Title: Would SG need SSM/cruise missile in the future?
Sayaret - September 14, 2006 12:11 PM (GMT)
I have been pondering over this topic for sometime, reading with interest the various countries around the region, who are thinking and planning to acquire nuclear power (for civilian use....or so they say). I mean in our region.
This would indirectly make us vulnerable...from whatever angle, we are at a disadvantage. That could be in the next 20 years maybe, not too sure how our SAF would be like then. But to rely solely on aircrafts, would mean being handicapped to a certain extent. So, having SSMs or cruise missiles might be our way of defending ourselves against unforeseen circumstances.
This would indirectly make us vulnerable...from whatever angle, we are at a disadvantage. That could be in the next 20 years maybe, not too sure how our SAF would be like then. But to rely solely on aircrafts, would mean being handicapped to a certain extent. So, having SSMs or cruise missiles might be our way of defending ourselves against unforeseen circumstances.
snowfox - September 14, 2006 02:20 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Sayaret @ Sep 14 2006, 08:11 PM) |
| I have been pondering over this topic for sometime, reading with interest the various countries around the region, who are thinking and planning to acquire nuclear power (for civilian use....or so they say). I mean in our region. |
Question, for discussion, what if SG acquire Nuclear Power Generaton abilities.
| QUOTE (Sayaret @ Sep 14 2006, 08:11 PM) |
| having SSMs or cruise missiles might be our way of defending ourselves against unforeseen circumstances. |
Before going into this area, are you refering to attacking land based target.
Side issue, for information only.
People are toying with the idea of Shipborned Nuclear Power station, if recall properly. it is a Russian design. Rational being that a Central construction site can achieve Economy of Scale, and such a power generation system has a a natural cooling near it (Sea) and a host of other pluses.
Side issue, for information only.
People are toying with the idea of Shipborned Nuclear Power station, if recall properly. it is a Russian design. Rational being that a Central construction site can achieve Economy of Scale, and such a power generation system has a a natural cooling near it (Sea) and a host of other pluses.
Sayaret - September 14, 2006 03:43 PM (GMT)
Its true, nothing says that SG would not...but then again, I personally don't know if our govt would go down that lane, simply becos there's actually a host of other possibilities which have been buried simply becos' of the so-called cheaper, more accessible etc nuclear power that is available.....the world of science is sometimes selfish becos prominent scientists think one way is best and its supported worldwide, then that's the best.....I am sure there's two sides to the argument, but desalination was once touted by Singapore to be way way too expensive and therefore not a possible source for us...but look at us now....we're among the experts in this area and exporting it too!!?? Strange right??
That aside, when I mean SSM / cruise missile, I mean what they are originally used for - land target, large sea target etc... :D
That aside, when I mean SSM / cruise missile, I mean what they are originally used for - land target, large sea target etc... :D
homing - September 15, 2006 04:58 AM (GMT)
I not sure but cruise missile will be "replace" by UAV bombers / fighter in the future as they give a better bang for buck / loitering time / more flexible bomb package / higher accuracy/ "stealth" option/ etc. Perfer to have a fleet of 100+ of UAV bomber/fighter in the near future than cruise missile/SSM option in Singapore.
Sayaret - September 15, 2006 05:39 AM (GMT)
Partly true, but not entirely. If cruise missiles and SSMs are not of strategic use, why would China, India, North Korea, Iran, Pakistan etc would be spending their precious dollars building and researching into this area? No matter how big a force of UAVs etc, its not good sense to put all your egges into 1 basket. If UAVs are a better choice, trust me, all these countries mentioned would have concentrated fully on them. China is still deploying new cruise missiles etc. Taiwan has invented some cruise missiles which is supersonic, while North Korea is trying to perfect their long-range missiles to reach US soil. UAVs are mostly short-ranged, simply becos to have them at long range, would mean they are big, then why not have the SSMs or cruise missiles?? Less problematic to a certain extent.
Personally, I would envision S'pore having cruise missiles, simply becos' of range and ease of delivery - via launchers , aircrafts, vessels or subs. The last being the platform of choice.
Personally, I would envision S'pore having cruise missiles, simply becos' of range and ease of delivery - via launchers , aircrafts, vessels or subs. The last being the platform of choice.
LazerLordz - September 15, 2006 06:14 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Sayaret @ Sep 15 2006, 01:39 PM) |
| Partly true, but not entirely. If cruise missiles and SSMs are not of strategic use, why would China, India, North Korea, Iran, Pakistan etc would be spending their precious dollars building and researching into this area? No matter how big a force of UAVs etc, its not good sense to put all your egges into 1 basket. If UAVs are a better choice, trust me, all these countries mentioned would have concentrated fully on them. China is still deploying new cruise missiles etc. Taiwan has invented some cruise missiles which is supersonic, while North Korea is trying to perfect their long-range missiles to reach US soil. UAVs are mostly short-ranged, simply becos to have them at long range, would mean they are big, then why not have the SSMs or cruise missiles?? Less problematic to a certain extent. Personally, I would envision S'pore having cruise missiles, simply becos' of range and ease of delivery - via launchers , aircrafts, vessels or subs. The last being the platform of choice. |
Cruise missiles, I personally feel, form one of the logical steps in the evolution of an armed forces.
You have the RSAF purchasing the stand-off weapons as part of the Eagle tranche, and this is one important piece of news, because it is almost an open admission of our need for a long range missile system.Furthermore, you have TCH speaking of ballistic missile threats as the next key area of focus for the SAF.
With regards to UAVs and planes, it is prudent to spread out your options, but not to the extent that you have too many different uplines and downlines for logistical support. We are not the US Army after all. The best ratio, IMHO, would be to possess two forms of standoff weaponry, one in CM form, the other by deep strike aircraft.
I hardly think that defensive systems are the only way forward in meeting ballistic missile threats. It is logical to assume that offensive systems should be in the scope of our needs to knock out any ICBM threats. However, for reasons of practicality, I think any platform that we either purchase or develop inhouse, will be preferably air-launched or sea launched , rather than land-launched. We have always leveraged on mobility as one of our key strengths, and I see that trend continuing.
There was a report posted here in the past about the Taiwanese Hsien Fung cruise missile.Given that we do have access to their high level missile range, as reported in the 1980s, what are the chances that we could have access to these missiles as well?
Another option is the Firefly UCAV, developed by STK. That has been reported to be a platform that could be converted in a jiffy into a cruise missile, by adding a warhead to it. After all, UAV technology grants the same, if not more accurate terrain mapping capability to the flight vehicle..
The absence of smoke does not mean the fire isn't there, maybe it has not been lit, that's all. ;)
LazerLordz - September 15, 2006 06:17 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (snowfox @ Sep 14 2006, 10:20 PM) | ||||
Question, for discussion, what if SG acquire Nuclear Power Generaton abilities.
Before going into this area, are you refering to attacking land based target. Side issue, for information only. People are toying with the idea of Shipborned Nuclear Power station, if recall properly. it is a Russian design. Rational being that a Central construction site can achieve Economy of Scale, and such a power generation system has a a natural cooling near it (Sea) and a host of other pluses. |
Nuclear Power eh.
I'm not very sure about this.. but it does form a logical path. We do not have the land to introduce solar energy, and wind energy is non-functional here, neither is hydropower.
ALPHA84 - September 15, 2006 07:27 AM (GMT)
I was more thinking of attack UAV like the Israel Harpy UAV. ST had this display of a slim long missile like UAV. It is named as the SPARROW-N UAV. Can this platform be a potential UAV for conversion to attack uavs? BTW, it would be nice if we had a larger frigate of abt 125m and carrying land attack cruise missiles. We could have air defense variants too........... B) :P
diCam - September 15, 2006 09:44 AM (GMT)
Well, RSN has Harpoons and that is cruise missile. So, here we are. SG have cruise missiles! :D We have the ship and air-launch version. Maybe, RSN will accquire submarine launch version in near future? The only thing we do not know is whether we purchase the upgrade kit to enable our Harpoon to attack land-based targets. If we have, I consider this as a pre-cursor of obtaining full CM capability in time to come.
Iowa_BB61 - September 16, 2006 06:15 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE |
- N/T - REF. ABOVE |
IIRC..., there was an article in the news a couple of years ago by a RSAF's official on the advantages of possessing cruise-missiles as a form of cost effectiveness and manpower management...??? AFAIK...
Anyone recalls...???
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~ Project-ION Phoenix ~~ ~~ Op. IceBerg ~~ ~~ Iowa_BB61 ~~ ~~ xxKuZNeTxx ~~
--------------------
Iowa_BB61 - September 16, 2006 06:18 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (LazerLordz @ 15 SEP 2006) | ||||
Nuclear Power eh. I'm not very sure about this..., but it does form a logical path. We do not have the land to introduce solar energy, and wind energy is non-functional here, neither is hydropower. |
AFAIK / IIRC..., a majority of ASEAN's nations are signatory members of the "SouthEast Asia, Nuclear-Weapon Free-Zone Treaty" as well as the International "Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty". Which explicitly states...
| QUOTE (ASEAN's WebSite (Treaty On The SouthEast Asia Nuclear-Weapon Free-Zone). Thailand (Bangkok) @ 15 DEC 1995.) |
3.2) Each State Party also undertakes not to allow, in its territory, any other State to:
4.1) Nothing in this Treaty shall prejudice the right of the States Parties to use nuclear energy, in particular for their economic development and social progress. |
Though Singapore had been known to stored Depleted-Uranium (DU) ammunitions in the early '90s for Coalition-Forces operating during the 1st GulfWar, before the treaty was signed...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peaceful applications of nuclear-energy are allowed under both treaties as mentioned above... InFact..., both Indonesia and Malaysia currently operates low-wattage experimental nuclear reactors... Though disposal of radioactive wastes remains an issue..., with Indonesia (E.G.) making a big hoo-hah over a shipload of organic fertilisers from Singapore (In Which They Actually Classified The Cargo As 'Hazardous Materials'... IIRC...), bring used in Batam. Is nuclear-energy actually feasible enough for us..., within Singapore's territory...???
Not forgetting the possibilities of a nuclear meltdown..., no nuclear power-stations had been commissioned in the United States, since the Three-Mile Island nuclear accident in 1979, involving the reactor core in its TMI-2 generating plant. IMHO..., Singapore's electrical and transmission-grid linking photovoltaic solar-panals on every single buildings in Singapore, coupled with existing power-stations and voilà, you have an island-sized "solar-farm"...??? Mine two-cents (EU's Nations Are Adopting Similar Policy)...
| QUOTE (Additional Post Edits @ 16 SEP 2006) |
Malaysian Institute For Nucleur Technology Research (MINT). Nuclear Energy Option and Energy Planning In Malaysia (Article Dated 13 SEP 2006). Click Here... (PDF Format). |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~ Project-ION Phoenix ~~ ~~ Op. IceBerg ~~ ~~ Iowa_BB61 ~~ ~~ xxKuZNeTxx ~~
--------------------
snowfox - September 16, 2006 08:35 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Iowa_BB61 @ Sep 16 2006, 02:18 PM) |
| Not forgetting the possibilities of a nuclear meltdown..., no nuclear power-stations had been commissioned in the United States, since the Three-Mile Island nuclear accident in 1979, involving the reactor core in its TMI-2 generating plant. IMHO..., Singapore's electrical and transmission-grid linking photovoltaic solar-panals on every single buildings in Singapore, coupled with existing power-stations and voilà, you have an island-sized "solar-farm"...??? Mine two-cents (EU's Nations Are Adopting Similar Policy)...-------------------- |
Sorry Iowa_BB61, Off hand Know of one American Reactor (Commerical) that was commission after the 1979.
Watts Bar Nuclear Plant is located just south of Watts Bar Reservoir on the Tennessee River in east Tennessee. Construction began in 1973, and Unit 1 began full commercial operation in 1996. The 2nd Reactor was stoped in 1988, but plans are afoot to complete it.
Link : http://www.tva.gov/sites/wattsbarnuc.htm
SG is Good for Wind Power, but lack room. Solar, sad, too much cloud cover.
Sorry Side Track.
Watts Bar Nuclear Plant is located just south of Watts Bar Reservoir on the Tennessee River in east Tennessee. Construction began in 1973, and Unit 1 began full commercial operation in 1996. The 2nd Reactor was stoped in 1988, but plans are afoot to complete it.
Link : http://www.tva.gov/sites/wattsbarnuc.htm
SG is Good for Wind Power, but lack room. Solar, sad, too much cloud cover.
Sorry Side Track.
Iowa_BB61 - September 16, 2006 09:28 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (SnowFox @ 16 SEP 2006) | ||
Sorry Iowa_BB61, off-hand know of one American reactor (Commercial) that was commissioned after 1979. |
On one-hand..., if construction of the Watts Bar nuclear power-station began in 1973, and was delayed and resumed, until full commercial operation began in 1996...
Would this not implied that the Watts Bar nuclear power-station was commissioned by the United States Department of Energy (DOE) before it could began construction in 1973...??? In such cases..., the statment "... no nuclear power-stations had been commissioned in the United States, since the Three-Mile Island nuclear accident in 1979..." remains absolutely accurate and relavent...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A IV-generation, high-temperature (Helium-Cooled), experimental reactor had been approved (Last-Year) by the United States Congress under the Energy Policy Act. While plans are underway for a new "Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR, A III.V-Generation Reactor)", around the vicinity of the Grand Gulf nuclear power-station near Port Gibson, Mississippi, under the DOE's "Nuclear Power 2010 Program".
According to an issue of the National Geography magazine..., former license applications will be filed by Entergy Corporation, General-Electric (GE) Company and WestingHouse-Electric Company (Toshiba-Owned) before 2008. With constructution ending somewhere around 2015 (If Planned).
| QUOTE (Additional Post Edits @ 16 SEP 2006) | ||||
Anyway..., in the distant future... We would be zapping energy souces from outer-space straight into our homes..., through wireless connections... LoL... :P
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~ Project-ION Phoenix ~~ ~~ Op. IceBerg ~~ ~~ Iowa_BB61 ~~ ~~ xxKuZNeTxx ~~
--------------------
snowfox - September 16, 2006 09:40 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Iowa_BB61 @ Sep 16 2006, 05:28 PM) |
| On one-hand..., if construction of the Watts Bar nuclear power-station began in 1973, and was delayed and resumed, until full commercial operation began in 1996... Would this not implied that the Watts Bar nuclear power-station was commissioned by the United States Department of Energy (DOE) before it could began construction in 1973...??? In such cases..., the statment "... no nuclear power-stations had been commissioned in the United States, since the Three-Mile Island nuclear accident in 1979..." remains absolutely accurate and relavent... |
Commissioned Bring Online. i.e Going to OCS does not make one an Officer, The Fellow Need to be Comissioned, even on that day of the Comission Parade itself, the fellow can be OOC before the parade.
No One is saying that the Data you provide is Not Accurate or revalent. Maybe not informed, as it was a low key event.
If I recall correctly, ther maybe another reactor comissioned, in State side.
diCam - September 16, 2006 09:50 AM (GMT)
Ok, let's come back to the topic...
It was reported that during the down-select stage for NFR, the French offered Storm Shadow as part of the weapon package if Sg select Rafale. This may indicate Sg's interest in accquiring CM capability.
We have also read about rumours and official/unofficial articles that Sg has R&D programmes with some countries with regard to weapon technology, specifically on guidance technology. Could it mean that we are developing long range weapon system? It is also well known that some Israel's weapons we are using are developed with Sg's financial input. I'm thinking whether can we put in more resources into developing Popeye Turbo?
In order to have a meaningful discussion I suggest that we should read The Missile Technology Control Regime. Though Sg and Israel is not a partner to this informal and voluntary Regime we may be affected by the politics surrounding this Regime.
What are your views?
It was reported that during the down-select stage for NFR, the French offered Storm Shadow as part of the weapon package if Sg select Rafale. This may indicate Sg's interest in accquiring CM capability.
We have also read about rumours and official/unofficial articles that Sg has R&D programmes with some countries with regard to weapon technology, specifically on guidance technology. Could it mean that we are developing long range weapon system? It is also well known that some Israel's weapons we are using are developed with Sg's financial input. I'm thinking whether can we put in more resources into developing Popeye Turbo?
In order to have a meaningful discussion I suggest that we should read The Missile Technology Control Regime. Though Sg and Israel is not a partner to this informal and voluntary Regime we may be affected by the politics surrounding this Regime.
What are your views?
Callsign 24 Seira - September 16, 2006 10:02 AM (GMT)
Current SE Asia atmoshere does not require anyone to acquire nuclear armed cruise missile ...once somebody have acquire these stuff, damn sure it will bring about instability.
How the future (timeline??) evolve, we will not able to tell.
Loose talk can lead to misunderstanding, pse take note
How the future (timeline??) evolve, we will not able to tell.
Loose talk can lead to misunderstanding, pse take note
Iowa_BB61 - September 16, 2006 10:50 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (DiCam @ 16 SEP 2006) |
It is also well known that some Israel's weapons we are using are developed with SG's financial input. I'm thinking whether can we put in more resources into developing Popeye Turbo? |
Well..., our RSAF's F-16D BLK-52 (Plus) Fighting Falcons are afterall cousin's of IAF's F-16I Sufas...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~ Project-ION Phoenix ~~ ~~ Op. IceBerg ~~ ~~ Iowa_BB61 ~~ ~~ xxKuZNeTxx ~~
--------------------
snowfox - September 16, 2006 01:36 PM (GMT)
Doubt that without good reason, would such capability be release to public.
Such a system (Cruise Missile) is a very threaten system to the region.
SG may have it , or May not have it. Testing will be done overseas.
Not much training required to learn/practise how to deploy such a system.
1) Warm up the system, stablise the INS/GPS.
2) Download the waypoints, and what ever needs to be downloaded.
3) if time permits, point the missile to the general direction, otherwise with such a range of the system, a turning radius should not matter much to the missile.
4) Launch the system.
Sorry this may be over simplifying the the over all system.
Rurmour Tme
Google for ths, afew site keep posting the similar posting, mounting a more powerful warhead on the Harpoon Missile by certain Middle East country.
Theory sound nice, but doubt that without the OK form the Manufacturer, it is a tough Task to undrtake.
Such a system (Cruise Missile) is a very threaten system to the region.
SG may have it , or May not have it. Testing will be done overseas.
Not much training required to learn/practise how to deploy such a system.
1) Warm up the system, stablise the INS/GPS.
2) Download the waypoints, and what ever needs to be downloaded.
3) if time permits, point the missile to the general direction, otherwise with such a range of the system, a turning radius should not matter much to the missile.
4) Launch the system.
Sorry this may be over simplifying the the over all system.
Rurmour Tme
Google for ths, afew site keep posting the similar posting, mounting a more powerful warhead on the Harpoon Missile by certain Middle East country.
Theory sound nice, but doubt that without the OK form the Manufacturer, it is a tough Task to undrtake.
Iowa_BB61 - September 16, 2006 06:05 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (SnowFox @ 16 SEP 2006) |
Google for this, afew site keep posting the similar posting, mounting a more powerful warhead on the Harpoon Missile by a certain MiddleEast country. Theory sound nice, but doubt that without the OK from the manufacturer, it is a tough task to undertake. |
Modified UGM-84 Harpoon's test-firing had been conducted in the Indian Ocean, as far as a couple of news corporations are concernced, by Israeli Sea Corps' Dolphin-Class SSKs.
AFAIK / IIRC..., current administration serving under George W. Bush had admitted to a collaboration in which nuclear-armed UGM-84 Harpoons are to be potentially deployed against Iran onboard Israeli Sea Corps' Dolphin-Class SSKs.
This was originally reported only by Los Angeles Times (A Couple Of Years Back...), after a couple of "anonymous / confidential sources" supposely leak informations to the news agency in an interview. A couple of tabloids cheekily picked-up the story...
| QUOTE (STRATFOR Forecasting Inc. @ 22 NOV 2005) |
Israel: German Subs And Nuclear Reach Though it would be possible to arm the Dolphins with nuclear weapons -- and Israel's defense industry is certainly capable of doing this -- such weapons would not likely be effective against Iran's nuclear assets or political targets. The Harpoon is an anti-ship missile, designed to seek out ship-sized targets on the water, and the missile's guidance system would have to be changed to attack targets over land (making it, essentially, a cruise missile). Though that conversion would be possible, some analysts contend that a nuclear warhead would be significantly heavier than the Harpoon's normal conventional warhead. A heavier warhead means that the range of the missile would be shortened, and its now nose-heavy airframe could degrade its accuracy. The range of a non-nuclear-armed Harpoon is approximately 175 miles, which is too short for a Dolphin in the Persian Gulf to be able to hit Tehran, or Iran's nuclear facilities at Arak or Natanz. Only the reactor at Bushehr would be vulnerable. With its shallow water, the Persian Gulf is an environment in which submarines can be spotted relatively easily by aircraft and ships, reducing the likelihood that the Israelis would risk their Dolphins by operating there. Therefore, the Israelis would be compelled to restrict their submarine operations to the deeper Gulf of Oman, or even better, the Arabian Sea. The Dolphins operated by Israel are similar to the Germans' Type 212/214 design and were originally designed for interdiction, surveillance and special-forces operations. They can accommodate a crew of 35 for up to two months of operations away from their base. The submarines are capable of launching the US-made UGM-84F Harpoon anti-ship missile from its torpedo tubes. Any nuclear capability the Dolphins would have would be in the form of Harpoons armed with Israeli-made nuclear warheads. Even getting to their launch point would be problematic for the Dolphins, with their range of 4,500 nautical miles. The only way they could get to the Gulf of Oman without needing to stop for refueling would be to go though the Suez Canal -- Going around Africa would mean that they would have to stop in friendly ports at least twice on the way. If a Dolphin from Haifa refuels in Gibraltar, it lacks the range to make it to South Africa. It would have to stop or be replenished along the way. It would also have to refuel on the second leg of its trip, or be replenished at sea. Given the advanced state of Israel's aeronautical and defense industry, developing a system that can reach targets deep inside Iran from the Gulf of Oman or the Arabian Sea is certainly within Israel's technical means. If Israel does have a nuclear second-strike capability, it is unlikely to come from Dolphins firing nuclear-tipped Harpoons from the Gulf of Oman or Arabian Sea. However, with an eventual fleet of five subs lurking in the waters around the Middle East, the Jewish state's potential enemies cannot completely ignore the possibility that Israel might be capable of responding to an attack, and must keep that in mind when considering any major action against it. |
From a professional intelligence analysis, Point-Of-View (POV)...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~ Project-ION Phoenix ~~ ~~ Op. IceBerg ~~ ~~ Iowa_BB61 ~~ ~~ xxKuZNeTxx ~~
--------------------
Callsign 24 Seira - September 16, 2006 06:29 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Iowa_BB61 @ Sep 17 2006, 02:05 AM) | ||
| AFAIK / IIRC..., current administration serving under George W. Bush had admitted to a collaboration in which nuclear-armed UGM-84 Harpoons are to be potentially deployed against Iran onboard Israeli Sea Corps' Dolphin-Class SSKs. This was originally reported only by Los Angeles Times (A Couple Of Years Back...), after a couple of "anonymous / confidential sources" supposely leak informations to the news agency in an interview. A couple of tabloids cheekily picked-up the story...
From a professional intelligence analysis, Point-Of-View (POV)... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ~~ Project-ION Phoenix ~~ ~~ Op. IceBerg ~~ ~~ Iowa_BB61 ~~ ~~ xxKuZNeTxx ~~ -------------------- |
Would SG need SSM/cruise missile in the future?
Tot you fellas ask rest to focus main topics instead of distracting, you should to discuss as new topic rite?
Iowa_BB61 - September 16, 2006 06:47 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Callsign 24 Seira @ 17 SEP 2006) |
Tot you fellas ask rest to focus main topics instead of distracting, you should discuss as new topic rite? |
AH..., the "Art-Of-Drifting (Topic-Wise)"..., ain't too digressed though. Sometimes in life, would be advisable for "nature" to choose it's own course, rather than delaying the "inevitable". :P
Ain't wise though, to create too many similar threads, least the forum's search engine struck it's quota limits... :lol:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~ Project-ION Phoenix ~~ ~~ Op. IceBerg ~~ ~~ Iowa_BB61 ~~ ~~ xxKuZNeTxx ~~
--------------------
Sayaret - September 18, 2006 04:47 AM (GMT)
Hi Callsign, I suppose some drifting away but within relevant parameters are ok bro. Afterall its still on the topic of cruise missile....moreover, its on with a topic that's really close to ourselves - Israel.
Again, I'd like to digress too - our Indon neighbours are nuts to experiment with nuclear power (as far as I am concerned) becos' their whole country is unstable - I meant their geological state. Moreover the nuclear site that they tot of building on is within the close proximity of a volcano!! Can u imagine how stupid they are?? That country is full of natural resources that can be used to power electricity - wind, solar, tidal, volcanic heating etc.....they have the bloody space to do so. But one thing they don't have - BRAINS to handle the nuclear power station. I am sorry if I've hurt any feelings, but I wish to be upfront with my personal opinion about them building or even experimenting with one. Too much natural calamaties to safely operate one, look at the number of earthquakes occurring there.
Anyway, as for SG having or intending to have cruise missiles, would there be possibility of us already having the Popeye Turbo? As for defence against these missiles, there were reports that SG was looking at the S300, but then it was later said they were considering the Patriot. But between the 2, I would have preferred the S300 though...
Again, I'd like to digress too - our Indon neighbours are nuts to experiment with nuclear power (as far as I am concerned) becos' their whole country is unstable - I meant their geological state. Moreover the nuclear site that they tot of building on is within the close proximity of a volcano!! Can u imagine how stupid they are?? That country is full of natural resources that can be used to power electricity - wind, solar, tidal, volcanic heating etc.....they have the bloody space to do so. But one thing they don't have - BRAINS to handle the nuclear power station. I am sorry if I've hurt any feelings, but I wish to be upfront with my personal opinion about them building or even experimenting with one. Too much natural calamaties to safely operate one, look at the number of earthquakes occurring there.
Anyway, as for SG having or intending to have cruise missiles, would there be possibility of us already having the Popeye Turbo? As for defence against these missiles, there were reports that SG was looking at the S300, but then it was later said they were considering the Patriot. But between the 2, I would have preferred the S300 though...
snowfox - September 18, 2006 06:24 AM (GMT)
Sorry Gentlemen,
Thread is Would SG need SSM/cruise missile in the future
My take is , SG needs what ever it needs to get the Job done. National Security.
Thread is Would SG need SSM/cruise missile in the future
My take is , SG needs what ever it needs to get the Job done. National Security.
Iowa_BB61 - September 18, 2006 07:02 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Sayaret @ 18 SEP 2006) |
Anyway, as for SG having or intending to have cruise missiles, would there be possibility of us already having the Popeye Turbo? |
Popeye Turbo...??? Both our Sjöormen and Västergötland-Class SSKs does not have provisions available for Submarine-Lauched Cruise Missiles (SLCMs). If acquired..., surface-based assets deployed onboard the Formidable-Class stealth frigates..., IMHO...
AFAIK..., IAF's F-16I Sufa's are capable of being deployed with RAFAEL's Popeye-II (Have Lite) cuise missiles. Would be surprised if such capabilities ain't included in our ORBAT..., though anything pertaining to it's existence would be highly classified, till RMAF / TNI-AF acquired such weapons.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~ Project-ION Phoenix ~~ ~~ Op. IceBerg ~~ ~~ Iowa_BB61 ~~ ~~ xxKuZNeTxx ~~
--------------------
Sayaret - September 18, 2006 02:54 PM (GMT)
Agreed, but the mere common sensical and logical speculation that we do have that "possible" capability or near capability is a great comfort. Don't u think?
I personally feel that we need the capability for a credible defence, a pro-active defence, an attacking defence strategy.
I personally feel that we need the capability for a credible defence, a pro-active defence, an attacking defence strategy.
Callsign 24 Seira - September 18, 2006 03:33 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Iowa_BB61 @ Sep 17 2006, 02:47 AM) |
| the "Art-Of-Drifting "..., ain't too digressed though. Sometimes in life, would be advisable for "nature" to choose it's own course, rather than delaying the "inevitable". |
Wat's this inevitable thing?
Straight and level on this one, ok.
P/S : What is Op IceBerg ?
Iowa_BB61 - September 18, 2006 03:48 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Sayaret @ 18 SEP 2006) |
Agreed, but the mere common sensical and logical speculation that we do have that "possible" capability or near capability is a great comfort. Don't u think...??? I personally feel that we need the capability for a credible defence, a pro-active defence, an attacking defence strategy. |
Can't say our neighbours are exactly sitting around, with their hands behind their backs, watching as a "chili-padi" gets spicer by the minutes...
| QUOTE (GateWay To Russia @ 07 APR 2004) | ||
Although Dr. Pillai declined to identify the nations which could be possible buyers of BrahMos missiles, Russian expert Dr Alexander Vaskin believes that Malaysia, Indonesia and Vietnam could get these missiles as "friendly countries". |
IMHO..., a hundred BrahMos cruise missiles would pose a greater threat to the Republic Of Singapore, than a couple of worthless Fulcrums and Flankers (Cost-Effective Too)... Time for some upgraded Anti-Ballistic Missiles' Defenses...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~ Project-ION Phoenix ~~ ~~ Op. IceBerg ~~ ~~ Iowa_BB61 ~~ ~~ xxKuZNeTxx ~~
--------------------
Orcishwarrior - September 18, 2006 05:05 PM (GMT)
ya!! agreeable when i read that malaysia and indonesia has shown interest in Brahmos missile. Cant help it to realise its gonna be quite threating to singapore surface naval combatants. Any reactive armour for our ship? :D .
an integrated solution for naval anti-ballistic missile system upgrade the modulus and bring in Aster 30. As for the mainland defence patriot PAC3 would do the Job.
OUr tiny island defence will be enhanced, it gonna be almost impenetrable another layer of electro magnetic shield :o Gosh!! :D
In my opinion, Singapore's JSOW acquisition can be considered as a stepping stone and grant greater access for pliot into GPS /INS guidance. I wont be astonished over the possible procurement of JASSM. i thought the SAF is currently waiting for something 2 happen.
an integrated solution for naval anti-ballistic missile system upgrade the modulus and bring in Aster 30. As for the mainland defence patriot PAC3 would do the Job.
OUr tiny island defence will be enhanced, it gonna be almost impenetrable another layer of electro magnetic shield :o Gosh!! :D
In my opinion, Singapore's JSOW acquisition can be considered as a stepping stone and grant greater access for pliot into GPS /INS guidance. I wont be astonished over the possible procurement of JASSM. i thought the SAF is currently waiting for something 2 happen.
Callsign 24 Seira - September 18, 2006 06:37 PM (GMT)
Yep, Tigerland is indeed interested.
http://www.defenseworld.net/dsa2006/brahmo...l_asymmetry.htm
http://www.defenseworld.net/dsa2006/brahmo...ty_visitors.htm
10th Defense Services Asia Exhibition & Conference
24 - 27 April, 2006 Kualalumpur, Malaysia.
….Brahmos strategy of exhibiting at major international defence exhibitions was bearing fruit with tremendous awareness being created in major markets. Defence officials from South America to Europe to Asia were aware of the missile and that it had already been accepted by the Indian army and navy. The local press has reports stating that the 9th Malaysian defence plan which included a major procurement component may look at options such as a short-range cruise missile capable of land, sea and air launch.
With countries in South East Asia on a procurement curve, the Brahmos may be the right product at the right time. According to a Zainul Abaden, a Malaysian defence analyst, cruise missiles from western sources would either be off-limits or too expensive to Asians. "Products from within Asia that match up technologically with the west have future", he added…….
http://www.india-defence.com/print/2056
Malaysia shows interest in acquiring Brahmos supersonic cruise missile
Dated 8/6/2006
New Delhi: The Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister of Malaysia Hon'ble Dato' Sri Mohd. Najib Tun Hj. Abdul Razak with a high-level delegation visited the BrahMos Weapon Design Complex here today.
Dr. A S Pillai, CEO and MD BrahMos received the delegation and highlighted the technological advancement made by the country with this high-tech project.
The delegation was shown the actual missile hardware and the sus-systems and a presentation was also given to the delegation explaining the technical features of the system.
After seeing the presentation, the Deputy Prime Minister said, "we are very much pleased with the technical progress made by India in high technology projects and are looking forward to stronger defence cooperation with the country based on the memorandum signed yesterday".
We are very impressed to see the BrahMos weapon systems especially with its 100% flight performance and pin point accuracy in neutralizing the targets, he said.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/wor...dia/brahmos.htm
What, however, makes the jointly produced cruise missile distinguishable from others is that it travels at a supersonic speed i.e. more than twice the speed of sound. Almost all other contemporary anti-ship missiles fly at subsonic speed. Its other distinguishing feature is that the Indo-Russian cruise missile is a state-of-the-art product.
Its unmatchable speed is its high point, making it invincible. The supersonic speed imparts it a greater strike-power as well. Possessing stealth characteristics, the 6.9-meter cruise missile weighing three tons has a range of 280 km. Its another outstanding feature is that it is highly accurate and can be guided to its target mainly with the help of an onboard computer. This has been established by the test-flight. The computer and the guidance system have been designed by India whereas Russia has provided the propulsion system.
http://www.defenseworld.net/dsa2006/brahmo...l_asymmetry.htm
http://www.defenseworld.net/dsa2006/brahmo...ty_visitors.htm
10th Defense Services Asia Exhibition & Conference
24 - 27 April, 2006 Kualalumpur, Malaysia.
….Brahmos strategy of exhibiting at major international defence exhibitions was bearing fruit with tremendous awareness being created in major markets. Defence officials from South America to Europe to Asia were aware of the missile and that it had already been accepted by the Indian army and navy. The local press has reports stating that the 9th Malaysian defence plan which included a major procurement component may look at options such as a short-range cruise missile capable of land, sea and air launch.
With countries in South East Asia on a procurement curve, the Brahmos may be the right product at the right time. According to a Zainul Abaden, a Malaysian defence analyst, cruise missiles from western sources would either be off-limits or too expensive to Asians. "Products from within Asia that match up technologically with the west have future", he added…….
http://www.india-defence.com/print/2056
Malaysia shows interest in acquiring Brahmos supersonic cruise missile
Dated 8/6/2006
New Delhi: The Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister of Malaysia Hon'ble Dato' Sri Mohd. Najib Tun Hj. Abdul Razak with a high-level delegation visited the BrahMos Weapon Design Complex here today.
Dr. A S Pillai, CEO and MD BrahMos received the delegation and highlighted the technological advancement made by the country with this high-tech project.
The delegation was shown the actual missile hardware and the sus-systems and a presentation was also given to the delegation explaining the technical features of the system.
After seeing the presentation, the Deputy Prime Minister said, "we are very much pleased with the technical progress made by India in high technology projects and are looking forward to stronger defence cooperation with the country based on the memorandum signed yesterday".
We are very impressed to see the BrahMos weapon systems especially with its 100% flight performance and pin point accuracy in neutralizing the targets, he said.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/wor...dia/brahmos.htm
What, however, makes the jointly produced cruise missile distinguishable from others is that it travels at a supersonic speed i.e. more than twice the speed of sound. Almost all other contemporary anti-ship missiles fly at subsonic speed. Its other distinguishing feature is that the Indo-Russian cruise missile is a state-of-the-art product.
Its unmatchable speed is its high point, making it invincible. The supersonic speed imparts it a greater strike-power as well. Possessing stealth characteristics, the 6.9-meter cruise missile weighing three tons has a range of 280 km. Its another outstanding feature is that it is highly accurate and can be guided to its target mainly with the help of an onboard computer. This has been established by the test-flight. The computer and the guidance system have been designed by India whereas Russia has provided the propulsion system.
Callsign 24 Seira - September 18, 2006 06:42 PM (GMT)
Sayaret - September 19, 2006 01:05 PM (GMT)
SG is indeed waiting for others in the region to openly declare that they have such missiles, which they will once they buy them. Can help but "display" their capabilities.
On the other hand, quite unlikely that SG would say they have something like the Brahmos....in fact I am sure they will not, but something like the defensive missiles like Patriot or even the S300, most likely would be displayed...a counter physchological way of telling others that we have a capability to counter whatever they just got.
On the other hand, quite unlikely that SG would say they have something like the Brahmos....in fact I am sure they will not, but something like the defensive missiles like Patriot or even the S300, most likely would be displayed...a counter physchological way of telling others that we have a capability to counter whatever they just got.
Iowa_BB61 - September 23, 2006 04:30 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Shiv Aroor (New Delhi) @ 19 / 20 JUL 2006) |
Russia’s Missile Sale To Indonesia Upsets DRDO (Defence Research And Development Organisation) Moscow’s decision to sell anti-ship cruise missiles to Indonesia without keeping Indo-Russian joint venture BrahMos Aerospace in the loop has left many red faces at DRDO, the equal Indian partner in the company. Apart from looking at Moscow’s proposed sale, as well as outside contractual bounds, DRDO is concerned that the sale would eat into the BrahMos missile’s market and therefore affect profits even before the missile has made its first sale abroad. While the DRDO responded to a detailed questionnaire sent by The Indian Express by saying that its chief, M Natarajan, was ‘‘not going to Russia concerning the sale of any missile’’, top sources have confirmed that Natarajan is leaving for Moscow on July 19, and his agenda there includes sorting out this new disagreement. When asked about Russia’s sale to Indonesia, and the fact that it was not being routed through BrahMos Aerospace as is stipulated in the terms and conditions of the joint venture, DRDO simply provided a definition of what BrahMos Aerospace does ‘‘concerned with the sale of BrahMos missile.’’ Last month, Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutt first conveyed DRDO’s anxieties when he met Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov in Moscow. BrahMos Aerospace Managing Director and DRDO Chief Controller (missiles), A Sivathanu Pillai, also made known India’s concerns to Russia’s Deputy Defence Minister Mikhail Dmitriyev. Pillai could not be reached for comment. DRDO perceives Moscow’s move to sell Yakhont missiles -- the prototype on which the BrahMos was developed -- to be inexplicable, since the programme was specifically entered into to ‘‘deploy BrahMos missile system in the Indian and Russian armed forces and also to export to friendly countries.’’ Sources said Moscow has justified the sale by indicating that talks with Indonesia have been on for three years. Late last month PM Manmohan Singh visited the BrahMos Aerospace complex in the Delhi cantonment and exhorted the missile’s ‘‘immense export potential’’, a visit where he also made it a point to call Russia a ‘‘traditional and trusted supplier of defence systems.’’ |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sukhoi Su-33 "Flanker-D", Equipped With SSN-N-26, P-800 Oniks / Yakhont, Anti-Ship Cruise Missile (ASCM).
More infomations over at Federation Of American Scientist (FAS).Org (Not UpDated Though) and Deagle.Com. + Bharat-Rakshak.Com.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~ Project-ION Phoenix ~~ ~~ Op. IceBerg ~~ ~~ Iowa_BB61 ~~ ~~ xxKuZNeTxx ~~
--------------------
diCam - September 23, 2006 04:49 AM (GMT)
An unrelated development: S. Korea Develops Cruise Missile (Extracted from Alert 5)
If SK can develop CM, I'm wondering... why can't we? :rolleyes:
If SK can develop CM, I'm wondering... why can't we? :rolleyes:
Callsign 24 Seira - September 23, 2006 05:08 AM (GMT)
The term cruise missile covers several vehicles and their capabilities, from the Chinese Silkworm (HY-2), which has a range of less than 105 km, to the U.S. Advanced Cruise Missile (ACM), which can fly to ranges of up to 3,000 km. These vehicles vary greatly in their speed and ability to penetrate defenses. All, however, meet the definition of a cruise missile: “an unmanned self-propelled guided vehicle that sustains flight through aerodynamic lift for most of its flight path and whose primary mission is to place an ordnance or special payload on a target.”………………..
……….Countries can achieve a cruise missile capability by simply buying existing cruise missiles from supplier states and modifying them to meet a particular need, or they can make a complete system from readily available parts………………
Of the four major subsystems that compose a cruise missile -— airframe, propulsion, guidance, control, and navigation, and weapons integration —- none is expensive in and of itself, and a steady supply of each is available. In the late 1960’s, the United States first introduced turbine propulsion systems that weighed less than 100 lb and produced many hundreds of pounds of thrust. These turbine engines, or their lineal descendants, powered most of the early U.S. cruise missile designs and were one of the least costly items. Depending upon the range a proliferant desires for its cruise missile, the powerplant may even be as prosaic as a reciprocating engine with a propeller. The latter, of course, has little hope of disguising its signature from defenses, but the mission profile may allow it to disguise itself as another platform. Even if no signature modification is considered, this type of missile has applications in regional wars where the technology of the defense is not as important as it is to an attacking proliferant.
At least 12 exporting countries—Great Britain, the United States, China, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Norway, Russia, Sweden, and Taiwan—have developed cruise missiles with some capability in the hands of proliferants to threaten U.S. worldwide interests. Generally, these cruise missiles are small and have a limited range. While it is possible that they can be converted to deliver WMD, their short range limits their possible targets of interest. They may deliver biological or chemical agents against ports and airfields in regions of concern such as the Persian Gulf, but are not able to attack longer range targets. In addition, cruise missiles, such as the Chinese Silkworm, have many other limitations besides short range that restrict their utility as a WMD delivery system. The missiles leave a turbulent airflow in their wake, which makes it difficult to deliver a sprayed pathogen or chemical agent cloud. They fly along a predictable path towards the target rather than one that can realign itself to match the geometry of the target.
The following cruise missiles are a sample of missiles that are available on the world market and pose less threat as possible candidates for conversion to WMD delivery: the British Sea Eagle, the Chinese Seersucker and Silkworm, the French Exocet, the German Kormoran, the Israeli Gabriel, the Italian Otomat, the Japanese SSM-1, the Norwegian Penguin, the Soviet SSN-2C and its derivatives, the Swedish RBS-15, the Taiwanese Hsiung Feng 2, and the U.S. Harpoon.
Even if the missiles do not pose a significant threat, some aspects of their manufacturing base may migrate to more capable missiles and require close scrutiny. Missiles that contain small turbojet engines can be cannibalized, and the engines can be used in more threatening applications. A proliferant can also glean the knowledge to build these turbojets by reverse engineering the engines or setting up indigenous co-production facilities. Examples of exported missiles with small turbojet engines include the British Sea Eagle and the Chinese HY-4. Israel is offering an upgraded Gabriel, which features the latest in propulsion technology, to overseas customers. Other missiles in this class include the U.S. Harpoon, the Swedish RBS-15, the Soviet SS-N-3, the Soviet SS-N-21, and the Otomat Mark-II. Cruise missiles that have immediate application to nuclear, chemical, and biological delivery include the U.S. Tomahawk and ACM, the Russian SSN-21, the AS-15, and the French Apache.
Harpoons have been exported to 19 countries, including Egypt, Iran, Pakistan, South Korea, and Saudi Arabia. India has received Sea Eagles, while Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, and North Korea have Silkworms and Seersuckers, a version of which North Korea now manufactures. Italy has Kormorans, and Taiwan, South Africa, Chile, Ecuador, Kenya, Singapore, and Thailand have Gabriel Mark-IIs.
Though the sale of complete systems on the world market is a concern, that threat is much smaller than the possibility that a country could indigenously design and build a capable cruise missile by cannibalizing other systems for parts it cannot build on its own. Of particular concern are components and parts that reduce the cost of the missile in serial production, reduce the cost of position mapping navigation systems, and increase the range of these missiles.
Navigation and guidance continues to be the pacing item in threatening cruise missile development. The Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM) is a derivative of the Harpoon and contains in its nose a video camera that acts as a terminal guidance system. If a proliferant adopts this technology and can position a transmitter and receiver within line-of-sight to the missile from anywhere in the theater, it can dispense with the need for any other kind of guidance system. Israel has developed a capable guidance system that can be used in this application.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/intro/cm.htm
……….Countries can achieve a cruise missile capability by simply buying existing cruise missiles from supplier states and modifying them to meet a particular need, or they can make a complete system from readily available parts………………
Of the four major subsystems that compose a cruise missile -— airframe, propulsion, guidance, control, and navigation, and weapons integration —- none is expensive in and of itself, and a steady supply of each is available. In the late 1960’s, the United States first introduced turbine propulsion systems that weighed less than 100 lb and produced many hundreds of pounds of thrust. These turbine engines, or their lineal descendants, powered most of the early U.S. cruise missile designs and were one of the least costly items. Depending upon the range a proliferant desires for its cruise missile, the powerplant may even be as prosaic as a reciprocating engine with a propeller. The latter, of course, has little hope of disguising its signature from defenses, but the mission profile may allow it to disguise itself as another platform. Even if no signature modification is considered, this type of missile has applications in regional wars where the technology of the defense is not as important as it is to an attacking proliferant.
At least 12 exporting countries—Great Britain, the United States, China, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Norway, Russia, Sweden, and Taiwan—have developed cruise missiles with some capability in the hands of proliferants to threaten U.S. worldwide interests. Generally, these cruise missiles are small and have a limited range. While it is possible that they can be converted to deliver WMD, their short range limits their possible targets of interest. They may deliver biological or chemical agents against ports and airfields in regions of concern such as the Persian Gulf, but are not able to attack longer range targets. In addition, cruise missiles, such as the Chinese Silkworm, have many other limitations besides short range that restrict their utility as a WMD delivery system. The missiles leave a turbulent airflow in their wake, which makes it difficult to deliver a sprayed pathogen or chemical agent cloud. They fly along a predictable path towards the target rather than one that can realign itself to match the geometry of the target.
The following cruise missiles are a sample of missiles that are available on the world market and pose less threat as possible candidates for conversion to WMD delivery: the British Sea Eagle, the Chinese Seersucker and Silkworm, the French Exocet, the German Kormoran, the Israeli Gabriel, the Italian Otomat, the Japanese SSM-1, the Norwegian Penguin, the Soviet SSN-2C and its derivatives, the Swedish RBS-15, the Taiwanese Hsiung Feng 2, and the U.S. Harpoon.
Even if the missiles do not pose a significant threat, some aspects of their manufacturing base may migrate to more capable missiles and require close scrutiny. Missiles that contain small turbojet engines can be cannibalized, and the engines can be used in more threatening applications. A proliferant can also glean the knowledge to build these turbojets by reverse engineering the engines or setting up indigenous co-production facilities. Examples of exported missiles with small turbojet engines include the British Sea Eagle and the Chinese HY-4. Israel is offering an upgraded Gabriel, which features the latest in propulsion technology, to overseas customers. Other missiles in this class include the U.S. Harpoon, the Swedish RBS-15, the Soviet SS-N-3, the Soviet SS-N-21, and the Otomat Mark-II. Cruise missiles that have immediate application to nuclear, chemical, and biological delivery include the U.S. Tomahawk and ACM, the Russian SSN-21, the AS-15, and the French Apache.
Harpoons have been exported to 19 countries, including Egypt, Iran, Pakistan, South Korea, and Saudi Arabia. India has received Sea Eagles, while Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, and North Korea have Silkworms and Seersuckers, a version of which North Korea now manufactures. Italy has Kormorans, and Taiwan, South Africa, Chile, Ecuador, Kenya, Singapore, and Thailand have Gabriel Mark-IIs.
Though the sale of complete systems on the world market is a concern, that threat is much smaller than the possibility that a country could indigenously design and build a capable cruise missile by cannibalizing other systems for parts it cannot build on its own. Of particular concern are components and parts that reduce the cost of the missile in serial production, reduce the cost of position mapping navigation systems, and increase the range of these missiles.
Navigation and guidance continues to be the pacing item in threatening cruise missile development. The Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM) is a derivative of the Harpoon and contains in its nose a video camera that acts as a terminal guidance system. If a proliferant adopts this technology and can position a transmitter and receiver within line-of-sight to the missile from anywhere in the theater, it can dispense with the need for any other kind of guidance system. Israel has developed a capable guidance system that can be used in this application.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/intro/cm.htm
Sayaret - September 25, 2006 04:11 AM (GMT)
Great....now we just need the sale and possession of the Brahmos or its equivalent to be confirmed by Indonesia, then SG can also get its own cruise missile...or so it would seem.... :D :D nah...not likely, SG would quietly get our own and keep mum of it for as long as they deem necessary, while in the meantime, defensive measures would be gotten to protect our ships and other land facilities. These I am sure would get some exposure to signal to others that we have something on hand and that we're not totally exposed.
Let's take this thread to another level....what range do you think these missiles would need to be? 500km at least?
Let's take this thread to another level....what range do you think these missiles would need to be? 500km at least?
snowfox - September 25, 2006 04:23 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Sayaret @ Sep 25 2006, 12:11 PM) |
| Great....now we just need the sale and possession of the Brahmos or its equivalent to be confirmed by Indonesia, then SG can also get its own cruise missile...or so it would seem.... :D :D nah...not likely, SG would quietly get our own and keep mum of it for as long as they deem necessary, while in the meantime, defensive measures would be gotten to protect our ships and other land facilities. These I am sure would get some exposure to signal to others that we have something on hand and that we're not totally exposed. Let's take this thread to another level....what range do you think these missiles would need to be? 500km at least? |
SG Does Not Have Cruise Missile
SG is a Peace Loving Country, And want to have a Hamonious relationship with their Neigbhours. Lock in an Arms Race is not benefictial to the Region.
Like in alot of Armed Forces, SG does have Missiles in their Arsenal.
Some Fly Fast, some Fly Slower.
Some Fly Near and Some Fly Further.
Some Fly Higher , Some Fly Lower.
Just Because it Flys low, slow, and far, it does not mean that it is a Cruise Missile, it is just a long range, slow low flying UAV.
Sayaret - September 25, 2006 10:09 AM (GMT)
Hi Snowie,
You're a pacifist aren't you? Either that you're a really optimistic peace-loving fella
:D :P :D
You have completed NS right? You are born in SG right? You're familiar with how our country operate right ( I mean with strategic information)....anyway, you're entitled to your beliefs....but don't be too disappointed though :D
You're a pacifist aren't you? Either that you're a really optimistic peace-loving fella
:D :P :D
You have completed NS right? You are born in SG right? You're familiar with how our country operate right ( I mean with strategic information)....anyway, you're entitled to your beliefs....but don't be too disappointed though :D
snowfox - September 25, 2006 11:40 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Sayaret @ Sep 25 2006, 06:09 PM) |
| Hi Snowie, You're a pacifist aren't you? Either that you're a really optimistic peace-loving fella :D :P :D You have completed NS right? You are born in SG right? You're familiar with how our country operate right ( I mean with strategic information)....anyway, you're entitled to your beliefs....but don't be too disappointed though :D |
What I was Trained.
The Main Duty of a Soldier is to Prevent War.
Once the Fighting Starts, we already have failed in our Primary Mission. and the rest is damage control.
The "Struggle" is been carried out as I am writting this, not when the Uniform is put on.
Weapons is the Stick part of Deal. Focus on the Carrot part, easier to motivate people.
Sayaret - September 26, 2006 02:02 AM (GMT)
Morning Snowie,
When prevention fails, you wouldn't want to be holding a sword while your opponent is holding a rifle would you? Or perhaps a rifle and your opponent a cannon right? Prevention is one thing, being able to meet the challenge when someone calls your bluff or takes action against you despite your prevention is definitely another issue. We have always have to be more than a handful for would-be adversaries. Its a fact of life which we cannot deny, even in the animal kingdom - defensive and offensive abilities are refined constantly - an arms race of sorts are constantly on the move. SG is small, we cannot take chances, we cannot assume that we have more than one chance of survival. the first loss we have could be our last. Therefore, we cannot take for granted. Prevention is better than cure, but when prevention fails, we need to have the vaccine to fight. Simple logic, opponent has cruise missiles, we have defences to knock them out and also more powerful cruise missiles. Given our national "kiasu" syndrome, we should have the ability to detect the missiles and destroy them before they are evn launched!! :D So much for kiasuism.....
Anyway Snowie, no offense ok? I am just giving my own opinion....you're right in the sense that as soldiers we have the duty to prevent wars..... but I feel its got to be one step more - primary duty is to protect our country when the eventuality comes.
When prevention fails, you wouldn't want to be holding a sword while your opponent is holding a rifle would you? Or perhaps a rifle and your opponent a cannon right? Prevention is one thing, being able to meet the challenge when someone calls your bluff or takes action against you despite your prevention is definitely another issue. We have always have to be more than a handful for would-be adversaries. Its a fact of life which we cannot deny, even in the animal kingdom - defensive and offensive abilities are refined constantly - an arms race of sorts are constantly on the move. SG is small, we cannot take chances, we cannot assume that we have more than one chance of survival. the first loss we have could be our last. Therefore, we cannot take for granted. Prevention is better than cure, but when prevention fails, we need to have the vaccine to fight. Simple logic, opponent has cruise missiles, we have defences to knock them out and also more powerful cruise missiles. Given our national "kiasu" syndrome, we should have the ability to detect the missiles and destroy them before they are evn launched!! :D So much for kiasuism.....
Anyway Snowie, no offense ok? I am just giving my own opinion....you're right in the sense that as soldiers we have the duty to prevent wars..... but I feel its got to be one step more - primary duty is to protect our country when the eventuality comes.
snowfox - September 26, 2006 02:59 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Sayaret @ Sep 26 2006, 10:02 AM) |
| Morning Snowie, When prevention fails, |
When Prevention Fails. a Sad Day.
The "conflict" is on today. Several policies are in place, more been planned to Prevent the worst case situation.
Allow to share one of them.
Prosper thy neighbour.
We are worth more Alive, (rather when wounded or dead) to our potential Aggressor(s).
If some elements within the list of potential Aggressor want to create trouble, it's with the hard work done today, that allow the other elements(Friends within the Aggressor) within themself to self correct in a peaceful manner.
Not that we force our Aggressor to be good, but our Potential Aggressor wants to be good to us.
Threatening Image
It is a fine balance of appearing Strong, but not overly threatening, that the Aggressor justify their Aggression based on their "perception".
(Akin to German WWII attack on Poland, a Strong Polish Image was create by the German Media, and a fake attack trigger the German "Counter-Attack", history has a few case of such situation)
SG need to sell and continue to sell the Image, that it is a peaceful Business Firendly country.
Size for Size, SG may have a high density of Arms, but it's main focus is Business. When SG's Friends are in trouble, SG is there with a hand to help, althought via SG military arms.
The "conflict" is on today. Several policies are in place, more been planned to Prevent the worst case situation.
Allow to share one of them.
Prosper thy neighbour.
We are worth more Alive, (rather when wounded or dead) to our potential Aggressor(s).
If some elements within the list of potential Aggressor want to create trouble, it's with the hard work done today, that allow the other elements(Friends within the Aggressor) within themself to self correct in a peaceful manner.
Not that we force our Aggressor to be good, but our Potential Aggressor wants to be good to us.
Threatening Image
It is a fine balance of appearing Strong, but not overly threatening, that the Aggressor justify their Aggression based on their "perception".
(Akin to German WWII attack on Poland, a Strong Polish Image was create by the German Media, and a fake attack trigger the German "Counter-Attack", history has a few case of such situation)
SG need to sell and continue to sell the Image, that it is a peaceful Business Firendly country.
Size for Size, SG may have a high density of Arms, but it's main focus is Business. When SG's Friends are in trouble, SG is there with a hand to help, althought via SG military arms.
| QUOTE |
| holding a sword while your opponent is holding a rifle |
Part of the Stragery. Keep some Ace cards under the sleeve.
Defense Against SSM/Curise Missile
One Need not have such a system (SSM/Cruise missile) to defend against them. (Exception is a Biological/Computer Virus, agree, you nee the virus to create the anti-bodies/dat files).
Not sure if you are informed, there are such a system inplace, since the early 90s, against land attack, mid 90s anti SSM. The overall System is constanly been improved. such as M113 Igla mount (Annouced 2005) (Time quoted are either the Commission, or public announced(The earlier is the prefered data). Not the date that the idea was started, or when the machinery arrived)
Am not an expert in this field, just know aliitle.