RSN capabilities

Ananda

The Bunker Group
Yes, the RSS Archer is no longer a Västergötland-class submarine, as it has been lengthened and like the Södermanland Class, it is equipped with AIP. However, it seems they are calling it the "Archer Class" (but no details have been released to enable us to compare between the Archer Class and the Södermanland Class).

Opssg, do you have info on how much it cost Singaporean Tax Payers for those two Archer Class ??
Kockums seems indicated that after refurbished the Sodermanland's practically are new subs. I think we can assume that if archers having simmilar build-up (more or less) than can be expected to perform for at least two decades as just new build subs.
Thus if the claim can be held, then the cost for acquiaring those two subs will be simmillar than getting brand new subs.

Just wandering if the work done by Kockums for 17 years old subs will be really comparable for brand new build subs.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Opssg, do you have info on how much it cost Singaporean Tax Payers for those two Archer Class ??
According to a Swedish source, the two Västergötland-class hulls were purchased for 1 billion kronor (or approximately US$128 million, depending on the exchange rate used). IIRC, the cost of upgrading the 2 Västergötland class to the Sodermanland Class was about US$ 75 million for the Swedish navy (but the US$ 75 million figure is not likely to be accurate or representative).

While Mindef will not release the cost of upgrading the two Archer Class vessels, we can make a wild guess - maybe US$ 203 million? (for both vessels)

Kockums seems indicated that after refurbished the Sodermanland's practically are new subs. I think we can assume that if archers having similar build-up (more or less) than can be expected to perform for at least two decades as just new build subs.
Thus if the claim can be held, then the cost for acquiring those two subs will be similar than getting brand new subs.

Just wandering if the work done by Kockums for 17 years old subs will be really comparable for brand new build subs.
If the Sodermanland class were as capable as the Gotland Class, why would the Swedish navy build the HMS Gotland, HMS Uppland and HMS Halland?

I think the above is a bit of marketing hype by Kockums AB. I'll treat the Sodermanland upgrade as a service life extension programme.
 
Last edited:

Ananda

The Bunker Group
OPSSG;176686
While Mindef will not release the cost of upgrading the two Archer Class vessels, we can make a wild guess - maybe US$ 203 million? (for both vessels).
USD 203 mio will be smaller than what the Malaysian's paid for two brand new scorpenes, but still show quite modifications job have been done on the subs.

If the Sodermanland class were as capable as the Gotland Class, why would the Swedish navy build the HMS Gotland, HMS Uppland and HMS Halland?

I think the above is a bit of marketing hype by Kockums AB. I'll treat the Sodermanland upgrade as a service life extension programme.
Agree on that. That's put Sodermanland build-up (which potentialy what the Archers more or less have) still make very reasonable value on money subs.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
USD 203 mio will be smaller than what the Malaysian's paid for two brand new scorpenes, but still show quite modifications job have been done on the subs.
Please note that DSTA has a Northern Light project office (aka Archer Class project office) in Sweden, which is responsible for selecting and integrating new underwater defence technologies and our own Integrated Knowledge-based Command and Control (IKC2) system for the Archer Class. It is the integration of other technologies (possibly not found on the Sodermanland Class) that may drive the cost up - such that a US$ 203 million guesstimate would not be accurate.

The Archer Class may cost much more than US$203 million because of the DSTA specified 'modernisation'. And I have no details of what was 'modernised'.

Maybe someone else who can explain better can chime in?
 
Last edited:

Firn

Active Member
Navy-Log

Typical cost for a new submarine powered by AIP is $250 million. These warships are openly for sale to almost anyone with a big enough checking account (except Taiwan, but that’s another story). For the budget-conscious – or someone simply in a hurry to raise hell with an allied navy -- a Russian P-130 or Piranha-T Small-class submarine may be purchased for a fraction of the cost of a Scorpene. In the past several years, both US and allied forces have been dismayed to have their ships “sunk” (including an aircraft carrier) by small but new diesel-electric submarines such as Sweden’s “Gotland” playing the enemy in exercises.
However the price of an U 212A is over 400 million € - roughly 560$.

Das Typboot U 31 wurde am 1. Juli 1998 auf Kiel gelegt und am 20. März 2002 getauft. Es begann im August 2002 die Funktionsnachweise im Hafen, ab April 2003 auf See.[4] Im März 2004 begann die Erprobung in der Deutschen Marine. U 31 bildet mit drei weiteren Booten der Klasse (U 32, U 33 und U 34) das erste Baulos. Die Entwicklung der Klasse kostete Deutschland etwa 150 Mio. €, der Bau der vier Boote für die Deutsche Marine jeweils gut 400 Mio. €.[5]

Um die magnetischen Signaturen der neuen, größeren Boote vermessen und so deren erschwerte magnetische Ortbarkeit sichern zu können, entstand von 2001 bis November 2005 in Schirnau-Lehmbek ein neuer Erdmagnetfeldsimulator für etwa 40 Mio. €.[6]
From Wikipedia, note that the link to the site of the gov. does no longer work.


This is how much I can say about prices.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
^^^ Firn, thanks for the AIP submarine prices.

BTW, the sister vessel of the RSS Archer (Ex-Hälsingland) is to be named RSS Swordsman (Ex-Västergötland) - which are recycled names of RSN's former Swift Class coastal patrol craft.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zb3R0ouZQYA]Submarine Training in Sweden[/ame]
 
Last edited:

Praetorianbv

New Member
unless it has already been discussed (and do point me to the messages that did), i am interested to know if Aster 15 or 30 has seen combat action and what radar was used?
 

SGMilitary

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #169
RSN PV hit unidentified underwater object

Latest from MINDEF

An RSN PV hit unidentified underwater object while patrolling around the

waters off Pedra Branca.

All crew are safe and PV is steered back to base.

MINDEF is conducting investigation.

Second accident to involve PV....should the RSN replace these PV's

with NG Stealth PV or LCS type vessels?

Any feedback?


Regards.
 

StevoJH

The Bunker Group
Latest from MINDEF

An RSN PV hit unidentified underwater object while patrolling around the

waters off Pedra Branca.

All crew are safe and PV is steered back to base.

MINDEF is conducting investigation.

Second accident to involve PV....should the RSN replace these PV's

with NG Stealth PV or LCS type vessels?

Any feedback?


Regards.
Container? Why do they need replacing? not their fault they hit a submerged object.
 

Red

New Member
Latest from MINDEF

An RSN PV hit unidentified underwater object while patrolling around the

waters off Pedra Branca.

All crew are safe and PV is steered back to base.

MINDEF is conducting investigation.

Second accident to involve PV....should the RSN replace these PV's

with NG Stealth PV or LCS type vessels?

Any feedback?


Regards.
The waters around that island is one of the most polluted in the environ. 900 ships pass by the location daily. All manner of rubbish is disposed off in the vincinty. In addition, I am to understand that the large parts of the waters there are shallow. The PV in question is currently not equipped with sonar and it is meant for coastal patrol(very much policing actions) though she could easily be up armed with harpoons and other weapons.

http://newspedia.nl.sg/Archive.aspx?Title=Pedra+Branca

I think that it is nothing serious. Probably disposed rubbish material.
 

Red

New Member
Container? Why do they need replacing? not their fault they hit a submerged object.
The PVs are still relatively new. What needs replacing are the Victory class ships which would be 30 plus years old at the end of 2020 necessitating replacements to be built sometime next decade. Depending on the threat environ and changing maritime situation in South China Sea, it could be sooner than later.

There has been talk that a bigger patrol ship would be better as compared to the current PVs. I am in favour of a mini LCS ship with a hangar which can launch UAVs or land helicopters; useful in exigencies.
 

SGMilitary

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #173
The PVs are still relatively new. What needs replacing are the Victory class ships which would be 30 plus years old at the end of 2020 necessitating replacements to be built sometime next decade. Depending on the threat environ and changing maritime situation in South China Sea, it could be sooner than later.

There has been talk that a bigger patrol ship would be better as compared to the current PVs. I am in favour of a mini LCS ship with a hangar which can launch UAVs or land helicopters; useful in exigencies.
RED,

I agrees with you.

The Victory MCV should be replaced with at least a Singaporean version of

FREMM?

At least 125 metres in length, at least 48 VL of Aster 15/30, MU90 LW ASW

torpedoes, VL NSM anti-ship missiles, 120 mm main gun, 30mm CIWS

canons with SHORADS surface to air-missile (gun + missile system),

ASW/ASUW helicopter and UAV.

AS for the PVs, yes they are relatively new....a stealth LCS replacement will

be ideal.


Regards.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Mindef said:
18 Nov 2009 - Chief of Air Force MG Ng Chee Khern officiated the inauguration ceremony of the Republic of Singapore Air Force's (RSAF) Peace Triton Sikorsky Seahawk Naval Helicopter detachment in the United States Navy (USN) Maritime Strike Weapons School in San Diego on 16 November.

The Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) had earlier acquired six S-70B Sikorsky Seahawk Naval Helicopters (NH). As part of the operationalisation process, the RSAF and the Republic of Singapore Navy (RSN) had subscribed to the USN's SH-60F Aircraft Qualification Course. Currently, the detachment has four helicopters and the Formidable-class frigate RSS STALWART, and will operate with a total of 152 aircrew and ship crew.

The training syllabus is conducted in two phases, the first being the aviation module where the individual vocations hone their skills and work as a composite crew. The second sees the integration between the frigate and the NH, and learning to fight as a composite unit. The training is held in San Diego, and includes USN instructors, RSAF pilots, RSN Tactical Co-ordination Officers (TACCO), RSN Sensor Operators (SENSO) and RSAF ground maintenance. They undergo a stringent selection criteria such as medical checks, screening and air crew qualification courses...

Looking forward, the frigates and NH will undergo more intensive training, that will cumulate in the full integration between the assets.

MAJ Leon Chua, who is also a TACCO commented: "It is a very important milestone, but it is not easy as many think it can be. It takes a lot of hammering down to details and it is not something you can just discuss and draw on paper. It is about knowing the unknowns and finding an answer to them. The NH will complete the frigate, which is already a formidable node of the SAF. Coming together will be a beginning and more work is expected..."
The Peace Triton programme is designed to provide an organic naval helicopter capability for the Formidable Class frigates (see YF's blog for more details). Singapore has an unusual shared organizational arrangement (between the air force and the navy), the details of which are described above.

More pixs and info in DT here.
 
Last edited:

SGMilitary

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #175
The Peace Triton programme is designed to provide an organic naval helicopter capability for the Formidable Class frigates (see YF's blog for more details). Singapore has an unusual shared organizational arrangement (between the air force and the navy), the details of which are described above.

More pixs and info in DT here.
I'm just curious why the RSN has no plans to procure additional S-70B? In term of technical and logistical aspect, the current 6 is not adequate.
What about the upgraded MCMV details that was awarded to Thales?
 

SGMilitary

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #176
I saw the latest RSn TV ads in print. There's a picture of a warship with more VLS. Could this warship be a replacement for MCV?

Cheers!
 

weasel1962

New Member
I'm just curious why the RSN has no plans to procure additional S-70B? In term of technical and logistical aspect, the current 6 is not adequate.
Tot I will address this. As the S-70B has not entered IOC with the RSN, does that mean SG has no ASW coverage?

There are primarily 3 ASW functions, hold at risk, protected passage and maritime shield. The first includes port security. Port security can have static and flexible sensors eg passive/active preplaced radars (for surface detection)/sonars/other sensors such as ROMANIS, mobile sensors eg ASW vessels or ASW a/c (for surface detection) or other measures eg designated routes, artificial barriers etc which cover not only submarine detection but anti-terrorism measures eg diver detection etc (I won't discuss this in detail). In the latter, RSN has both subs and several vessels equipped with sonar capability which regularly perform this role.

The second role involve regular patrols by vessels. Vessels have a better capability vis a vis helos because of endurance ie they stay in their patrol area a lot longer. SG's fearless class generally performs this role.

Maritime shield is relatively new to the RSN because of the lack of blue water vessels. This is now rectified with the induction of the Formidable class frigates. The ASW helos support this role but these are 70s/80s warfare concepts.

This century's tech now requires UAV/USV/UUVs in all 3 roles. The advantages compared to helos/a/c are as follows:

(a) cost. Each "Fleet" class USV costs US$3-5m. S-70B cost US$54m each not counting cost of maintenance, crew, sonobouys etc.
(b) expendibility. The loss of USVs are far less costly and would signal the presence of hostile forces. USVs may cost even less than torpedoes.
(c) endurance. Each "Fleet" class USV is designed for 24-48 hour endurance compared to 2 for each helo.
(d) detection. USVs can carry towed arrays which work at low speeds (eg under 20 kts). These speeds are not feasible for helos/aircraft. USVs also carry the gamut of other equipment eg dipping sonar,
(e) manpower. Less crew is needed for USVs. Helo crew need more training.

Currently high value units (HVUs) are defended by ASW assets eg FFGs, MCVs with the support of ASW helos/aircraft. Going forward, USVs will likely form shields that defend HVUs and theirs escorts. RSN will only need more helos if there are more escort vessels. What RSN requires are USVs. With the induction of the Spartan (with flash sonar) and Venus USV (upcoming) as well as likely fleet class USV, its already happening.
 

SGMilitary

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #178
With due respect, I'm hoping that the RSN will procure 6 more S70B helicopters + unmanned USV to support the S70B and a possible replacement for the 5 Fokker 50 MPA. Perhaps 4 modified G550 + 4 unmanned RQ4D Global Hawk.I've read an article that stated RMN Scorpene submarines are the only submarine platform in SouthEast Asia that are able to launch anti-surface missile as in RMN case is the SM39 Exocet.I've also read Janes article that the RSN Archer class SSK are equipped with Italian Blackshark HVW torpedoes. Are there plans to equip the Archer class with Harpoon anti ship missile? What about the MCV?Should the RSN replace them with second batch of Formidable or FREMM?Please state your comments.

Tot I will address this. As the S-70B has not entered IOC with the RSN, does that mean SG has no ASW coverage?

There are primarily 3 ASW functions, hold at risk, protected passage and maritime shield. The first includes port security. Port security can have static and flexible sensors eg passive/active preplaced radars (for surface detection)/sonars/other sensors such as ROMANIS, mobile sensors eg ASW vessels or ASW a/c (for surface detection) or other measures eg designated routes, artificial barriers etc which cover not only submarine detection but anti-terrorism measures eg diver detection etc (I won't discuss this in detail). In the latter, RSN has both subs and several vessels equipped with sonar capability which regularly perform this role.

The second role involve regular patrols by vessels. Vessels have a better capability vis a vis helos because of endurance ie they stay in their patrol area a lot longer. SG's fearless class generally performs this role.

Maritime shield is relatively new to the RSN because of the lack of blue water vessels. This is now rectified with the induction of the Formidable class frigates. The ASW helos support this role but these are 70s/80s warfare concepts.

This century's tech now requires UAV/USV/UUVs in all 3 roles. The advantages compared to helos/a/c are as follows:

(a) cost. Each "Fleet" class USV costs US$3-5m. S-70B cost US$54m each not counting cost of maintenance, crew, sonobouys etc.
(b) expendibility. The loss of USVs are far less costly and would signal the presence of hostile forces. USVs may cost even less than torpedoes.
(c) endurance. Each "Fleet" class USV is designed for 24-48 hour endurance compared to 2 for each helo.
(d) detection. USVs can carry towed arrays which work at low speeds (eg under 20 kts). These speeds are not feasible for helos/aircraft. USVs also carry the gamut of other equipment eg dipping sonar,
(e) manpower. Less crew is needed for USVs. Helo crew need more training.

Currently high value units (HVUs) are defended by ASW assets eg FFGs, MCVs with the support of ASW helos/aircraft. Going forward, USVs will likely form shields that defend HVUs and theirs escorts. RSN will only need more helos if there are more escort vessels. What RSN requires are USVs. With the induction of the Spartan (with flash sonar) and Venus USV (upcoming) as well as likely fleet class USV, its already happening.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Latest local news report on the USN providing training for the RSN with regards to the integration of naval helicopters or the Singaporean Peace Triton detachment, located at the Naval Air Station North Island in San Diego (click to see another Mindef article and news release):

Jermyn Chow said:
S'pore navy on target in Pacific exercise:
Ability to manage with smaller crew impresses US Navy commander

Mar 15, 2010 - ABOARD RSS STALWART (IN THE PACIFIC OCEAN): Deep in the bowels of the stealth frigate RSS Stalwart, Singapore naval officers in the warship's Combat Information Centre have their sights locked on a hostile nuclear submarine. The submerged vessel was first spotted lurking about six nautical miles (11km) away - close enough for it to strike the Republic of Singapore Navy (RSN) frigate and other United States Navy warships patrolling the choppy Pacific Ocean.

In naval parlance, that's a 'hot contact'. The 80-member crew of the Stalwart swing into action and within minutes, an S-70B Sikorsky Seahawk naval helicopter is in the air to keep the threat at bay. Throughout the 12-hour game of hide-and-seek, the Seahawk's sharp ears - dipping sonars that can 'hear' as deep as 400m underwater - trumped and held off any hostile advances.

The anti-submarine helicopter, the latest weapon in RSN's arsenal, can also scour the seas some 100 nautical miles away and travel five times faster than the frigate it operates off, which typically travels at a speed of about 20 knots. Yesterday, the Seahawk and the frigate were watching over the 1,600 sq km water body off San Diego - more than twice the size of Singapore.

Their 'sense and strike' manoeuvres were part of an eight-day exercise ending today, which saw the deployment of two of the RSN's six anti-submarine helicopters. Also part of the 1,500-man exercise, codenamed Golden Merlion, were five warships, six naval helicopters, two maritime patrol aircraft and a nuclear submarine from the US Navy. The exercise, jointly organised by the Singapore and US navies, demonstrated why the Seahawk was the predatory bird of choice for the RSN.

Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean, who witnessed the outcome of the exercise off the California coast yesterday, said the chopper will see the Singapore Armed Forces 'well into the future'. Also present at the drill were senior SAF officers such as the Chief of Navy, Rear-Admiral Chew Men Leong, and Colonel Wellman Wan, commander of the RSN's First Flotilla...

But what gives the SAF 'a major leap forward' is its ability to pair up the chopper and its stealth warships so that it can 'dominate a much greater area of sea and airspace'. 'The fact is that you can put both the ship and the aircraft together and sort of multiply the capabilities of both operating together as one system,' said DPM Teo.

Yesterday's drill, involving both the RSN's frigates and Seahawks, is the realisation of a plan that was put in place 10 years ago when the navy first acquired the six strike vessels from France. In 2005, it then place the order for the six anti-submarine helicopters to operate off the frigates. The Republic of Singapore Air Force pilots and their ground crew have been training on similar choppers in the US since October 2007 before the Republic took delivery of its own Seahawks last year. Moving forward, DPM Teo said the SAF will be 'ramping up' the frigate programme.

Colonel Wan, who commands the six missile corvettes and six frigates in the First Flotilla, told The Straits Times that this would include sharing the know-how with the other five frigates and adapting operations to the shallower and more crowded South China Sea and local waters.

The Singaporeans training in San Diego will return home in June this year with at least three of the six naval helicopters to set up the Seahawk squadron. The commander of the US Navy's Third Fleet, Vice-Admiral Richard Hunt, told reporters that he was impressed with the RSN's ability to do more with a 80-man crew compared with frigates of the same class and capabilities elsewhere, which are usually crewed by 150 to 180 people. The clincher was how RSN uses technology and machines to do more with fewer operators. Vice-Adm Hunt added that the US will have much to learn from the RSN which he thinks is 'towards the top of all navies I've gotten to see'.
More pixs here.
 
Last edited:

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
From the news reports and thanks to the US Navy, it took the Singapore Navy 3 years to gain this new naval helicopter capability for the Formidable Class.

Jermyn Chow said:
Seahawks take flight despite delays
Helicopters, which were delivered late, team up seamlessly with frigate in exercise

Mar 16, 2010 - NAVAL AIR STATION, NORTH ISLAND (SAN DIEGO)... The anti-submarine S-70B Sikorsky Seahawks teamed up seamlessly with the RSN's radar-evading stealth frigate RSS Stalwart to root out and destroy 'enemy submarines' on the final day of the eight-day exercise, code-named Golden Merlion. The chief trainer of the Singapore pilots and sailors, Lieutenant-Commander Jon Anderson, 37, of the US Navy's Helicopter Maritime Strike Weapons School, was impressed. The naval aviator, who tailored the training plan for the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) here in San Diego, said: 'What the US Navy took about six years to achieve, the Singaporeans were able to do in three...that's incredibly accelerated compared with what we did for our initial operations.'

...The trainees under him and his 13 instructors were part of Singapore's fifth detachment of RSN and Republic of Singapore Air Force personnel sent to the US for training with a US Navy helicopter squadron. Under an agreement, six RSN Seahawk helicopters will be based at the Naval Air Station North Island naval base. Each Seahawk is operated by two pilots, a tactical coordination officer who comes up with the plan to track sea aggressors, and a sensor operator.

Captain Sim Kah Meng, 29, a tactical coordination officer, said: 'Everything happens very quickly, within seconds, from spotting the submarine, thinking about the best tactics to engage it and second guessing what it is doing.'

...The commander of the San Diego detachment, Lieutenant-Colonel Jonathan Tan, described the integration of Seahawks with the frigates as a 'true reflection' of the modernised SAF. Those trained in San Diego will share what they learnt with all six frigates of the RSN, which will take until the end of next year, said Lt-Col Tan, who will oversee the setting up of the Seahawk Squadron. The first batch of 62 servicemen will wrap up their training this month and are expected home in June with at least three naval helicopters; a second batch of 63 servicemen will start training in about two weeks' time and return to join the new squadron in August.
I'm quite happy that the Republic of Singapore Navy (RSN) acquired a new organic naval helicopter capability as they help with the radar horizon issue and are very useful for anti-submarine warfare. Each naval helicopter is an additional sensor to augment the Heracles MFR (a passive phased array S-band pencil beam radar) on the frigate, with the Fokker 50 MPAs (which perform the search function) and the Venus USVs (currently being developed by Singapore Technologies - see post #60 in this pix thread) to extend our sensor reach of RSN's First Flotilla, under Colonel Wellman Wan. A university in Singapore is also working on ambient noise imaging through efforts like ROMANIS and underwater buoys like PANDAs for ambient noise data collection and cooperative target tracking - the acquisition of new naval capabilities will complement the local research efforts. [h/t to weasel1962 for the links]

I hope to see this class of vessel deployed with CTF-151 in the future.

BTW, I'm not a fan of the description of the Formidable Class as radar-evading stealth frigates simply because they can be seen on the radar of another warship. It's just that thanks to signature management and emissions control (EMCON) procedures, a contact by an opposing warship with a Formidable Class frigate can result in the other warship mistaking the frigate for a much smaller fishing boat. The Formidable Class frigates are detectable by radar but it would not be so easy to identify them (with the use of different EMCOM levels) and get into range to engage them given the heavy maritime traffic around Singapore's area of influence. The current approach to news reporting is geared towards educating laymen. Unfortunately, this approach does not provide me any juicy technical details like the model of the APS-143 radar acquired for Singapore's S-70Bs (or if indeed this is the case).
 
Last edited:
Top