SINGAPORE : Singapore has launched its first locally-built warship, RSN Intrepid, which will be equipped with advanced weapon and sensor systems.

This is made possible by tying up with a French ship builder under a technology transfer agreement.

But it will take a few more years before the vessel is fully equipped on a mission to defend Singapore and its vital lines of communications at sea.

Called a stealth frigate, the RSN Intrepid will have a sturdy outfit against threats from the air, surface, and underwater.

This includes a surface-to-air missile system to combat hostile aircraft, and long-range detection and lightweight torpedoes to counter submarine threats.

At this size, it packs in more, with a smaller crew of only 70.

Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said: "We must work smarter in order to achieve the same results with less manpower. Singaporeans will enjoy the dividend in terms of enhanced security and also a shorter National Service period. This approach underpins our transformation to the third generation SAF."

The first such frigate was built in France and will undergo trials soon, while the RSS Intrepid is the first of five vessels that are locally built by Singapore Technologies Marine. - CNA

Source: CNA http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/sin...w/93542/1/.html

What is really amazing is that RSN never disclose its real weapons..just generally..
i mean if it`s aster 15s say so lah. why so shy? if it`s aster 30s or maybe the intention to use, install and delcare that in future, then this is undertstandable. singapore purchase some upgrade kits for harpoons missiles recently i heard - harpoon 2 upgrade kits together with australia and egypt,etc. anyway, you can also buy harpoon G which have 195 km range. and later upgrade to harpoon 2s..even longer range than exocet block 3..:)

Tell me, is it better to tell you what I'm packing before a fight or do I keep quiet about it and pull it out when the fight just started? Some things are best kept secret and you gain an advantage called "surprise".

Err...i tink our neighburs know already liao..this kindda of tings cant keep quite one....intelligence gathering is there...spies, intelligence exchange..cannot underestimate their intelligent gathering. sumtimes can get news frm foriegn media. only the citizens dun noe much and their lousy media. perhaps prevent media frm speculation and prevent citizen frm making noise. i saw in WAFF forum that thier media actually put a report that they wanna buy carrier. but 10000 tons only. this is one heck of a carrier. lolz...

Still, as I've mentioned in the other Mil Nuts forum, you cannot confirm the accuracy of the media reports or studies unless it's openly "declared" by the government or MINDEF. Sure they may know something, but us discussing it may actually verify or even add to what they know. (Statistics published by defence journals and military reports are not as accurate as you think.) In this age of computers, who know which eyes are reading and assessing the information discussed here. For all you know, one of the forum members might be from another country's intel service.

For example, I (being part of the intel services) may know that this country has how many tanks after reading Jane's defence weekly but after going through a discussion forum such as this one, I may find out that the actual count is alot more and with special modifications as well. I may also find out that this country has a weapons system that I have not known about previously as my spies cannot get hold of such info. Such scenarios may seem impossible but they are not.

The above example only serves as an example of what might be.

Just like to point out that the ship should be labelled as RSS (Republic of Singapore Ship) and not RSN (Republic of Singapore Navy).

Even governments may say sumting else. anyway, ther are respected journals and mags like Janes and not so well regarded ones..if wat u say is true, might as well dun believe anyting..heheh..so point is which source we give greater imptc. Singapore not declaring asesst is only aimed at local population and kampong people leh..we dun want cause uproar. the foriegn govts noe of these stuffs long ago liao. no point having intelligence if u get zero returns yeah. tey noe of this already..either thru intelligence sharing or espoinage,etc...this happens all the time..and such info is verified and counterchecked all the time to test for accuracy. one more thing intelligence officers surfing net for intelligence is really unintelligent..lolz..cheers.


P.S..i won my bet..Greece wins...lolz

You should also bear in mind that the enemy in this present stage do not have a face or country. The internet happens to be one of the ways they gather their intel.

But enough of this discussion, it seems that I've hijacked the thread. My apologies.

You should also bear in mind that the enemy in this present stage do not have a face or country. The internet happens to be one of the ways they gather their intel.

- this i agree but i was`nt toking abt them leh.

But enough of this discussion, it seems that I've hijacked the thread. My apologies.

- its ok..sorry too..cheers..lol..

What is the combat management suite of our new Delta frigates? A derivation of PAAMS?

And also, how effect are chaffs nowadays in a world dominated by anti-ship missiles with advanced guidance systems? Do the inclusion of short range anti-missile systems like RAM, GOALKEEPER and PHALANX warrant for the omission of chaff launchers from today's ships?

From Admiral (Rt'd) Woodwards memoirs of the Falkland Wars, I gather the impression that it isn't enough just to fire chaffs in the nick of time - the entire ship must be maneuvered into the chaff cloud to maximize full protection potential. That involved lots of quick calculations and judgement in relation to wind speed/direction and ETI of the ASM. If chaffs are still on, do onboard automations now take over all these tasks?

And what of a combination of close-range anti-missile systems and chaffs on board a vessel? Which activates first? If a chaff system requires a ship to move into its metallic cloud for optimal protection, that would require time and hence chaffs cannot be a activate -at-the-very-last-minute. What is the typical engagement range of onboard anti-missile sentry systems? Will the activation of chaff affect their ability to perform?

Combat Management System is locally developed....by ST of course.

I think this info is available on the RSN official website, check it out.

Nope, couldn't find it on the RSN website. Can you provide a link?

Mmm....Hopefully this wouldnt give you guys an impression that i dont trust Singapore Technology. For me i seriously dont think they have the capability to fully develop and build a sophisticated Combat Management System. I believe majority of the hardwares are originated from France, Israel or perhaps Britain and are modified to call it our own.

This might goes the same for the software.
Anyway whatever it is, The overall capabilities of the Ship Combat Management System matters the most. Its our Nation's Pride to have a powerful and well -recognised warship, sailing and embarking at the dock of foreign countries. :)

Cheers and a toast to the Republic Of Singapore Navy ;)

Mindef official statement

Check out this official statement. Seems like the website on the Formidable class has been taken out.

Well, DSTA and ST may have more capabilities than you will ever give credit for....

I too, am wondering, how good the combat management system will turn out. Even the Australia with a lot more defence technology behind their back, found it difficult to get it right when they attempted to write their own for their Collin subs. They had to almost discarded what they have got and adopted a US Navy version from Raytheon.

However, I do believe that ST and DSTA will not allow the project to fail, neither will they go it alone if they do not possess the capabilites. They are most like have some sort of help from some the Israeli, French or even Swedish and customise the system to tailor RSN's requirements. They might have used lots of off-the-shelf computer systems, adopt a proven software framework to based their combat management system on.

Most likely from Thale Defence Contactor. Makes me wonder does the technology transfer includes combat management system or other onboard hardware. :huh:.

Anyway most technologically advanced nation like Japan started by copying and further modifying. It happens to turn out to be a brilliant idea rather than starting from scarp. :D .

10 Years down the road singapore might just be able to develop its own Aegis System B) Whos knows!!

My Webpage

What? You're a web-designer for MINDEF? Cool.

So at which time frame does the Destroyer program kick in? :D

singapore no much resources to build so many things for the navy at once..tat means the victory class replacements will be built after vikings are built.. but the program can start sooner..who noes..maybe they alrrady have a program to replace the victory class..the latest the victory class can last is till 2020(the oldest victory ship will be 32 years old then...or who noes maybe sooner..RSN has commited itself to replacing all combat ships with stealth designs)..i belief tat RSN will certainly commence the building of the subs in this decade... after 2005/2006..in time for comissioning in 2010-2012(like wat the swedes and danes are doing). Yuo cant expect to wait till 2010 or later to order replacement for the sjoormens. got time-lag before the ships are ready to be comissioned. can`t have empty submarine sqaudron leh.


..so i tink we`ll hear news abt the victory class frigate only at the end of this decade. but i have no doubt it will be a frigate class vessel. look at the american LCS (littoral combat ship), it`s nearly the size of our formidable frigate..im hoping for more vls cells..48 cells..and maybe PAAMs like British type 45..the hull does`nt have to be big like tat ship...just more weapons. if you look at our formidable class frigate..you can sure extend a bit and sure can put in two more 8-cell vls slyver laucnher..no problem. ..and maybe have a more poweful radar..we are reserching radar with the french i hearing. :P

so are we using aster15 or aster30? getting more rumours...

Wallow..Aster 15 lah..we don`t go for big buys just like that one..but the frigates confirmed can carry aster 30s..either they change the launcher or the current laucher is capable to carry aster 30s..

go here;

http://www.eurosam.com/room/communique5.htm

you think who r the 6 foriegn un-named customers..huh??
Only saudi arabia and singapore opt for aster 15s so far outside europe you know..

dun play play...in future sure we see aster 30s...our ships are designed with the future in mind.. ;)..just look at the designs of formidable class...where u see so much rooms for improvement in the world one...only our singapore paranoai(joke) possible..hehe

well... we will probably get our aster30 after the PAAMS qualification test is done by 2006...

it is also noted in some website that our FFG comes with only 2 rather the 4 sylver launchers...

perhaps the other 2 launchers are for the future sylver launchers... either A50 or A70?

in APDF forum... one of the forumners noted that RSN is getting the A43A sylver which can accomodate Aster30 as well as Aster15.. but i cant find anything on the A43A sylver at all on the WWW.

I tink i noe source of rumors abt deltas getting just two slyver launchers; saudi al sawari firgates..tey come with two slyver launchers per firgate only..why..i dont know but sure got space to add on 2 more vls launchers for a43 or a50.

i did read in ACIG forum tat the slyver proto-type launcher is capable of firing both asters 15s and 30s. maybe tis is the a43a. the reason the french have 2 version later is to market to different customers and i tink coz tey wanna fit the shorter a43 into theier nucler carrier charles the gaul.

but u r rite abt sumting leh..it does`nt make sense for rsn to just arm the deltas with aster 15s when it certainly can acomodate aster 30s. also why arm with aster 15s ...arm all with aster 30s lah..the only diference between aster 15 and 30 is the booster. maybe in future. and not shock our local muslim neighbours.

it`s also possible arrrr...rsn is actually waiting for the production of A70 lauchers. these lauchers can fit the scalp navale missile. as intertim meausure, tey fit a43 or a50 or a43a whatever luancher. a70 abt the size of the mk41 launcher. can tey fit into deltas? of coz can..ter is a lot of space...the aussie ugly anzac firgates have an 8 cell mk 41 installed on ter hangar. who noes maybe in future got aster15 quad pack like essm? or rsn may decide to go for a long range cruise missile, especially if malaysia and indonesia starts buying the indian brahmos or watever russian missile lah.

what is the min arming distance for aster15 and 30?

ASTER 15

Altitude of interception
10 km

Range
30 km
-------------------------

ASTER 30

Altitude of interception
20 km

Range
3 / >100 km

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

Speaking about cruise missile i believe that the SAF is anxiously waiting to acquire it and there is a high possibility of the first cruise missile to be delivered to singapore will be either the Scalp / Shadow or Apache. The report will come through only when the winner of the Fighter programme is finally be announced.
(The Content above doesnt have any relation with this topic its more to airforce)

Where else for the navy, the longer range skirmming missile could be either Harpoon Block 2 or the Newer version of Exocet missile (Under Construction)

Delta Frigate Specification

do you have info about the min arming distance for both class of asters?

According to the site below, Aster 15 min engagement range is 1.7km and the Aster 30 is 3km.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/aster.htm

while mistral's minimum range is reported at 1km...

anything closer would have to be handled by the 76mm SPG or the 0.5cal HMG.

Once the Aster fails to engage and kill. The Last couple of alternatives the incoming missile will be handled by the super rapid gun on the platform if any nearer will probably be the CHAFF and really damn near jump into the water. :huh: anyway dont expect the sailors to do that its a chargable offence of deserter. :P

dont forget the CIWS - 25mm Typhoon

Yes. There will be two such systems aft and on either sides of the hangar - small calibre gun systems. It could be `slaved' to the `EADS Systems And Defence Electronics Najir 2000' electro-optical gunfire control system(using electro-optical directors sited fore and aft - you know where..everyone`s talking about it). It could also be an autonomous system with on-mount sensors. But a decision has not been made yet I think... as of February . They are looking at the Israeli Typhoons and ST Kinetics naval remote weapon station. The three trainable launchers that everyone has been talking about refers to EADS systems and defence electronics NGDS decoy systems.( But a look would be more than suffice to show that the decoys could be replaced with mistral missiles maximising the use of the electro-optical directors)

Also, the fore gun...the 76/62 Super rapid could be replaced by a 127mm gun as space and weight considerations have been taken into account. If such decisions were made, it only goes to show that it will be done sometime in the future...which is good as we could go for UD`s 127mm MK 45 MOD 4 systems or at least use the lastest projectiles which can reach miles further than what the present Super-rapid gun could afford.

- public domain ..from janes defence weekly..11 February 2004.

Good to hear that they actually think ahead.

Very important for naval ships. The platform will typically last longer then the weapon system. have to always think ahead.... :D

do hope they would replace the Super-Rapid with the MK 45 and in particular, the MOD 4 version. I have a soft spot for the latter. But just look at the specs. At 120 km, it out-ranges current versions of the Exocet missiles. It would give greater meaning to the term `precision strike' by the RSN. That and Singapore`s close relations with UD which helps.

It`s plausible that it is the RSN`s intention at the out-set to integrate these weapons but only at a later date so as not to offend Malaysia and Indonesia.



The 5-inch (127mm), 62-caliber Mk 45 Mod 4 Naval Gun system is in U.S. Navy service today, ready to significantly enhance Naval Surface Fire Support (NSFS) mission performance. The Mk 45 Mod 4 will provide NSFS range in excess of 21 nautical miles (37 km) using the Navy's new 5-inch Cargo projectile, the Improved Conventional Munition and an improved propelling charge for all-weather, day/night mission support. The new Mk 45 Mod 4 will also provide over-the-horizon NSFS range of more than 60 nautical miles (120 km) with the near-term integration of the 5-inch Extended Range Guided Munition (ERGM) and propelling charge. Operation and performance of these extended-range munitions are specifically tailored for effective use and optimized range in unison with the major subsystem upgrades introduced with the Mk 45 Mod 4 Naval Gun.

Subsystem upgrades for the Mk 45 Mod 4 include a 62-caliber barrel, strengthened gun chamber and trunnion supports, lengthened recoil stroke and an interactive touch-screen control system. Design improvements also include a new gun mount shield to improve maintainability and reduce overall radar signature. United Defense is poised to incorporate round initialization interface and identification capabilities in unison with fleet integration of the 5-inch ERGM to allow Mk 45 Mod 4 to effectively support this new land attack munition.

Beginning with the USS CHURCHILL DDG 81 in March 2001, Mk 45 Mod 4 is being forward-fit to U.S. Navy DDG 51-Class destroyers and to other new ship applications such as KDX-2 destroyers for the Republic of Korea. Existing Mk 45 Mods 0-2 guns can be upgraded to the Mod 4 configuration, which is planned for backfit application to CG 52-Class ships as part of the U.S. Navy's Cruiser Conversion Program.

And it also comes in a stealth cupola :)

Since we are talking about guns.......... here's a nice article about new ammo for the 76mms.......

Oto Melara Munition Gives Naval Guns Low-Tech, ‘Nonlethal’ Precision

In an age characterized by missiles guided by sophisticated electronic seekers and a constellation of satellites, an Italian arms company is taking a different approach to precision munitions. To increase the accuracy of widely used medium-caliber naval guns, Oto Melara, a unit of the Finmeccanica Group industrial conglomerate based in Rome, is employing the concepts of low drag and high speed with a new munition called Ammunition Reduced Time-of-Flight (ART).

ART is designed to be fired by existing 76mm naval guns deployed on warships used by more than 50 nations, including the U.S. Navy’s Perry-class guided-missile frigates and the U.S. Coast Guard’s Hamilton-class high-endurance cutters and Famous-class medium-endurance cutters.

The ART is a narrow projectile (42mm diameter) shaped like a rocket with tailfins and, at 3.4 kilograms, is lighter than a conventional 76mm shell. The tungsten-iron-core ART is encased in a 76mm shell, centered by a round collar, called a sabot. When the round is fired, gasses build up behind the sabot to hurl the projectile out of the gun barrel. The sabot falls off as the projectile leaves the barrel.

The projectile, lighter and more aerodynamic than a conventional shell, heads toward the target at 1.5 times the speed of a conventional round. Because of its speed, the ART is less affected by wind and target motion and therefore far more accurate than a conventional round. It is so accurate, company officials said, that it is effective as a “non-lethal” weapon.

“ART is so good,” said Oto Melara CEO Carlo Alberto Iardella, “that it can disable a rudder on a ship without sinking it or injuring the crew. That means that ships smuggling sensitive contraband such as nuclear weapons or missiles can be stopped on the high seas if they try to evade law-enforcement organizations.”

ART rounds require no modifications to ships’ guns and are compatible with existing automated ammunition handling systems. No modifications in the ships’ fire-control systems are required, either.

Oto Melara is confident that ART would be a useful weapon to support U.S. President George W. Bush’s Proliferation Security Initiative, which has been joined by 11 nations to interdict weapons of mass destruction at sea. Ten of those nations deploy warships equipped with Oto Melara 76mm guns, which can fire at a rate of 120 rounds per minute.

A version of ART is equipped with a 3-kilogram high-explosive air-burst warhead for use against aircraft, sea-skimming missiles, surface ships, swarms of fast boats and for shore bombardment. Oto Melara and Simmel Difesa, a munitions manufacturer based in Colleferro, Italy, are developing a microwave fuze that behaves like a seeker for the ART. The fuze is non-jammable, insensitive to sea clutter and compensates for wind and other deviations. It detonates in relation to target velocity and position.

Another derivative is the DART (Driven ART), equipped with a guidance computer on the tail of the projectile and steerable canards on the nose. This version can be steered to the target by riding a radar beam from the gun’s fire-control radar, Stephen D. Bryen, president of Finmeccanica Inc., the U.S. representative of the Finmeccanica Group, told Sea Power.

Bryen and Michael Timming, senior vice president for naval systems at Oto Melara, said the fully modularized 76mm gun with ART munitions would be ideal for defense of oil platforms against swarms of small suicide boats. ART could disable them without detonating their explosives.

Timming said the ART is scalable to any size, such as the 5-inch (127mm) naval gun.

The Italian Navy funded development of the ART and has ordered 400 rounds scheduled for delivery beginning this year, making the service Oto Melara’s first customer for the munition. Company officials said the ART will cost 1,600 euros (approximately $1,960) per round.

Late last year, Adm. Ennio Piantini, the Italian Navy’s director general for naval weapons systems, briefed officials of the Naval Sea Systems Command on the ART.

The ART has the potential to be the munition to arm the U.S. Navy’s new Littoral Combat Ship, Bryen said, if a 76mm gun is selected as one of the mission modules for the ship.


To pay about $4000 (sing dollars) for a more accurate round seems reasonable. I dont think an ERGM is what we need. At a projected cost of US$50,000 a pop, that will kill us. (And that's only projected cost. Costs have the sickening tendency to escalate wildly, especially with guided rounds, if history is taken into account) More importantly, I do not believe we have as much of a need for naval bombardment as them. They take into account forced entry (aka amphibuous assault on defended beaches). I dont think we can seriously consider something like that...

It does`nt mean that we opt for a 127 mm gun, it has to be ERGM at that. And it does`nt mean an all ERGM arsenel too if we decide to go for it. I doubt it would be the case for the USN as well. My point is on the precision engagement it offers in terms of littoral war-fare. It would be a waste to utilize harpoon block 2s(since there is a report somewhere that upgrade kits were bought) or such missiles for these purposes unless absolutely necessary. So, it would be good to have some on board. With the RSN poised to install small calibre gun systems on board the Deltas, it would good to utilize the fore guns in an enhanced role.

Of course i know that you dont mean we buy a full load of ERGMs. But what I'm saying is that the money can be better spent elsewhere. More bang for the buck ya know? :D Besides, ERGM is GPS guided, so it will not be useful for attacking ships unless they are pierside. If a round is developed with terminal guidance sensors, (which is what they are trying to do with the LRLAP round) and still costs less than a Harpoon, then I say GO FOR IT! Imagine engaging another ship on the seas with a couple of those rounds... :blink: wah lau, they gonna get high trying to engage them.

Fighting ships with these rounds aside(which I reckon would still come in handy if they could extrapolate with a reasonable measure of accuracy the ship`s location using whatever new systems made out ), they would have been particularly useful in littoral war-fare situations given its accuracy - taking out coastal batteries and strategic targets much further inshore. Definetly a waste on missile stocks for the latter. The triangulation of fire-power from both air, land and now sea forces would be great. And an asset as well given SEA`s geographical context.

As said, it is for the future. Costs could well go down as these projectiles become common-place and expecially with allies buying and depolying them as well. Something for the future and now that the Deltas are built with these systems in mind, it could well be a reality.