Indonesia Defence Forum

[Chestnut]

norway are seeking to ditch their leopard 2 for K2 black panther

There's no word still whether or not the Norwegians would upgrade their fleet to the A7+ or procure the K2.

 

[Alex898]

Because Russian fanboys are butthurt and it's their only argument 9 times out of 10.

I've seen a lot of "debat kusir" in indonesia millitary youtube channel, our local defense blog, so Im gonna agree with you.

 

[Chestnut]

this talk about Russian vs US/EU military equpiment is quite interesting. but sometimes i wonder, why the embargo topics only came out when we are about to buy new jet fighters ? no one talks about embargo when our striking force navy ships is mostly equipped with exocet, what happens if US told France to not sell exocet to us ? (the same case with egypt Rafale), or no one talk about embargoes when our military transport aircraft only consist Herky, and CN (but CN engines are US made). now, we're gonna build 2 new frigate which I belive will use US/EU weaponry, and no one talks about embargoes ?

that brings out question, does embargoes topics still relevant when we talk about buying new toys ?

Not sure, but the amount of cognitive dissonance is alarming.

 

[Gen3115]

this talk about Russian vs US/EU military equpiment is quite interesting. but sometimes i wonder, why the embargo topics only came out when we are about to buy new jet fighters ? no one talks about embargo when our striking force navy ships is mostly equipped with exocet, what happens if US told France to not sell exocet to us ? (the same case with egypt Rafale), or no one talk about embargoes when our military transport aircraft only consist Herky, and CN (but CN engines are US made). now, we're gonna build 2 new frigate which I belive will use US/EU weaponry, and no one talks about embargoes ?

that brings out question, does embargoes topics still relevant when we talk about buying new toys ?

In my opinion, I guess its probably because whenever people talk about embargo here, they immediately associate it with our American jets being grounded which really wasn't the case.

I may sound a bit biased here, but for me the embargo issue isn't relevant especially when we've proven that we can circumvent it in the past.

 

[Raduga]

after recent frigate contract reveal , now the destroyer rumor soared in our military community again (though they said it's beyond 2024 scope) KDX ? Omega ?

my ideal plan for our navy surface combatant capability before 2030 is let's say
14 or more PKR10514
10 Iver huitfeldt
4-6 Full Fledge naval destroyer (we'd better aiming for multi mission capability like AB class and not just specified to AAW or ASW)

 

[Alex898]

I may sound a bit biased here, but for me the embargo issue isn't relevant especially when we've proven that we can circumvent it in the past.

I agree with you, based on the future procurement of Alutsista that leaked in the internet, I dont see any russian equipment except BTR and the F5 replacements. the rest of it will be US/EU made. so yeah, I dont think the decision maker in the MOD are afraid of embargo, but of course they have considered it as a risk.

 

[Raduga]

There's no word still whether or not the Norwegians would upgrade their fleet to the A7+ or procure the K2.

seeing how the korean does well in their K9 thunder contract , k2 undoubtedly will become another strong contender .
https://www.armyrecognition.com/mar...ding_leopard_2a4nos_or_buying_a_new_tank.html

 

[Alex898]

10 Iver huitfeldt

dont you think thats a bit too much ? I mean the plan for 2024 is only 2 ships, logically 5 ships in 2030 is max. but yeah, you said ideally.

 

[Nike]

after recent frigate contract reveal , now the destroyer rumor soared in our military community again (though they said it's beyond 2024 scope) KDX ? Omega ?

my ideal plan for our navy surface combatant capability before 2030 is let's say
14 or more PKR10514
10 Iver huitfeldt
4-6 Full Fledge naval destroyer (we'd better aiming for multi mission capability like AB class and not just specified to AAW or ASW)

They Will use future opv sans Corvette as main patroler, then combining Frigates like Bung Tomo class and Martadinata class as escort unit for the flagship of Itver class as main unit within the squadron

Oh boy, here we go. "I'm not a Russophile, BUT...."



And considering how many times the Flankers are used on sorties vs. the F-16's, I'd say the Flanker fails in that regard. But don't take my word for it, ask around any of the personnel in the Airbases. Like it or not, the entire AU infrastructure is made to support western aircraft. All the MRO's in country are made to support our western aircraft and they have been for some time. And any attempt to send our Flankers to MRO facilities in Vietnam or setup MRO facilities here are strongly rebuked by the Russians. Compared to Lockheed Martin/General Dynamics (whom allowed and supported PTDI to conduct spare part manufacturing and MRO facilities here as far back as the 80's) I'd say it's a clear cut which one is the better deal here. Exactly how does the Russian deal seem better to you? Explain.



And why doesn't it cut? If it's good enough for higher tier air forces such as the Israeli Air Force, Royal Australian Air Force, and the Republic of Singapore Air Force; why is it not good enough for us? Please explain your reasoning.



And did the Russians not embargo us in the 60's/70's? Whatever happened to the Tu-16's we once operated? All equipment has a chance of an embargo. Britain did so with the Hawks in the 90's as well. The difference is what the United States has shown that compared to Russia or Europe, is that they have a strategic geopolitical interest in keeping us within their circle preventing them from issuing an actual full scale embargo. Case in point is the fact during the embargo, our US supplied airplanes still flew whereas the Soviet embargo in the 60's led to literally every Soviet built plane to fall into disuse. With that in mind, explain exactly how the Indonesian Air Force procuring the SHornet or the Strike Eagle would be a mistake.




Exactly how is the F/A-18 or the F-15 inferior? They have better service records, cheaper operational costs, less problematic maintenance, a much more abundant global supply chain, a much more active assembly line thus being cheaper to produce, and also much more advanced avionics, countermeasures, and weapons packages. Please explain how they are supposedly inferior in your view?



Sounds like a you problem to be honest.



Then maybe you should go back and read through the thread. I'm not the only one here that supports US/EU made aircraft. @Kansel, @striver44, @Nike, @Gen3115 , along with a plethora of other posters have shown studies and articles proving as much.

But I'll throw you a bone. The F-15C (which was first introduced in 1976) is currently fitted or being refitted with the AN/APG-63(v2) and AN/APG-63(v3) AESA radars. The F-15E Strike Eagle (first introduced in 1989) is currently equipped with either the AN/APG-63(v3) or the AN/APG-82(v1) AESA radars. Meanwhile, the Su-35 (first introduced in 2014) uses an Irbis-E PESA radar. Exactly how does a fighter that is equipped with a PESA radar in any way shape or form superior or at least in line with one that is equipped with an AESA radar? It's the 21st century and BVR combat is the name of the game. And an aircraft with a PESA simply can't perform as well in BVR against something with an AESA. Furthermore, the engines of an F-16 and F-15C/E are interchangeable with each other (https://books.google.co.id/books?id=wqfpAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA295&lpg=PA295&dq=are+f-16+and+f15+engines+interchangeable&source=bl&ots=i8PPswUON7&sig=ACfU3U1UmZZmh8PeLj7GvN4pnR-PZ7of2Q&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiY6Keww_zpAhUVH7cAHbS_D40Q6AEwAHoECA8QAQ#v=onepage&q=are f-16 and f15 engines interchangeable&f=false), the engines of the Su-27/30 and the Su-35 are not. Wouldn't this simply cause more logistical issues and maintenance costs? Explain exactly how this would benefit the Indonesian Air Force.

You know, for someone who supposedly isn't a Slavaboo, you're really trying hard to defend something that is wholly inferior.

The Russian units is not dwell rightly within Air Force planning, i am more comfortable with the current plan to get rid of UK and Russian Made fighter and replace it with US Made and South Korean

 

[Indos]

Personally I wouldn't say Russian equipment is inferior, but I do think that US/EU jets suit our needs and existing infrastructure better. I actually think most Russian jets have better flight characteristics than their US/EU counterparts but US/EU jets so far have better avionics and sensors as well as more relevant capabilities.

I wouldn't say the Su-35 is inferior to the F-15 simply because it has a PESA radar compared to the F-15's AESA radar since the Irbis-E despite being a PESA radar is actually quite decent from what I know, but I would say this, the F-15 especially when its an F-100 powered F-15 would fit so much better within the TNI-AU compared to the Su-27/30's we have now. The F-16 and F-15 has been designed to complement each other, they have the highest commonality between the both of them especially if we choose F-100 powered F-15's where our F-16 and F-15's could have interchangeable engines (ROKAF's batch 2 F-15K's had F-100 instead of the F-110 specifically for this reason), not too mention they also share almost the same armaments set meaning they could share the same stock of munitions and on top of that with they can datalink with each other through Link 16 which is important if we want a network centric force for the future and a network centric force is very relevant for an archipelago country the size of Indonesia.

Right now even our Su-27 and Su-30 don't even have high commonality with each other, despite using the same AL-31F type engines, the Su-27 and Su-30 uses engines from different manufacturers, the Su-27SK/SKM has AL-31F from Salyut while the Su-30MK/MK2's has AL-31F's from UMPO. These are different manufacturers which means their engines arent even interchangeable between the Su-27 and Su-30 due to the different sub-components for each engines built by the different manufacturers. Think about it, the Su-27 and Su-30 are in the same squadron, but they can't even share the same engines, I think most of us here know how difficult it is to operate them and their readiness rate, so I don't think I need to go there. I won't fully blame the Russians on this though, its been there philosophy to provide maintenance and overhauling of jets behind the front lines, unlike that of their Western counterparts. http://sukhoi.mariwoj.pl/su-30-id.h...gfpTLjqbHkAyQ5SddjnqSv7Atfpi9NtSpE46ZRJy_hZQA



No Su-30's were shot down, but the R-77's they had failed to reach the F-16's who were successful in taking down a MiG-21, even the US confirmed there were no F-16's shot down and from what I know the US keeps a watch on PAF's F-16's https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-16s-shot-down-in-indian-battle-idUSKCN1RH0IM

There is no prove Su 30 is shot down. I also dont believe F16 is shot down either. It is normal for Pakistan and India to claim here and there, but so far the proven one is only the Mig shoting down.

In my opinion, I guess its probably because whenever people talk about embargo here, they immediately associate it with our American jets being grounded which really wasn't the case.

I may sound a bit biased here, but for me the embargo issue isn't relevant especially when we've proven that we can circumvent it in the past.

View attachment 641199

There was time when we only can fly 2 F 16 while the rest were cannibalized. You were still little kid at that time so you dont know the true story.

At the Bawean incident, we only have 2 F16 to fly.

 

[Alex898]

There is no prove Su 30 is shot down. I also dont believe F16 is shot down either

I think the point is not about that, SU 30 as a heavyweight fighter supposed to engage the F16 and shot it down, instead it was forced to disengaged by F16 AMRAAM, and did not able to retaliate because the its lack of BVR missile capability (R77)

 

[Indos]

I think the point is not about that, SU 30 as a heavyweight fighter supposed to engage the F16 and shot it down, instead it was forced to disengaged by F16 AMRAAM, and did not able to retaliate because the its lack of BVR missile capability (R77)

Su 30 is not good at BVR capability compared to American jets. It is proven in Blact Pitch games. It win WVR but lost in BVR. It is what I remember when I read the comment from our pilots.

Despite that, due to the range it can cover and the heavy armament it can carry. Sukhoi is still one of the prefered one, thats why when Air Force is asked about the fighter they want to get, it gave two option which are F16 and Su35and the government chose Su35.

But there maybe kick back happening during SBY term when we acquire Su 30 since there is broker on the deal and it has relation with Democrate party. Metro TV tried to find the location of the broker office, and they found the office is not credible.

 

[Gen3115]

I agree with you, based on the future procurement of Alutsista that leaked in the internet, I dont see any russian equipment except BTR and the F5 replacements. the rest of it will be US/EU made. so yeah, I dont think the decision maker in the MOD are afraid of embargo, but of course they have considered it as a risk.

Every weapon system we buy, build and own has its risks, it just depends on how we manage those risks and it just so happens some weapons systems are easier to manage than others

This is a valid argument for when we haven't bought the Flankers.



"Yada yada yada iPhone is better than Android, 'cause I said so, yada yada yada."

"Who cares about service ceiling, rate of climb, operational range, angle of attack, maneuverability, radar detection range, power to weight ratio, MTOW or other technical mumbo jumbo because AESA STRONG will trump everything and anything under the sun. And in case I haven't told you, 'cause I said my iPhone is better than your Android so IT IS!"

Bruh, I never said one is better than the other simply because I said so, but I did say that it just suits us better. If you're using the iPhone vs Android analogy then how about this, if you have a Macbook, an iPad, Apple Watch and any other Apple product it'd be better for you to have an iPhone wouldn't it? since with the iPhone you can use AirDrop with your other devices to share photos and files and if you're getting a newer iPhone your data automatically transfers from the old phone, not too mention you can get guarantees and customer service from the iBox store for the devices. If you have an Android while the rest of your devices are Apple products then you still get the job done, but it just less convenient isn't it? Well thats literally the same case with us and our NATO-standard US/EU systems. Does it mean Androids are shit? nope. Does it mean iPhone's are shit? nope, but it does show which phone you could buy that offers more convenience with the other devices you have.

Also I did say that Russian jets have better flight characteristics than their US/EU counterparts, I don't deny that. But rate of climb, maneuverability, power to weight is mostly relevant when it comes to WVR engagements, meanwhile nowadays we've mostly evolved to BVR engagements where avionics and sensors play a more important part, which is why you see everyone from US, EU countries to even China investing in AESA radars rather than the older mechanical scan or passive radars, even Russia is also going into AESA with Byelka and Zhuk-AE, although comparably later than their US, EU and Chinese counterparts. Again, never said you should underestimate flight characteristics, but in today's world avionics and sensors are increasingly playing a more important part.

This is a valid argument for when we haven't bought the Flankers.

so what? you're saying we should just stick with the mess we're stuck with right now? not too mention the political obstacles we face operating these jets?

There is no prove Su 30 is shot down. I also dont believe F16 is shot down either. It is normal for Pakistan and India to claim here and there, but so far the proven one is only the Mig shoting down.



There was time when we only can fly 2 F 16 while the rest were cannibalized. You were still little kid at that time so you dont know the true story.

At the Bawean incident, we only have 2 F16 to fly.

Sorry for not being clear enough, my point was not whether an Su-30 got shot down or not, my point is the F-16's with the AIM-120C-5's were able not only to shoot down a MiG-21 but was also able to get the Su-30's to go cold. Plus the no F-16 loss claim didn't only come from Pakistan, it also came from US who's had Pak F-16's under surveillance.

lol, then tell me the true story then

 

[JCMan]

Every weapon system we buy, build and own has its risks, it just depends on how we manage those risks and it just so happens some weapons systems are easier to manage than others


Bruh, I never said one is better than the other simply because I said so, but I did say that it just suits us better. If you're using the iPhone vs Android analogy then how about this, if you have a Macbook, an iPad, Apple Watch and any other Apple product it'd be better for you to have an iPhone wouldn't it? since with the iPhone you can use AirDrop with your other devices to share photos and files and if you're getting a newer iPhone your data automatically transfers from the old phone, not too mention you can get guarantees and customer service from the iBox store for the devices. If you have an Android while the rest of your devices are Apple products then you still get the job done, but it just less convenient isn't it? Well thats literally the same case with us and our NATO-standard US/EU systems. Does it mean Androids are shit? nope. Does it mean iPhone's are shit? nope, but it does show which phone you could buy that offers more convenience with the other devices you have.

Also I did say that Russian jets have better flight characteristics than their US/EU counterparts, I don't deny that. But rate of climb, maneuverability, power to weight is mostly relevant when it comes to WVR engagements, meanwhile nowadays we've mostly evolved to BVR engagements where avionics and sensors play a more important part, which is why you see everyone from US, EU countries to even China investing in AESA radars rather than the older mechanical scan or passive radars, even Russia is also going into AESA with Byelka and Zhuk-AE. Again, never said you should underestimate flight characteristics, but in today's world avionics and sensors are increasingly playing a more important part.



so what? you're saying we should just stick with the mess we're stuck with right now? not too mention the political obstacles we face operating these jets?

Sorry, actually I was trying to answer Chestnut's post but misquoted yours instead, that particular post has since been deleted so please consider this as a correction.

And no, we shouldn't fix a leak by throwing more water (money) down the drain. If indeed the Flankers are hurting our budget due to its maintenance cost, then splashing billions of dollars to buy a new type of plane and start our learning curve in terms of familiarization from zero again will not help our budget situation in any way, shape or form.

Oh boy, here we go. "I'm not a Russophile, BUT...."



And considering how many times the Flankers are used on sorties vs. the F-16's, I'd say the Flanker fails in that regard. But don't take my word for it, ask around any of the personnel in the Airbases. Like it or not, the entire AU infrastructure is made to support western aircraft. All the MRO's in country are made to support our western aircraft and they have been for some time. And any attempt to send our Flankers to MRO facilities in Vietnam or setup MRO facilities here are strongly rebuked by the Russians. Compared to Lockheed Martin/General Dynamics (whom allowed and supported PTDI to conduct spare part manufacturing and MRO facilities here as far back as the 80's) I'd say it's a clear cut which one is the better deal here. Exactly how does the Russian deal seem better to you? Explain.



And why doesn't it cut? If it's good enough for higher tier air forces such as the Israeli Air Force, Royal Australian Air Force, and the Republic of Singapore Air Force; why is it not good enough for us? Please explain your reasoning.



And did the Russians not embargo us in the 60's/70's? Whatever happened to the Tu-16's we once operated? All equipment has a chance of an embargo. Britain did so with the Hawks in the 90's as well. The difference is what the United States has shown that compared to Russia or Europe, is that they have a strategic geopolitical interest in keeping us within their circle preventing them from issuing an actual full scale embargo. Case in point is the fact during the embargo, our US supplied airplanes still flew whereas the Soviet embargo in the 60's led to literally every Soviet built plane to fall into disuse. With that in mind, explain exactly how the Indonesian Air Force procuring the SHornet or the Strike Eagle would be a mistake.




Exactly how is the F/A-18 or the F-15 inferior? They have better service records, cheaper operational costs, less problematic maintenance, a much more abundant global supply chain, a much more active assembly line thus being cheaper to produce, and also much more advanced avionics, countermeasures, and weapons packages. Please explain how they are supposedly inferior in your view?



Sounds like a you problem to be honest.



Then maybe you should go back and read through the thread. I'm not the only one here that supports US/EU made aircraft. @Kansel, @striver44, @Nike, @Gen3115 , along with a plethora of other posters have shown studies and articles proving as much.

But I'll throw you a bone. The F-15C (which was first introduced in 1976) is currently fitted or being refitted with the AN/APG-63(v2) and AN/APG-63(v3) AESA radars. The F-15E Strike Eagle (first introduced in 1989) is currently equipped with either the AN/APG-63(v3) or the AN/APG-82(v1) AESA radars. Meanwhile, the Su-35 (first introduced in 2014) uses an Irbis-E PESA radar. Exactly how does a fighter that is equipped with a PESA radar in any way shape or form superior or at least in line with one that is equipped with an AESA radar? It's the 21st century and BVR combat is the name of the game. And an aircraft with a PESA simply can't perform as well in BVR against something with an AESA. Furthermore, the engines of an F-16 and F-15C/E are interchangeable with each other (https://books.google.co.id/books?id=wqfpAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA295&lpg=PA295&dq=are+f-16+and+f15+engines+interchangeable&source=bl&ots=i8PPswUON7&sig=ACfU3U1UmZZmh8PeLj7GvN4pnR-PZ7of2Q&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiY6Keww_zpAhUVH7cAHbS_D40Q6AEwAHoECA8QAQ#v=onepage&q=are f-16 and f15 engines interchangeable&f=false), the engines of the Su-27/30 and the Su-35 are not. Wouldn't this simply cause more logistical issues and maintenance costs? Explain exactly how this would benefit the Indonesian Air Force.

You know, for someone who supposedly isn't a Slavaboo, you're really trying hard to defend something that is wholly inferior.

"Yada yada yada iPhone is better than Android, 'cause I said so, yada yada yada."

"Who cares about service ceiling, rate of climb, operational range, angle of attack, maneuverability, radar detection range, thrust to weight ratio, MTOW or other technical mumbo jumbo because AESA STRONG will trump everything and anything under the sun. And in case I haven't told you, 'cause I said my iPhone is better than your Android so IT IS!"

 

[Indos]

Did we deploy AWACS like the Aussies did? I must've missed that.

[/QUOTE]

I dont think AWACS was allowed on the Pitch Black Game. Oya it was surely Sukhoi bought during Megawati administration. We dont know the capability with the ones bought by SBY which has better avionics. I read at Angkasa magazine if I am not mistaken.

Any way we can still upgrade our SU 30 radar.