InvisionFree - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums

Learn More · Sign-up for Free
Welcome to Military Nuts. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Name:   Password:


Google Only search Militarynuts.com

Pages: (7) « First ... 5 6 7  ( Go to first unread post )

 ST Marine LHD Design
weasel1962
Posted: Nov 10 2010, 10:30 PM


Major
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2,931
Member No.: 19,860
Joined: 9-November 08



I prefer a F-35 capable LHD. Too bad if you don't like it. LOL.

Actually I don't see any question you make that requires an answer.

My sole point is that I prefer a F-35 capable LHD. You don't like it, so I must answer? Clueless.

Like in all previous posts, you're just out to make baseless criticism just because you like to do so. You can continue your insults and whatever clueless assertions about mindef etc, I don't really give a damn about what you think actually but then you don't really say anything anyway. Don't really learn anything from your posts.

This post has been edited by weasel1962 on Nov 10 2010, 10:34 PM
Top
bdique
Posted: Nov 11 2010, 09:16 PM


Captain
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1,789
Member No.: 20,323
Joined: 12-December 08



well I hope I don't sound like I'm making potshots here but given the way SAF will operate, its unlikely we'll need attack aviation assets like Cobras and Harriers. This pretty much rules out F-35s as well.

US Marines are expected to fight far away from home, and not expect any assistance anytime soon. Carriers can provide air superiority, but CAS duties will ultimately fall upon the Cobras and the Harriers. Since SAF won't be taking the war that far away, air cover and CAS can still be provided by aircraft based in SG, negating the need to carry these heavy support elements.

To me, the LPH's primary duty is still a troop carrier. I get the feeling from the small size that if it were to undertake ASW duties, it has to sacrifice or compromise on the troop carrying capabilities. That being said, I'm the optimist that believes that ST Marine would have found a way to pleasantly surprise me with space-saving technologies smile.gif I'm just curious about something: given that the E160 carries 50 more troops than the E141, do the 50 more troops need the three extra heli landing spots?

If needed, I believe the paltry few F-35s can still be somehow shoehorned onto the E160. I can only imagine that they must be on to some very special one-off mission. Of course I would love to see RSN field a baby carrier with 5th Gen fighters! Sail it around SCS, make a lot of people nervous, spark an arms race and maybe finally speed up development of new superweapons? I don't know, but somehow a baby carrier is quite a big stick for a nation like SG to wield.

Okay, back to studying. All the best to those with end year exams biggrin.gif


--------------------
From the gunner's seat: The Green and Black Screen
Top
Shotgun
Posted: Nov 11 2010, 09:53 PM


Captain
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1,925
Member No.: 238
Joined: 3-March 06



QUOTE (bdique @ Nov 11 2010, 09:16 PM)
well I hope I don't sound like I'm making potshots here but given the way SAF will operate, its unlikely we'll need attack aviation assets like Cobras and Harriers. This pretty much rules out F-35s as well.

US Marines are expected to fight far away from home, and not expect any assistance anytime soon. Carriers can provide air superiority, but CAS duties will ultimately fall upon the Cobras and the Harriers. Since SAF won't be taking the war that far away, air cover and CAS can still be provided by aircraft based in SG, negating the need to carry these heavy support elements.

To me, the LPH's primary duty is still a troop carrier. I get the feeling from the small size that if it were to undertake ASW duties, it has to sacrifice or compromise on the troop carrying capabilities. That being said, I'm the optimist that believes that ST Marine would have found a way to pleasantly surprise me with space-saving technologies smile.gif I'm just curious about something: given that the E160 carries 50 more troops than the E141, do the 50 more troops need the three extra heli landing spots?

If needed, I believe the paltry few F-35s can still be somehow shoehorned onto the E160. I can only imagine that they must be on to some very special one-off mission. Of course I would love to see RSN field a baby carrier with 5th Gen fighters! Sail it around SCS, make a lot of people nervous, spark an arms race and maybe finally speed up development of new superweapons? I don't know, but somehow a baby carrier is quite a big stick for a nation like SG to wield.

Okay, back to studying. All the best to those with end year exams biggrin.gif

thanks bdique for reminding me.... &@!^#(@!
Top
Alfie007
Posted: Nov 11 2010, 11:52 PM


Captain
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1,049
Member No.: 21,100
Joined: 4-August 09



QUOTE (Shotgun @ Nov 11 2010, 09:53 PM)
QUOTE (bdique @ Nov 11 2010, 09:16 PM)

Okay, back to studying. All the best to those with end year exams biggrin.gif

thanks bdique for reminding me.... &@!^#(@!

hehe.. I'm done with mine.. laugh.gif


--------------------
user posted image
We, members of the Singapore Armed Forces, do solemnly and sincerely pledge that:
We will always bear true faith and allegiance to the President and the Republic of Singapore.
We will always support and defend the Constitution.
We will preserve and protect the honour and independence of our country with our lives.
Top
weasel1962
Posted: Nov 12 2010, 05:00 PM


Major
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2,931
Member No.: 19,860
Joined: 9-November 08



QUOTE (bdique @ Nov 11 2010, 09:16 PM)
well I hope I don't sound like I'm making potshots here but given the way SAF will operate, its unlikely we'll need attack aviation assets like Cobras and Harriers. This pretty much rules out F-35s as well.

If needed, I believe the paltry few F-35s can still be somehow shoehorned onto the E160. I can only imagine that they must be on to some very special one-off mission.

With regards at least to the cobras, the lack of necessity for such aviation assets is contradicted by the procurement of the Apaches.

As to F-35B on E-160, won't happen cos the vessel's too short. Take off distance is minimum ~550 ft or 180m. It will need a E180.
Top
blowpipe
Posted: Nov 12 2010, 05:31 PM


Captain
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1,021
Member No.: 21,086
Joined: 25-June 09



I am not sure how feasible is it to base F35 onto the LHD though there are landing spots. Bear in mind that it is not equivalent capacity ie 1 F35 : 1 Helicopter. The support & operations for fixed wing is very different from Rotary. I believed the current assumption capacity is limited to only rotary wing support. Perharps the most is V 22 Ospery VTOL.


--------------------
Today we can be keyboard warriors reminiscing our army experience because there are somebody out there who is willing to do the job for us.
Top
bdique
Posted: Nov 12 2010, 07:31 PM


Captain
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1,789
Member No.: 20,323
Joined: 12-December 08



QUOTE (weasel1962 @ Nov 12 2010, 05:00 PM)
QUOTE (bdique @ Nov 11 2010, 09:16 PM)
well I hope I don't sound like I'm making potshots here but given the way SAF will operate, its unlikely we'll need attack aviation assets like Cobras and Harriers. This pretty much rules out F-35s as well.

If needed, I believe the paltry few F-35s can still be somehow shoehorned onto the E160. I can only imagine that they must be on to some very special one-off mission.

With regards at least to the cobras, the lack of necessity for such aviation assets is contradicted by the procurement of the Apaches.

As to F-35B on E-160, won't happen cos the vessel's too short. Take off distance is minimum ~550 ft or 180m. It will need a E180.

ah, I meant attack aviation assets for the E160. In any case, since the Apaches don't operate from flat decks (from what I understand, Apaches don't do too well being exposed to the salty sea, unlike the Cobras), they aren't quite the same as Cobras. They have the same tactical role, but from a strategic perspective they are deployed differently. Our amphib assault forces should still have attack helis available to help them persecute targets, but I'm pretty sure they won't be flying in from a ship.

Whoops, missed the part about the minimum take of length... Paiseh >.<


--------------------
From the gunner's seat: The Green and Black Screen
Top
YourFather
Posted: Nov 13 2010, 11:01 AM


Major
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2,386
Member No.: 68
Joined: 17-July 04



QUOTE
Date Posted: 12-Nov-2010


Jane's Defence Weekly


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chile aims to acquire two LPDs
Josť Higuera JDW Correspondent
  Santiago, Chile

The commander-in-chief of the Chilean Navy, Admiral Edmundo Gonzalez, has confirmed that the service hopes to acquire two landing platform dock (LPD)-type amphibious assault ships.

The first "multipurpose transport ship", as Adm Gonzalez described it, is expected to be procured by 2012, with a second vessel to be added later.

Adm Gonzalez made no effort to conceal the navy's interest in the French vessel Foudre (L9011), which he said the French government is offering. Sources in Santiago told Jane's that the French authorities have made clear that Foudre's sister ship, Siroco (L9012), will also subsequently be sold and that Chile could be given first option to acquire her.

According to the sources, Italy has hinted that one of its San Giorgio-class ships will be available for transfer in 2014, followed by a sister ship between 2016 and 2017. Singapore is also offering one of its Endurance-class LPDs.

According to Adm Gonzalez, options for the procurement of the second LPD are open and an order for a newly built ship has not been ruled out. Sources have told Jane's that various shipbuilders have expressed an interest in building ships tailored to Chilean Navy requirements, including Spain's Navantia, France's DCNS, Italy's Fincantieri, Germany's TKMS and South Korea's Daewoo.

The case for procuring LPDs has been reinforced by a series of natural disasters, including earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and tsunami that have affected Chile since 2007. Those emergencies called for mass evacuations and the transporting of large amounts of aid.

The acquisition of LPDs is also aimed at increasing Chile's power-projection capabilities and would parallel an expansion of the country's marine infantry force from its current strength of 3,000 to 5,000.



Endurance-140 out, Endurance-160 in?


--------------------
I don't quarrel with baboons.
Top
LaoTiKo
Posted: Nov 13 2010, 11:46 AM


2nd Lieutenant
*

Group: Members
Posts: 673
Member No.: 47
Joined: 22-June 04



What's about the Invincible (x3) class for Sembawang Airbase?

With ASMBs coming online maybe based on Hainan island, and neighbours(friendly to China?) fielding IRBMs... short of getting THAAD and sea platforms with SM-3 ...

How realistic is it to have these mini carriers to increase survivability from 1st strike?

This post has been edited by LaoTiKo on Nov 13 2010, 11:47 AM
Top
Alfie007
Posted: Nov 30 2010, 08:26 PM


Captain
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1,049
Member No.: 21,100
Joined: 4-August 09



If this hasn't been posted before, this is worth watching..

--> Hanjin Heavy Industries & Construction (HHIC) - LPH Landing Ship (Dokdo) & LSF II Assault Hovercraft

This post has been edited by Alfie007 on Nov 30 2010, 08:26 PM


--------------------
user posted image
We, members of the Singapore Armed Forces, do solemnly and sincerely pledge that:
We will always bear true faith and allegiance to the President and the Republic of Singapore.
We will always support and defend the Constitution.
We will preserve and protect the honour and independence of our country with our lives.
Top
LaoTiKo
Posted: Dec 2 2010, 07:56 PM


2nd Lieutenant
*

Group: Members
Posts: 673
Member No.: 47
Joined: 22-June 04



According to this:

http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/...ious-ships.html


JDW this week reported RSN willing to transfer LPD to Chile navy in preparation for a new and bigger amphibious ship to come?
Top
Shotgun
Posted: Dec 2 2010, 09:35 PM


Captain
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1,925
Member No.: 238
Joined: 3-March 06



Endurance 160????
Top
Sayaret
Posted: Dec 2 2010, 09:57 PM


Major
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2,501
Member No.: 202
Joined: 13-December 05



Alright!! Let's get bigger and load out a more lethal punch....


--------------------
"My posts are solely based on personal perspectives and not targeted at any minority nor majority parties' interests. Will not be liable for others' mis-interpretations nor inability to comprehend"
Top
LaoTiKo
Posted: Dec 6 2010, 08:33 PM


2nd Lieutenant
*

Group: Members
Posts: 673
Member No.: 47
Joined: 22-June 04



QUOTE (Shotgun @ Dec 2 2010, 09:35 PM)
Endurance 160????

I very humbly hope not. Perhaps the French Foudre and her sister... or RFA Larges Bay...or the best choice of all the 3million pound HMS Invincible.
Top
blockhead
Posted: Jun 21 2011, 11:30 PM


3rd Sergeant
*

Group: Members
Posts: 86
Member No.: 198
Joined: 26-November 05



Hi, not sure if this has been posted before. If it has, mods are welcome to remove, please.

ST Eng brochure on Endurance 160
Top
Alfie007
Posted: Jun 22 2011, 01:13 PM


Captain
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1,049
Member No.: 21,100
Joined: 4-August 09



Something wrong with the link above, can't open it.. Here's the workable link..

ST Marine Brochure on the Endurance-160 MRSS

This post has been edited by Alfie007 on Jun 22 2011, 01:16 PM


--------------------
user posted image
We, members of the Singapore Armed Forces, do solemnly and sincerely pledge that:
We will always bear true faith and allegiance to the President and the Republic of Singapore.
We will always support and defend the Constitution.
We will preserve and protect the honour and independence of our country with our lives.
Top
blockhead
Posted: Jun 22 2011, 01:53 PM


3rd Sergeant
*

Group: Members
Posts: 86
Member No.: 198
Joined: 26-November 05



Sorry, I should have checked after I posted. Thanks Alfie.
Top
LaoTiKo
Posted: Jun 22 2011, 03:10 PM


2nd Lieutenant
*

Group: Members
Posts: 673
Member No.: 47
Joined: 22-June 04



Rear hull extension up to deck 5 or 6 would really make a difference. With an elevator like those in Principe de Asturias and HTMS Chakri Naruebet, you can remove the ramps and free up more space. Plus a bigger elevator with more footprint allow for transfer of outsize stuffs between flight deck to deck 6 and 5.

Sigh. A shame.

user posted image

This post has been edited by LaoTiKo on Jun 22 2011, 03:11 PM
Top
weasel1962
Posted: Jun 23 2011, 06:50 AM


Major
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2,931
Member No.: 19,860
Joined: 9-November 08



Interesting to note 225 units (-15 to 210) used to calculate length but only 163.7m long.

7 helos below deck + 5 deck spot = fairly large complement of helos can be operated subject to fuel limitations.

26 IFVs per vehicle deck = ~80 IFVs can be carried on 3 decks with each CVH. 1-2 bn strength.

If elevator can have 11m span, that would be enough for F-35B (at least 6 below deck). Looks like design can incorporate a 25m long forward ski jump, if required with the removal of forward gun emplacements?
Top
beretta
Posted: Jun 23 2011, 09:18 AM


3rd Sergeant
*

Group: Members
Posts: 72
Member No.: 21,702
Joined: 30-May 11



I am thinking that this type of vessel presents a very large juicy target & cannot operate alone. Is the vessel also equipped with CIWS ?
Top
« Next Oldest | General Discussion | Next Newest »
InvisionFree - Free Forum Hosting
Create your own social network with a free forum.
Learn More · Sign-up Now

Topic OptionsPages: (7) « First ... 5 6 7 



Hosted for free by InvisionFree* (Terms of Use: Updated 2/10/2010) | Powered by Invision Power Board v1.3 Final © 2003 IPS, Inc.
Page creation time: 0.0905 seconds | Archive

Google Only search Militarynuts.com