lol another of your confirmation that SG is going to operate carrier group?
the article did says that the US navy plans to use 48 ospreys as flying lorries to resupply their aircraft carriers.
we don't have any aircraft carriers so why are we interested in something like that?
with the closing of PLAB, maybe it is a replacement for the C130 as troops carrier? Who knows?
Hard to imagine SG operating a carrier though....although it make sense from a unpredictability perspective but it is a damn huge target....
Actually I think we are very vulnerable, it's a good idea to forward base our equipment and not leave everything here in 1 basket, if we have 1-2 small carriers in different regions it will keep whoever wants to invade guessing and guessing forever. if you remember kuwait invasion the iraqi's took just a day maybe they got kicked out later on but the damage already done. Japanese in ww2 only took a week to overrun Sg. Nowsdays tanks can swim no need to buld bridges the indonesians have russian bmp3 fully amphibious
if you look at the falklands war after the argentinian grabbed the islands the british didn't have any large carriers so they hastily sent 2 small sea control carrier ships to reclaim back the islands so this scs is not a concept but battle proven system.
If you spend bulk of your investment to re-claim a lost war, you already lost. i rather use 1/3 of that money to have one thousand more tanks.
the investment do not stop at the carrier, you need an accompanying fleet as well, so besides the cost of the carrier, you got to include the rest as well.
That aside, I think with the closing of PLAB, F-35B VSTOL is a real possibility. With Osprey which is also VSTOL, its a clear sign that SAF is moving towards VSTOL option.
The vulnerability of runway being bombed is over with VSTOL.
What I think will happen, is that a few designated camps will be rebuild or re-turf to support these crafts.
Normal tarmac will not do well with the heat generated by the F-35B.
Which company will be selected to do the job??
ST engineering will benefit the most, there will be opportunities for MRO ammunition supply re-turfing ship building ...
btw we are already having all these accompanying fleet, we have 6 frigates 6 submarines all blue water capability, we also having the facilities, see google earth what changi naval base having.
Tanks are not cheap these days assuming russian bmp3 sales costs is around 3.16mil. A thousand of these is over 3billion but wait military planners will say you need to keep at least 0.5 spares for each tank so potentially it will cost 4-5 billion, for manpower you need another 3000 just for tank crews excluding mechanical engineers and back room people whom you will need to support this new equipment. But .... if your planes don't control the skies above your territory then all you have are just 1000 brand new stationary targets.
2 small carriers will costs around 100 mil each, will need maybe 1000 people in total, each F-35B advertised 85 mil and osprey 70 mil but as production ramps up as more countries get into the program costs will come down. The british royal navy during the falklands episode put around 19-21 aircraft fixed and rotary on these small ships and this was max capacity
fresh off the printing presses
http://www.ibtimes.com/france-russia-mis...er-2069052
Either this really is for malaysia naval capability to be able to conduct long term deployment to enforce it's claims around the spratlys amid the rising tensions there.
or this is to help the french, without them losing face, they get msia (due to their good r/s with russia) to become go-between, first sell to msia then later presumably "re-sell" to russians.
either way we are not the first to intro high tech weapon capability into the region - so there's the justification and no more excuses =)
