| Welcome to Philippines Defense Forces Forum. 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: |
| IF ALL OUR NAVAL ASSETS HAVE MISSILES; would encroaching on Spratlys prevented? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Nov 9 2005, 09:14 AM (2,963 Views) | |
| flipzi | Nov 9 2005, 04:42 PM Post #11 |
|
R-A-T-S
![]()
|
Else, they'll be attracting big players, like the US' 7th fleet. That's why arming our meager force of corvettes and patrol crafts with missiles will be enough. Just imagine if we now have our anti-ship missile-firing MRFs? We will definitely give the Chinese a hard time sneaking into our territories unscathed.
|
![]() " Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them! - Art. II Sec 1, Philippine Constitution " " People don't care what we know until they know we care. " getflipzi@yahoo.com | |
![]() |
|
| Wushu | Nov 9 2005, 05:07 PM Post #12 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
ramos i think was a far better tactician than marcos and erap...... marcos underestimated the americans, nur misuari and the mnlf, the npa's, the political opposition, underground media, the middle class, the roman catholic church, and his own wife..... erap was as dumb as a doornail, period..... ramos on the other hand destroyed misuari's reputation, neutralized the mnlf, lowered the numbers of npa cadres, and played circles around his political opponents.... fvr's and almonte's strategy of packing journalists into hueys and sending them off as bait in the spratleys resulted in world condemnation of china..... a priceless advantage we underdogs now enjoy..... what marcos and erap had in common was they wanted to be known as macho men... but the shrewd tactician uses less brawn and more brains...... |
![]() |
|
| flipzi | Nov 9 2005, 05:11 PM Post #13 |
|
R-A-T-S
![]()
|
... but we lost the Mischief Reef to China still. |
![]() " Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them! - Art. II Sec 1, Philippine Constitution " " People don't care what we know until they know we care. " getflipzi@yahoo.com | |
![]() |
|
| mantz | Nov 9 2005, 05:30 PM Post #14 |
|
Trainee
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Guys, Now that the damage has been done, what is our option ? How about sending in the SWAG, capture the chinese soldiers inside, demolish the structure and then declare these chinese as illegally fishing in Philippine EEZ ?? Anyway, China has always maintained that these structures are for "fishermen" kuno !!!
|
![]() |
|
| flipzi | Nov 9 2005, 05:49 PM Post #15 |
|
R-A-T-S
![]()
|
Too late! The Chinese knew what they needed to do. First, they setup small structures and risked getting the ire of the International media (Ramos miscalculated the Chinese ploy here). The Chinese knew that media criticisms would wane down anyway. They also knew that Ramos wont be that brave enough to dismantle the manned structure, that's why the Navy SWAG destroyed the markers planted around the reef only. They also knew that the Mutual Defense Treaty does not cover that of the Spratly's case, that's why China braved its way through. Since, they succeeded in putting the still unfortified structure and prevented the military under Ramos from dislodging them, they started to fortify the structure, made it bigger and brought in communication equipments like satellite tranceivers. The structure is now made of concrete and it can service big ships like frigates. NOW, HOW CAN YOU DISLODGE THE CHINESE AFTER THAT FORTIFICATION? The biggest mistake here is that the SWAGs should have arrested the fishermen (then resolve the issue through diplomatic means) and dismantled the original structures. Our F5s and S211 were still doing better then. We could have use these to provide deterrence for possible counter-manuevers. In fact, the Chinese missile frigates which were trying to come closer, halted when PAF F5s soared in. We had the US and the UN on our backs anyway, if in case the conflict worsened. Had they did that, Mischief Reef could still be ours today. Also, our inutile lawmakers who failed to modernize our AFP after the US pullout MUST BE BLAMED here. Solution? 1) Bring the case to an international court. 2) Negotiate with the Chinese the turnover of the structure to us. The structure should be manned by Filipinos. The Chinese fishermen and other citizens may use the place for shelter during typhoons or emergencies. 3) Swap another reef at the farthest part of our territory in the Spratly's. At least, the Chinese will not be as close as they are now. Forceful action at this time is not a good option. |
![]() " Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them! - Art. II Sec 1, Philippine Constitution " " People don't care what we know until they know we care. " getflipzi@yahoo.com | |
![]() |
|
| caterwaul | Nov 9 2005, 05:58 PM Post #16 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That would be suicide, those structures are well secured with advanced detection technology and Chinese special troopers that are probably tougher and more capable than the SWAG. |
![]() |
|
| jammerjamesky | Nov 9 2005, 09:12 PM Post #17 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
:thumb: brilliant idea guys, I think i would venture to apply only additional fittings of anti ship missiles to this class due to top weight limit capacity of the other ships mentioned. Jacinto Class - South Korean PKM's- Cyclone class - Smaller Pkm class - It would be a mixed of US, European,Israeli and Russian made missile. Harpoon- Uran- Sea skua- and other's But we still need new ships in the navy even if we have those patrol crafts. Kalayaan Group of Island should be patroled by long endurance ship and good in sea keeping. OPV's is still needed in the KIG area. OPV aquisition is a great addition to the navy. In the case of Ramos its a tactic to defy chineese strategy in the world community in the occupancy of the reefs. Although we lose the prescious mischief reef to the chineese we have still the rights and power to settle it in the International Court or Arbitration. Despite of all the efforts that they used Ramos never think of the immediate treats that it could cause to our country. I think let China decide their oil exploration in the reef and will give them no immediate result and profit. In case of Erap maybe the navy enjoy's having a new OPV in their fleet but it made no sense at all since the deal has a problem. Even if the deal was come to reality baka matulad tayo sa Brunie incase. As of now let our budget deficit stabilize until 2008 then lets think forward of a new AFP in next years to come. The budget constraint that our country is suffering right now doesnt mean the AFP will stop from acquiring new ship but instead a little by little acquisition will balance the AFP in giving services to the people and the ability to give their personnel a good payment and cash incentives. |
![]() |
|
| israeli | Nov 9 2005, 10:48 PM Post #18 |
![]()
|
many defense analysts have already said from the very beginning- NO NAVY will take the Philippine Navy seriously unless the latter is able to field A DECENT NUMBER OF NEW WARSHIPS AND ANTI-SHIP AND AIR DEFENSE MISSILES. there is no denying to the fact that the Philippine Navy needs to get both OPVs (which are not really being armed with missiles but provisions for the addition of such systems are in place in the vessels) and guided-missile corvettes but there is also a need for a substantial number of missile-armed fast attack crafts. ![]() however, given the prevailing circumstances, only the Jacinto class patrol vessels, Cyclone class patrol boats and PKM patrol boats have the actual capacity to be upgraded for the addition of missiles, therefore the PN needs to get new combat vessels, in particular OPVs, guided-missile corvettes and missile-armed fast attack crafts, and retire its JURASSIC destroyer escort and corvettes. |
| "To secure peace is to prepare for war." - Carl Von Clausewitz | |
![]() |
|
| gemini1 | Nov 10 2005, 05:48 AM Post #19 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Jammerjamesky I think i would venture to apply only additional fittings of anti ship missiles to this class due to top weight limit capacity of the other ships mentioned Jacinto Class - South Korean PKM's- Cyclone class - Smaller Pkm class The smallest naval asset we have is the US Swift class patrol boats listed at 22.5 tons 50ft in length but the US Navy test fired the penguin anti ship missiles although it did not adopt the configuration Penguin Mk 2 being test fired from a US Swift Mk3 patrol boat The Andrada class boats were also small (56 tons/78 ft in length) yet the Aerospatiale AS15TT light anti ship missile was also test fired although again we did not acquire missiles. ![]() we don't need the fancy heavy weight missiles, just those that would do the job right! 2 pods (launcher?) on each side is more than enough source: opus224 |
![]() |
|
| gemini1 | Nov 10 2005, 06:52 AM Post #20 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Here's another interesting development of mini missiles NAVY'S SMALLEST IMAGE-GUIDED MISSILE COMPLETES SUCCESSFUL TESTS Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division China Lake, Calif.-- In the California desert, under a glaring mid-morning sun, Spike—the world’s smallest image-guided, fire-and-forget missile—accomplished its first controlled flights on May 26, 2004. In three test flights totaling slightly less than 60 seconds, the diminutive missile (5.3 pounds, 25-inches long) successfully demonstrated more than a dozen critical functions. “This paves the way for self-guided flight tests in 2004,” said China Lake engineer Steve Felix, the Spike project manager. Originally conceived as a man-portable weapon for Marines and Navy special operations groups, which have supported the weapon’s development, Spike fills a critical niche for a low cost, lightweight guided weapon for U.S. ground forces. With only 15 minutes of training, ground troops will be able to effectively engage soft and lightly armored targets at ranges up to 2 miles. Plus Spike’s precision guidance reduces the risk of collateral damage. Its lightweight and low cost (about $4K per missile) make it suitable for wide distribution among front-line units and cost effective even against low-value targets. Spike’s potential applications go beyond ground combat. It is a realistic armament choice for tactical unmanned aerial vehicles as well as a force-protection weapon to defend surface ships from small-boat swarms and light aircraft. In all three flights, Spike’s reduced-smoke motor propelled the missile from the launcher with barely a visible wisp of smoke. The missile accelerated to 600 miles per hour in under 1.5 seconds. At a predetermined time, the guidance section commanded several pre-programmed pitch, yaw, and roll maneuvers. “This was a ‘walk before you run’ approach,” added Felix. “The first and third flights did 4-g maneuvers, the second flight 6-gs. Future test flights will work toward the system’s maneuverability limits.” Warrior input has driven every step of the design and engineering process. “Spike is an 80% solution,” explained Felix, who conceived the idea for the weapon. “It’s not designed for every threat on the battlefield. But it is extremely lethal against a broad cross section of mobile targets and could be available to U.S. forces within 24 months from receipt of funding. Spike is a highly effective and low-cost solution, and it’s needed by our warfighters today.” It has been under development at Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division China Lake by a small government/industry development team of interdisciplinary experts from China Lake, DRS Technology, and ATK Thiokol. Sverdrup Naval Systems Group provided additional support. source: www.militaryphotos.net/forums/ archive/index |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Philippine Navy · Next Topic » |










![]](http://z1.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)



8:33 AM Jul 11