Indonesia Defence Forum

[Jatosint]

So i will be a fixed AA site? I thought being fixed is a vulnerablity these days ??

NASAMS is semi-mobile (CMIIW), the systems are easily transportable by trucks but need to be put on the ground first before firing (atau pas masih diatas Truk udah bisa nembak juga? atau ads versi yg bener-bener mobilenya ya?)

 

[Kansel]

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[umigami]

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

Do they already got cannon and elta radar?

 

[Fl0gger]

Do they already got cannon and elta radar?

some of them had cannon but not all of them and for radar idk

 

[striver44]

NASAMS is semi-mobile (CMIIW), the systems are easily transportable by trucks but need to be put on the ground first before firing (atau pas masih diatas Truk udah bisa nembak juga? atau ads versi yg bener-bener mobilenya ya?)

yeah it's better to assemble it once needed than put it in a fixed site which will be easy prey to our northern and southern neighbors standoff weaps.

 

[Jatosint]

Do they already got cannon and elta radar?

some of them had cannon but not all of them and for radar idk

AF still call it 'T-50i' not 'F/A-50' so....

 

[Gen3115]

Idk about SAMP/T however long before this COVID 19 pandemy i've posted the planning for 5 medium range air defence battalions and 2 detachments of long range air defence. Rumour i've read was about more NASAMS and likely PAC-3 but again this was just a rumour a while ago.

I don't know much about the Patriot yet, but isn't the PAC-3 specifically made to go against ballistic missiles and can it be used against aircraft as well? most of the other Patriot operators I see operate a mix of PAC-2 and PAC-3 and I thought maybe the PAC-2 is for aircraft and PAC-3 for missile defense, cmiiw

 

[umigami]

AF still call it 'T-50i' not 'F/A-50' so....

Lama Dinanti, Akhirnya Jet Tempur T-50i TNI AU Bakal Dilengkapi Radar
Indo Defence 2018

It doesn't matter what they will call it

 

[Raduga]

Lama Dinanti, Akhirnya Jet Tempur T-50i TNI AU Bakal Dilengkapi Radar
Indo Defence 2018

It doesn't matter what they will call it

kurang "Akan" itu di headline berita nya. , cuman kalo emang bener jadi , moga moga yang dari Elta .

 

[Cromwell]

I don't know much about the Patriot yet, but isn't the PAC-3 specifically made to go against ballistic missiles and can it be used against aircraft as well? most of the other Patriot operators I see operate a mix of PAC-2 and PAC-3 and I thought maybe the PAC-2 is for aircraft and PAC-3 for missile defense, cmiiw

The one spesifically made into anti-ballistic missile is THAAD and forget about this one. This one requires US military personels to man or as observant, something which isn't going to happen in Indonesia.

 

[umigami]

kurang "Akan" itu di headline berita nya. , cuman kalo emang bener jadi , moga moga yang dari Elta .

Actually Skadron 15 was posting a picture of our pilot learning to use ELTA radar with simulator in korea but the post got deleted.

 

[Gen3115]

The one spesifically made into anti-ballistic missile is THAAD and forget about this one. This one requires US military personels to man or as observant, something which isn't going to happen in Indonesia.

https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/articles/20130618.aspx I read here that the PAC-3's are only able to engage missiles and have shorter range at 35 km. Shouldn't we get PAC-2's as well since that has range of 160 km and its also made to engage aircraft and some missiles? it's also cheaper too than the PAC-3's

https://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/patriot-specs.htm

 

[Chestnut]

https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/articles/20130618.aspx I read here that the PAC-3's are only able to engage missiles and have shorter range at 35 km. Shouldn't we get PAC-2's as well since that has range of 160 km and its also made to engage aircraft and some missiles? it's also cheaper too than the PAC-3's

https://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/patriot-specs.htm

You're right, PAC-3 is primarily for engaging missiles and are quad packed onto a canister as a result, though they are still capable of engaging aircraft. But the reason why I support getting PAC-3's over the PAC-2's or the SAMP/T is because the combination or PAC-3's and NASAMS 2's + Oerlikons + AAW frigates make for an all-round IADS setup. And for the most part, we have zero TBM/cruise missile defense capability currently, and in a war against the PLA, you'd see them being a very common threat.

 

[trishna_amṛta]

https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/articles/20130618.aspx I read here that the PAC-3's are only able to engage missiles and have shorter range at 35 km. Shouldn't we get PAC-2's as well since that has range of 160 km and its also made to engage aircraft and some missiles? it's also cheaper too than the PAC-3's

There is no point of using land based missile to engage the launching platform (aircraft). Land based missile role is to go against the inbound missile, while the launching platform will be engage by fighter, hopefully before they have the change to launch their payload.

 

[Jatosint]

There is no point of using land based missile to engage the launching platform (aircraft). Land based missile role is to go against the inbound missile, while the launching platform will be engage by fighter, hopefully before they have the change to launch their payload.

I Agree, It's better and far more efficient to kill the enemy’s archers instead of its arrows

But 'no point'? What is wrong with having a land-based air defense system that can both engage precision-guided munitions and aircraft?