Indonesia Defence Forum

[striver44]

Mereka bisa muter sendiri out of control, .

that is giant bow 23mm gun iirc, not norinco 35mm AA copycat

 

[Jatosint]

Well naming convention should not be bothered as Indonesia is still far cry from having such problem at hands.

Marines corps to own their dedicated SPAAG? In the current set up they are using BVP 2 for such roles, btw why the marines not actively looking for BMP 2 or BVP 2 excess article? Marines Corps is in dire need for Amphibious armor as their third division set up is without armor and the rest is lacking armor in their inventory

Hmmmm 12 SP and 12 Towed = 4 SP and 4 Towed for each Pasmar?.

Anyway, if Kormar looking for Russian SPAAG, probably they should choose Derivatsiya-PVO SPAAG for the sake of commonality:
-Based on BMP-3F
-Use 57mm munition (probably it can use the same munition from S-60 or Navy's 57mm naval gun)
-Russia claimed that it can shot not just low-flying aircraft/helicopter/uav, but also rocket and cruise missile

For towed ones,(if what Alman said is accurate) the budget is quite small, only $39 million, so I guess it will be AA-Gun and not SAM? Well if it's AA-Gun, i hope they can get something that is automated

so alman looks very dissapointed with norinco SPAAG, what's the problem btw.?? any idea @Chestnut

Probably due to Giant Bow incident in Natuna which killed 4 soldiers

 

[Raduga]

Hmmmm 12 SP and 12 Towed = 4 SP and 4 Towed for each Pasmar?.

Anyway, if Kormar looking for Russian SPAAG, probably they should choose Derivatsiya-PVO SPAAG for the sake of commonality:
-Based on BMP-3F
-Use 57mm munition (probably it can use the same munition from S-60 or Navy's 57mm naval gun)
-Russia claimed that it can shot not just low-flying aircraft/helicopter/uav, but also rocket and cruise missile

For towed ones,(if what Alman said is accurate) the budget is quite small, only $39 million, so I guess it will be AA-Gun and not SAM? Well if it's AA-Gun, i hope they can get something that is automated


Probably due to Giant Bow incident in Natuna which killed 4 soldiers

BMP Sosna

 

[striver44]

consider just how poorly russian SAM(and many other weaps system) performed I think it's better to find for other weaps supplier, anyone but russia please.

 

[Nike]

Hmmmm 12 SP and 12 Towed = 4 SP and 4 Towed for each Pasmar?.

Anyway, if Kormar looking for Russian SPAAG, probably they should choose Derivatsiya-PVO SPAAG for the sake of commonality:
-Based on BMP-3F
-Use 57mm munition (probably it can use the same munition from S-60 or Navy's 57mm naval gun)
-Russia claimed that it can shot not just low-flying aircraft/helicopter/uav, but also rocket and cruise missile

For towed ones,(if what Alman said is accurate) the budget is quite small, only $39 million, so I guess it will be AA-Gun and not SAM? Well if it's AA-Gun, i hope they can get something that is automated


Probably due to Giant Bow incident in Natuna which killed 4 soldiers

If the proposed budget just like what he said of around 263 million us dollar for 12 system, then K30 biho is quite acceptable at that range. India just ordered for around 2,5 billion US dollar for 104 system and all the logistick and commands system from Hanwa. The plus side, Biho chasis still retain their Amphibious capability

And it seems Korkut SPAAG too is within this kind price range , and Korkut is Amphibious too

Indonesia delegation including the Navy member

 

[Nike]

what is the objective of an military? To win the war and destroying the enemies!!! Not to win the minds and hearts of the population and civillian from enemies sides!!!

Thats game to win the minds and hearts clearly made the objective of the conflict itself become obscured and inflicted self defeat on the purposes.

 

[Jatosint]

BMP Sosna

Ah yes, I forgot about Sosna

what is the objective of an military? To win the war and destroying the enemies!!! Not to win the minds and hearts of the population and civillian from enemies sides!!!

Thats game to win the minds and hearts clearly made the objective of the conflict itself become obscured and inflicted self defeat on the purposes.

Nope. It is a lot easier to destroy your enemy when the local population is on your side, or at least neutral. Take GAM, Fretilin, MIT, and OPM for example, to some extent they relied heavily on the local population to support them (logistics, informant, recruitment, etc). Also, in this era of democracy, social media, free press, etc., it is very important for a military operation or even a military institution itself to secure legitimacy by winning the hearts and minds of the population. Remember how public opinion in the US influences the Vietnamese war? East Timor referendum?

Of course one may argue that the responsibility to win the hearts and mins of the population should not be solely/mainly given to the military since it will potentially distract the military from its primary role: to destroy the enemy. But still, having support from the population will make your day a lot easier, so is the opposite.

 

[striver44]

what is the objective of an military? To win the war and destroying the enemies!!! Not to win the minds and hearts of the population and civillian from enemies sides!!!

Thats game to win the minds and hearts clearly made the objective of the conflict itself become obscured and inflicted self defeat on the purposes.

winning wars and winning battles are two very different things. you can win as much battle as you could but is not going to win war when you demonize the population of the adversaries.
just look at afghanistan war, the US never lost a single battle against the taliban, but many argue that the war is already lost.

 

[Chestnut]

so alman looks very dissapointed with norinco SPAAG, what's the problem btw.?? any idea @Chestnut

https://www.liputan6.com/news/read/2955420/4-prajurit-tni-gugur-saat-latihan-di-natuna

I am a bit ok with not getting Su-35 because of CAATSA, but I'm a bit worried about the Marines not being able to get stuff because of CAATSA though, will take time for them to transition to NATO standard equipment if they're really forced to

Then like it or not they would have to adapt. They're used to NATO equipment since they've already operated plenty of them before. It's not really an excuse for them to stick to Russian stuff.

Hmmmm 12 SP and 12 Towed = 4 SP and 4 Towed for each Pasmar?.

Anyway, if Kormar looking for Russian SPAAG, probably they should choose Derivatsiya-PVO SPAAG for the sake of commonality:
-Based on BMP-3F
-Use 57mm munition (probably it can use the same munition from S-60 or Navy's 57mm naval gun)
-Russia claimed that it can shot not just low-flying aircraft/helicopter/uav, but also rocket and cruise missile

For towed ones,(if what Alman said is accurate) the budget is quite small, only $39 million, so I guess it will be AA-Gun and not SAM? Well if it's AA-Gun, i hope they can get something that is automated


Probably due to Giant Bow incident in Natuna which killed 4 soldiers

BMP Sosna

CAATSA: "I'm gonna do what's called a pro-gamer move"

consider just how poorly russian SAM(and many other weaps system) performed I think it's better to find for other weaps supplier, anyone but russia please.

If they wanted something cheaper yet effective they can just repurpose the old AMX hulls with the Crotale NG turret.

 

[Nike]

Not really. It is a lot easier to destroy your enemy when the local population is on your side, or at least neutral. Take GAM, Fretilin, MIT, and OPM for example, to some extent they relied heavily on the local population to support them (logistics, informant, recruitment, etc). Also, in this era of democracy, social media, free press, etc., it is very important for a military operation or even a military institution itself to secure legitimacy by winning the hearts and minds of the population. Remember how public opinion in the US influences the Vietnamese war? East Timor referendum?

There is miss about your conclussion. US is failed because they dont have clear objective on how to end Vietnam war and how to proceed it, instead they drag it down while trying to put South Vietnam as the front liner and giving supporting roles, and they eventually failed to gather their own public rally to support such continues war. Indonesia military is not failed in Timor, but rather they cant put their hold together what is their objective while governing Timor (especially Indonesia quasi military style dictatorial government) and the order to put everything under military shoes what failed us and diplomatic blunder at the time deprived Indonesia from foreign support , not even Soeharto style institution can prevail in Jakarta. There is nothing to do with the military need to win the minds and hearts for oponnents population. Modern military should taking it roots for their original purposes to defend the country and defeat the Nation enemies. You only walking the path of imperialism if you starting to talking to win the minds and hearts of oponnents population

 

[Jatosint]

CAATSA: "I'm gonna do what's called a pro-gamer move"

Wamenhan's statement about the possibility of Su-35 cancelation and replaced it by F-35 is a clear sign that our MoD is very concerned about CAATSA. However, there seems to be no US pressure on BT-3F and BMP-3F contract, and last month the request to procure a further batch of BT-3F has been approved by the 1st Commission.

So perhaps the US will only use its CAATSA cards for something sophisticated and significant like fighter aircraft, long-range SAM, subs, etc., and they will leave us alone for something that is 'B aja' like APC, IFV, and maybe SHORAD

 

[Nike]

winning wars and winning battles are two very different things. you can win as much battle as you could but is not going to win war when you demonize the population of the adversaries.
just look at afghanistan war, the US never lost a single battle against the taliban, but many argue that the war is already lost.

What is the purpose of US staying in the Afghanistan? The very presence of them in Afghanistan is clearly deviate from their original purposes or objective to punish Afghanistan establishment who shielded Al Qaeda just like Bush said before, "initial military objectives of OEF, as articulated by President in his 20 September Address to a Joint Session of Congress and his 7 October address to the country, included the destruction of terrorist training camps and infrastructure within Afghanistan, the capture of Al Qaeda leaders, and the cessation of terrorist activities in Afghanistan."

US doesnt need to win the minds and hearts of Japanese people during their conflict, instead pure engagements and clear objective to destroying their fighting spirit and subdue them to the knee is what made them the victor and awe the Japanese until today. The same can be said for Russian German conflict, military engagements should be viewed purely from military standpoints, meaningless effort to win over the oponnents population is symbol of the weakness instead.

 

[Jatosint]

There is miss about your conclussion. US is failed because they dont have clear objective on how to end Vietnam war and how to proceed it, instead they drag it down while trying to put South Vietnam as the front liner and giving supporting roles, and they eventually failed to gather their own public rally to support such continues war. Indonesia military is not failed in Timor, but rather they cant put their hold together what is their objective while governing Timor (especially Indonesia quasi military style dictatorial government) and the order to put everything under military shoes what failed us and diplomatic blunder at the time deprived Indonesia from foreign support , not even Soeharto style institution can prevail in Jakarta. There is nothing to do with the military need to win the minds and hearts for oponnents population. Modern military should taking it roots for their original purposes to defend the country and defeat the Nation enemies. You only walking the path of imperialism if you starting to talking to win the minds and hearts of oponnents population

Dude, one of the reasons why most of the East Timor population chose independence was because of the bad reputation of our military there (terlepas dari benar atau enggaknya semua tuduhan pelanggaran HAM). Remember the Santa-Cruz incident?

Also, neglecting the importance of winning the support of the local population, especially in terms of Human Right violation conducted by TNI/Polri personnel, is exactly one of the reasons why we still have conflict in Papua. Read LIPI's 'Road Map Papua' book
http://lipi.go.id/risetunggulan/single/buku-road-map-papua/16

 

[Nike]

Dude, one of the reasons why most of the East Timor population chose independence was because of the bad reputation of our military there (terlepas dari benar atau enggaknya semua tuduhan pelanggaran HAM). Remember the Santa-Cruz incident?

Also, neglecting the importance of winning the support of the local population, especially in terms of Human Right violation conducted by TNI/Polri personnel, is exactly one of the reasons why we still have conflict in Papua. Read LIPI's 'Road Map Papua' book
http://lipi.go.id/risetunggulan/single/buku-road-map-papua/16

I am not a dude though

Drawing for past lesson, without harsh lesson to demoralized the oponnents fighting spirit entirely it will be a futile efforts for the military to employ win the minds and hearts tactics, those kind of roles should be under civillian jobdesk.

What military can do is to conducts discipline in engagements, professionally doing their jobs as soldiers and not cross the human rights value of un armed oponnents. But they should not engaged too much in such win the minds and hearts tactics.

For Papua issue, i am always the proponnent to push the police to taking the whole responsibility in Papua, not the military. Military should stay in Camps and the border. The reason should be clear. Papua is not under military threat, those nuisance actually can be handle by the police if we are looking at what the police capable off, it just the army want to get playing in the ponds what made me baffle. Resources competition is at play here

 

[Chestnut]

Wamenhan's statement about the possibility of Su-35 cancelation and replaced it by F-35 is a clear sign that our MoD is very concerned about CAATSA. However, there seems to be no US pressure on BT-3F and BMP-3F contract, and last month the request to procure a further batch of BT-3F has been approved by the 1st Commission.

So perhaps the US will only use its CAATSA cards for something sophisticated and significant like fighter aircraft, long-range SAM, subs, etc., and they will leave us alone for something that is 'B aja' like APC, IFV, and maybe SHORAD

I can guarantee that is not the case. CAATSA is all encompassing, to leave it out for 'smaller' purchases would defeat the whole purpose of the act. That is why the Marines are apparently looking at the AAVP-7 from BAE as a replacement for the BT-3F. Also, you'd be hard pressed to find a bank that is willing to finance a Russian arms deal right now.