend for missile defence at the moment (as we have other priorities) and there are also other candidates like the Israeli developed Elta EL/M-2080 "Green Pine" early-warning AESA radar/Arrow combination or even the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR/Barak 8 combination (given our G550 CAEW acquisition). Singapore is very interested in longer range radar technology and the radar is a key component in an ABM system.
Last edited:
Interestingly, Singapore did consider the S-300 system not too long ago. Whether or not, the system will be re-visited will be interesting considering, as mentioned by OPSG, that there will be integration issues.
SINGAPORE IN TALKS TO BUY RUSSIAN MISSILES - Jane's Defence Weekly
I like the Aster 30 land system but I doubt Singapore would get Aster-30 land system to replace the I-hawks though the latter remains a possibility. I dont think we want similar systems on our ships and on land as well. That being the case, Partiots/Meads looks likely. I would not be surprised if the replacement is Israeli too; especially if the Israelis give total access to the thier systems.
With the latest and last upgrade to the I-hawks(obviously a stop-gap measure), we have a few years to purchase, integrate and commission a new mid-range->long range system. It will probably one of the bigger purchases Singapore will be making in the next 2-3 years.
From:
SINGAPORE IN TALKS TO BUY RUSSIAN MISSILES - Jane's Defence Weekly
I like the Aster 30 land system but I doubt Singapore would get Aster-30 land system to replace the I-hawks though the latter remains a possibility. I dont think we want similar systems on our ships and on land as well. That being the case, Partiots/Meads looks likely. I would not be surprised if the replacement is Israeli too; especially if the Israelis give total access to the thier systems.
With the latest and last upgrade to the I-hawks(obviously a stop-gap measure), we have a few years to purchase, integrate and commission a new mid-range->long range system. It will probably one of the bigger purchases Singapore will be making in the next 2-3 years.
The Aegis/Standard option is indeed expensive considering we have other priorities. That said, my view is that Singapore would buy it anyway if the other options fall short.
I share your view that a good system would be one at sea. Hence, I am inclined to believe that we would in fact be building a new class of anti-air frigates in this regard. The move towards building the Formidable frigates and incorporating our own battle management systems has resulted in a wealth of necessary experience useful in building and managing more sophisticated platforms.
Moreover, we would be able to support the initiatives of our allies(the US or Australia, for example) by building ships. I have always held the belief that the RSN should be a potent mix of blue water and brown water combatants given our interests. Something like 12 frigates(with 4 anti-air frigates)/ 12 littoral patrol vessels with helidecks.
SGMilitary
New Member
SGMilitary
New Member
I've read an article from Pentagon website yesterday.. There's a brief statement that Singapore is looking at procuring Boeing C-17 military aircraft. Does anyone have any detail?
Singapore Air Show
Ok - a little bit of a stir here. Why, is an RAAF F-111 duo receiving top billing for a Singaporean airshow ? Aint the RSAF got nothing to show :rotfl
How about some nice F-15s ?
As an aside: At least one advantage of working in Changi North Industrial Park - get see and hear the rehearsal sessions, and when I mean hear, I really do mean hear
Ok - a little bit of a stir here. Why, is an RAAF F-111 duo receiving top billing for a Singaporean airshow ? Aint the RSAF got nothing to show :rotflHow about some nice F-15s ?
As an aside: At least one advantage of working in Changi North Industrial Park - get see and hear the rehearsal sessions, and when I mean hear, I really do mean hear
SGMilitary
New Member
Hopefully, there is a possibility that the F-15SG may flew back to Singapore but the F-111 is an accomplished aircraft during her era. Keep our fingers cross.
How about some nice F-15s ?
As an aside: At least one advantage of working in Changi North Industrial Park - get see and hear the rehearsal sessions, and when I mean hear, I really do mean hear
Cheers!
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #331
Because it will be one of the last airshows the F-111 will ever attend...
Guess I just been over "F-111'd" over the years -- been seeing it do "dump & burn" an other variations for at least 25 years now.... (seem to recall at least one of these "dump & burn" runs at Christchurch in mid '80s)Because it will be one of the last airshows the F-111 will ever attend...
Still, will be good to see it the one lest time -- and if I don't see it, will certainly hear it
nfloorl:
Maybe some F-15SGs will be back around Aug 2010, just in time for National Day? Not sure if they want to make an over 17,000km journey which will need KC-135R support just to appear for a while at the 2010 Singapore Air Show.
How about some nice F-15s ?
As an aside: At least one advantage of working in Changi North Industrial Park - get see and hear the rehearsal sessions, and when I mean hear, I really do mean hear
Last edited:
fretburner
Banned Member
^why? where are your F-15SGs?
The F-15SGs that have been delivered are currently at Mountain Home Air Force Base in the US and Singapore's Strike Eagle training detachment operates under the banner of the 428th Fighter Squadron (see post #37 in another DT thread). We also have a F-16 training detachment in Luke Air Force Base in the US that operates under the banner of the 425th Fighter Squadron (see post #15 in another DT thread). The US based F-16 training program began in 1988 and post #15 referred to has more details if you are interested.
Today, the RSAF also trains under US Army Aviation with a Peace Vanguard Apache Helicopter detachment at Marana, Arizona, as well as a Peace Prairie Chinook detachment in Grand Prairie, Texas. BTW, RSAF's Peace Prairie Chinooks flew more than 80 sorties and transported over 800 evacuees and security personnel after Hurricane Katrina in Aug 2005.
Further, we have a Peace Triton naval helicopter detachment being trained by the USN Maritime Strike Weapons School in San Diego (see post #39 in another DT thread). The RSAF and the RSN had subscribed to the USN's SH-60F Aircraft Qualification Course. And a Formidable Class frigate, the RSS Stalwart is there with a total of 152 aircrew and ship crew for ship-helicopter integration training.
Last edited:
fretburner
Banned Member
^ thanks! reading through some of the posts on the links you gave me...this caught my attention:
"...The PC V detachment was established in October 2008 as the U.S. Air Force's 428th Fighter Squadron, and will operate up to 12 F-15SG fighter aircraft at the base for the next 25 years..."
It's not the USAF who will fly the 12 F-15SGs right? But they will be part of a USAF squadron?
And, what's the rationale for basing there for the next 25 years?
It seems like, if Singapore ever gets attacked, then they won't have their best fighters to fight off the attackers until maybe a day later?
"...The PC V detachment was established in October 2008 as the U.S. Air Force's 428th Fighter Squadron, and will operate up to 12 F-15SG fighter aircraft at the base for the next 25 years..."
It's not the USAF who will fly the 12 F-15SGs right? But they will be part of a USAF squadron?
And, what's the rationale for basing there for the next 25 years?
It seems like, if Singapore ever gets attacked, then they won't have their best fighters to fight off the attackers until maybe a day later?
A significant portion of our training does not occur in Singapore due to limited airspace. Please note that the squadron exists to provide training for OUR pilots but this arrangement is a way of managing sensitives - and more importantly, this structure is not an unusual USAF arrangement with visiting forces who train in the US (other than the longer than normal duration, which is a Singapore mandated requirement).
Kindly note that our force structure (air force, army and navy) is designed for overmatch against a potential regional aggressor. Therefore, we are not really worried about the F-15SGs being abroad. In 2010, we only need less than 1/2 of our forward deploy-able forces to present an overmatch against conventional forces in the immediate region - keeping in mind that we have a mainly conscript army but a volunteer air force and navy. This helps with family life of alert forces. Further in the event, a surprise attack successfully occurs, it only stirs up a hornet's nest and our returning forces are going straight into the enemy's rear (which means a two pronged counter attack by us). Besides, any surprise attack on Singapore is an attack on the US logistics presence here - which can only benefit us in ensuring that we will have US support. The main realistic threat to Singapore is not conventional, it is more likely to be asymmetrical in nature.
Our investments in defence and in defence diplomacy have enabled us to modify and shape our external security environment to our advantage. eg. Beyond partnering with the TNI to help Indonesia when natural disaster strikes like the recent earthquake or in the past after the Dec 2004 Tsunami, Singapore also transfers aircraft and equipment to our defence partners. BTW Singapore transferred 19 SIAI-Marchetti SF-260s and the ex-RSS JUPITER to the Indonesians in 2002. Singapore also transferred 7 F-16A/B's (3 Alpha & 4 Bravo models) to Thailand in January 2005. These airframes were donated by the government of Singapore to the Thai Air Force. In return the RSAF can train on the Thai air base of Udon Thani a number of days each year.
Last edited:
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #338
I know what you mean. The dump and burn has been used FAR too much. It's good to see RAAF actually creating a relatively new 4-ship Hornet display routine, rather than simply relying on the old F-111...Guess I just been over "F-111'd" over the years -- been seeing it do "dump & burn" an other variations for at least 25 years now.... (seem to recall at least one of these "dump & burn" runs at Christchurch in mid '80s)
Still, will be good to see it the one lest time -- and if I don't see it, will certainly hear it
Still the twin dump and burn displays conducted over Brisbane for our Riverfire festival every year will be missed...
fretburner
Banned Member
OPSSG, how much time does your best fighters spend outside of the country vs in the country? Just wondering.
I cannot tell you more information than what is provided in the links - please read them again. BTW, I can't answer your question in the manner you have asked it because the answer to your question is, it depends.