I did not know there were so many armchair generals/admirals in SG... But I guess that is a understandable hazard with mandatory National Service.
So in that vein, here's my take on why Singapore might need or use an Aircraft Carrier if we were to get one.
But before we look at what we would use it (or them) for, we should determine what sort of carrier it might be. This video on Japan's Izumo-class "Helicopter Destroyer", provides a broad categorisation of different classes of carriers. [From 0:35 in the video].
Firstly, there is a vast difference in size and capabilities of a Super-carrier of the Nimitz or Ford class that the US operates compared to the Chinese Liaoning, or the Izumo. These ships of over 100,000 tonnes displacement afford the US the capability to project naval air power almost anywhere in the world [1:12 in the video].
The next category of carriers are what the video calls "medium Carriers" [1:19] and have proportionally reduced capability to protect naval air power. China's Liaoning and Shandong are about 60,000 tonnes and are in this "class" of carriers. They accord China a "Regional Power" status. But in a ship to ship or carrier group to carrier group face off, China's carrier would be outmatched by the US Carrier Battle Group. (But of course, China would not need to match the US Carriers ship for ship...)
Then there are small carriers like the Izumo of about 20,000 tonnes with proportionally smaller capacity for air assets. They are ideal for anti-submarine warfare [1:30] and other roles.
From the "Carrier Ambition" post, Singapore's most likely "carrier" would be designated as a "Joint Multi-Mission Ship". This is a realistic assessment as to the purpose and capabilities of the ship.
Singapore does not have a 250 km gap like the Miyako strait [7:05], nor islands that are 700 km away from a major airbase. We do not need an aircraft carrier to protect Pedra Branca (about 40 km?).
If we were to have a Joint Multi-Mission Ship (JMMS) capable of carrying aircrafts, such a ship would be very flexible in deployment and use. Singapore had previously used our Endurance-class Landing Platform Dock for humanitarian relief mission when Indonesia was devastated by the Indian Ocean Tsunami of 2004.
The JMMS is a variant of the Endurance class Landing Platform Dock and would technically be a Landing Helicopter Dock. It's enhanced capabilities would be well suited to humanitarian and disaster relief work.
The current Endurance-class LST already has space for helicopters, so the LHD or JMMS as would be able to carry more helicopters. The model shows 5 on deck. Not clear if there are hanger space below deck for more helicopters. Also Singapore is acquiring 4 F-35B STOVL for evaluation. With an option to purchase up to 8 more. If Singapore orders the JMMS, the F-35B could be deployed on the JMMS making them mini-carriers. Or at least small carriers. Of course, if Singapore intends to deploy the F-35B on the JMMS, there would be modifications needed to allow the jets to operate off the JMMS.
It is almost a no-brainer to put the F-35 on the JMMS (or mini-carrier).
But what would Singapore use the Carrier for?
As the aircraft-carrying JMMS has not been built, and the specifications would still be subject to final amendments (even if I were privy to the details) all the details are speculations.
The Izumo Class at about 27,000 tonnes (fully loaded) has a maximum of 28 aircraft. But it is a little larger than the Endurance JMMS as designed (though the design is not finalised, and it could conceivable be enlarged to the Izumi's size).
Our starting assumption is that our Endurance JMMS will NOT be a dedicated aircraft carrier or whatever the Izumo is becoming, and will be somewhat smaller than the Izumo.
The aircrafts carried would be some F-35B - maybe a squadron of 12 aircraft.
There should also be helicopters (2 or more) for anti-submarine warfare (ASW), logistics, and rescue.
And drones.
Boeing is testing their "Loyal Wingman" drone as a force multiplier. These could reduce the number of manned F-35 on the JMMS. Instead of 12 F-35, just 4 F-35 could lead 12 Loyal Wingman (for a total of 16 aircrafts) on a combat mission.
Even so, as a small carrier, the JMMS would not be able to bring a lot of firepower with her. That would not be the strength of the JMMS.
In a combat situation, it would work best as a force multiplier. Such as being the airbase for carrier-based Aerial refuelling drone, such as the Boeing MQ-25 Stingray.
Launching aerial-refuelling drones 500 km from Singapore, F-16s taking off from Changi could rendezvous with these aerial-refuelling drones, get more fuel and go on to their mission. (F-16s have a combat range of about 500 km.)
Of course, if we were to have combat missions over 500 km (from SG), we would probably deploy our F-15s (almost 2,000 km combat range), or our F-35s (1,300 km) if we have more than 4.
.
Launching F-35s and drones from the JMMS raises the question of how will these aircrafts be launched? Ski-jump ramps? Or catapults?
The F-35Bs can land vertically, but the drones will need barrier/arrested recovery. And the US has been testing their drones with catapult assisted take-off. And if we are going to install catapults and master the use of catapults, then the F-35 might as well be launched that way.
Which will be an added complexity, and moving us closer to a dedicated aircraft carrier.
The JMMS may well be more of a Drone Carrier than an F-35 carrier. Yes, F-35 can land on it in a pinch, but the JMMS main role may be to be the carrier for autonomous drones that can carry out surveillance and reconnaissance, refuelling, ASW, and even combat missions. Loyal Wingman drones could augment a flight of F-35 or F-15, enhancing the firepower. Or they may prosecute strike missions autonomously.
Drones can also carry out "Wild Weasel" mission to suppress enemy air defences, which is one of the more dangerous mission for manned aircraft. The low observability of drones (stealth) would improve their survivability while risking no lives, and a cheaper equipment (compared to an F-35).
The drones of the JMMS may well be the forward edge of our air defence, blunting the enemy's air defence, engaging enemy air force in the first instance, hunting enemy submarines and surface combatants, and providing reconnaissance and battlefield intelligence for our forces. So that when our air force engages, it would be against a weakened enemy, and to our advantage.
So, that's where I see a JMMS, if we (Singapore) ever gets one. It would be a LHD or a JMMS carrying drones which can carry out ASW, reconnaissance, provide aerial refuelling, and supplement F-35 or F-15 strike missions. And in a pinch, an F-35 can land on the JMMS, or be deployed from it.
[Video update: the JMMS have been "usurped" by the MRCV:
[Afternote: A look at the interior of the Izumo:]
No comments:
Post a Comment