What's new

Indonesia Defence Forum

Carl gustav is in limited roles within limited units
Maaaan, I wish we just standardized our anti-materiel weapons. I'm surprised Pindad haven't come up with anything in this regard. Would love to see light AT role equipped with disposable launchers (AT-4, C-90) incorporated into our rifle squad with the heavier stuff like CG/PF-98 in the weapon squad.
 
Last edited:
. . . .
Maaaan, I wish we just standardized our anti-materiel weapons. I'm surprised Pindad haven't come up with anything in this regard. Would love to see light AT role equipped with disposable launchers (AT-4, C-90) incorporated into our rifle squad with the heavier stuff like CG/PF-98 in the weapon squad.

If you can designing a more complex MLRS , rocket pods and even designing an gas turbine engine or diesel engine, to designing and mass producing something like RPG 7 and Carl gustav is no biggy actually. The real problem is on the end user side.
 
. .
The real problem is on the end user side
yea, from budgetary issue to domestic/international political issue gives uncertainty to home grown military industry. I wonder what happen to KKIP now? They getting mothballed?
 
.
yea, from budgetary issue to domestic/international political issue gives uncertainty to home grown military industry. I wonder what happen to KKIP now? They getting mothballed?

Hmm what are you talking about? i don't talk about that.
What i mean about end user is,
first, their current tactical operation (doctrine, perceived threat, education and training) doesn't warrant the need for significant anti armor ability at tactical platoon and squad level
second, TNI AD is still catching up at anti armor technology. But they only use that for educational need not at tactical operational as a whole
Third, our defense industry is capable enough to designing and build en masse such basic anti armor equipment (the likes of Carl Gustav, RPG 7 and so on) but we are not engaging in such adventure because back to point one, there is no need from end user.
 
.
There's nothing wrong with having the 105mm gun because:

A) We're not in Europe

B) Ammunition aplenty after most AF adopted the 120mm

C) Exceptional urban combat capability compared to the 120mm

D) We still be able to Pierce like 90% of the enemy's armor.

Also we have licensed production with the Belgian to produce this gun.

If we talking about tank gun we should be eying this:

 
.
can anyone confirmed this ? i heard our TA-50 in last night accident got major damage , because there was a report the use of ejection seat by the pilot.
 
. . . .
a neat stuff i found on FB
https://www.icarus-aerospace.com/tactical-air-vehicle-tav/
https://www.icarus-aerospace.com/branta/
upload_2020-8-11_18-18-52.png

upload_2020-8-11_18-19-11.png


WASP
icarus-aerospace-2020-02.jpg


BRANTA (High altitude , long endurance , long glider wing variants)
icarus-aerospace-2020-02-04.jpg

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i wonder rather than investing on strictly Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Squadron , we could seek an RPV / OPV (Optionally piloted) attack plane such as this , it can be turned into full fledge UAV or even Piloted Plane up to mission requirements .
 
. .

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom