The problem for you my guy, what am I a fanboy of? Am I a Russophile because I stand for keeping our Flankers and buying more? Am I a Koreaboo because support the continuation of the KFX program? Or am I a Turkophile because I wanted for the Pussenkav to buy the Pindad-Turkey joint venture MMWT Harimau tanks? On the other hand, you my guy are clearly a Yankophile through and through, even a casual observer can see right through you from the first day you started commenting on this forum.
Ah yes, I am definitely a free-a-boo. Hence why I wrote an in depth post about why the AD should use the SAMP/T and the the Leopard 2 over the Patriot and Abrams, and how the Navy should stick to European missiles.
The difference between me and you is that I might make my appreciation of the US known, but I don't let my emotions guide me when it comes to a topic of serious discussion regarding that appreciation.
Who called me out? You and your homeboys? Sorry to break your heart, but responding to each one of your bromance pals doesn't really motivate me much, because firstly, they only regurgitated your viewpoints, and secondly I neither have the time nor the enthusiasm for repeating my points to each and every one of your homeys.
Ah yes, everyone that disagrees and debunked you is clearly brainwashed and wrong because JCMan can never be wrong. God forbid someone disagrees with you over anything. At this point you're just insinuating that other people can't/shouldn't draw up their own conclusions and arrive at the same point as me. And if they do that means they're wrong because obviously you're right.
If that's not narcissism I don't know what is.
Contrary to popular belief, I don't hate you personally per se. Heck I even understood that marketing people like you needed to make a living, right? And we all know in order to sell stuff, marketing people needed to create a buzz. But what I don't like is the way you always tried to divert programs that our military or industry have invested a lot of time, effort, and most of all money just so that they should buy products or systems that you endorse or approve, or what you personally whimsically think are good for our country (partly due to fanboyish bias perhaps, or just plain old financial motivations), just on account because you said so.
My guy, the first post you made was directed at me and so does the majority of your other posts. You literally told everyone how you were a silent observer but you felt the need to "correct" me over something that YOU perceive as wrong. You're literally acting like a crazy ex-Girlfriend right now lmao.
And it's cute that you're trying to do the faux sympathy act. But I'll throw yet another bone. If what you're saying is true and I am a salesman trying to generate buzz, Why would I post on a forum defense forum to do that?
I don't know if you realize how our defense procurement works, but I don't need to post here to do that. In fact I actually don't need to hear your opinion or the opinions of others really. If I REALLY wanted to sell something, I would just schedule a meeting with the head or deputy head of a branch like PUSENKAV or PUSPENERBAD and just go from there. The public's opinion is not important in a closed door procurement system. So even if what you say is true, there isn't anything you can do to stop me from swinging the perception of those in power to potentially buy the stuff I am selling. So it's still pretty funny to me that you're wasting your breath screaming at a ghost.
Don't believe me? Look at the second batch of Astros II's. How many people knew about that second batch?
You'd prefer we turn all of those investments into nothing just on account of what you think should happen in your head, WITHOUT any valid data, comparison, or factually provable information. I stand for consistency in the decisions that we made, waited for, put effort on, and payed for. If something went wrong, then let's fix those mistakes and improve things. Not just abandon ship, let those cost sunk into nothing, and just steer into short term programs that just suits some foreign defense companies' needs. I'd prefer for us to pay for our mistakes (if they were mistakes after all) rather than take shortcuts because our country is ruined by taking too many shortcuts, if you fail to see that already.
So in your words you're saying that you support corrupt dealings, inconsistent choices, and bad defense planning? And that you prefer to let those things go through for what exactly? Even if those things costs billions in taxpayer revenue not just now, but for the entire lifetime of that asset?
You're a hardened veteran in this field, right? Surely you can come up with solutions to improve ongoing programs rather than always offering short term solutions (which involved buying things from foreign defense companies almost all of the time) and steering those programs into potential source of income for people you used to (or still) represent.
I do offer solutions, you personally just don't like them for one reason or another. I'm just the hard to swallow pill.
All I hear from you are highly biased and prejudiced things that you think are right in your mind, what you heard from some high ranking official somewhere that you supposed to know, what you copy pasted from media that supported your viewpoints, yada yada yada I'm a big shot experienced defense contractor representative who knows some big brass somewhere so you better listen, because I'm always right!
Projection much?
Sorry guy, your tone made people think that you're taking them for a ride, always trying to steer and spin things to your benefits, rather than sounding like a genuine professional giving advice in the best interest of the Republic of Indonesia, something that someone with your experience and connections should easily be able to do.
Oh really? What's your credentials then? Exactly by what metric are you using to come up to that conclusion and what qualifies you to give advice on what I should or should not do? Because morality and norm is pretty useless in a technical debate.
The onus is on you to prove that indeed some fighters in our inventory were indeed "hangar queens" all the while you admitted that calculating the CPFH of fighters is difficult and may vary by country for a plethora of reasons. How can we say that fighter A is expensive to maintain and are hangar queens if we don't even know it's exact maintenance costs, unless the Air Force gave that data to us?
I did provide sources, but as usual you'd rather just deny and question them because that's who you are. You just can never admit you're wrong.
You insisted that our Flankers were only used during parades and major exercises, but another poster here have proven that it was not the case, and I would also argue that even in Russia they only use their Flankers during important military maneuvers while for regular training and drills their Flanker pilots used the Yak-130 instead. It made perfect sense that the more maintenance heavy fighters used more sparingly by an Air Force than the less maintenance heavy ones, I reckon even the USAF's F-16s would have more flight hours than their F-15s or F-22s, for example.
That other poster literally provided sources that BACK UP my claim. All those sources only displayed major exercises and PR events. So how exactly am I wrong?
Also, are you legit comparing the TNI AU's Flankers to that of the Russian VVS? Pause for a second, think about what you just said. You are comparing a customer with ZERO MRO facilities to that of the original producer. Do you realize how stupid that argument is?
