Vietnam strategic plans for building defence capability: Facts and Analysis

[BoQ77]

Absolutely, they are very good fighters.

Well, another example, just think about tiny Israel, now and before. In the past they didn't have as much equipment, but they always win against superior forces. There is stalemate, only when they refuse to push all the way, like in Lebanon or Gaza, usually for political reasons or US pressure. Otherwise, nobody can stop the Israeli army.

Inferior Arab armies is a lucky for Israel. I don't believe there're someone think VPA as inferior as Arab Armies.
If Arab armies as good as VPA, there wouldn't have Israel.

Israel captured some Mig-21 from Egypt or Syria back to 1960s and provided to US for studying.
The lesson learn applied to aerial combats in North Vietnam, while we know nothing about US fighters before. Soviet Union even provided Arab Mig-23, while the best Vietnam has is Mig-21

During April 1965 to Nov 1968 there're 268 air combats in North Vietnam, US lost 244 aircrafts, Vietnam 85
During 1969, Egypt lost 48, Israel lost only 5

 

[Carlosa]

Inferior Arab armies is a lucky for Israel. I don't believe there're someone think VPA as inferior as Arab Armies.
If Arab armies as good as VPA, there wouldn't have Israel.

Israel captured some Mig-21 from Egypt or Syria back to 1960s and provided to US for studying.
The lesson learn applied to aerial combats in North Vietnam, while we know nothing about US fighters before. Soviet Union even provided Arab Mig-23, while the best Vietnam has is Mig-21

There is definitely a big difference between the VPA and the Syrian army and if someone doesn't see it, they are blind, but people have a right to be blind if they want to. Oh well.

I'm going to sleep for a few hours man, take it easy, we continue later. I did enough fighting for today.

 

[sweetgrape]

To be fair, have to remember that the IDF is just about, man per man, the best army in the world, so not many armies look very good when compared to them. The Golani brigade is one of the best units in the Israeli army, if not the best one, so how many others compare well against them? Also, the Golani brigade is one of the most battle hardened units of the IDF and that certainly makes a difference also. Lets not forget that the IDF is in a constant state of semi warfare.

The Vietnamese army certainly has weaknesses, but also have strengths, their special forces are second to none, the marine special forces leave the US navy seals way behind, its just amazing how they train and what they are able to do, the chinese are particularly weary about them because they know what they can do as they found out the hard way in some skirmishes in the SCS (these things were never published by the way, but very real, Eldad reef, etc).

Also, the mobilization capability of the Vietnamese military is second to none and very similar to the IDF. I've seen it myself at one point when a typhoon was approaching central Vietnam and the military mobilized over 100.000 servicemen and militiamen in one area in 24 hours. How many militaries can do that? The US certainly can't, that I know for sure.

So lets be balanced. They need to improve in some areas, but they are doing quite well in other areas. They've been setting up a number of independent brigades for some years now and they are doing quite a bit of experimenting.

I can also say that they train a lot. I would also caution about rushing to conclusions since the Vietnamese army is very secretive, they let you see what they want you to see and nothing else. That also applies to what equipment they have. There are many weapon systems that they are known to have but not a single picture of them have ever been published, ex: Thor air defense systems, SAM-6, etc. They are known for that, so again, unless you have classified information, I would not rush to conclusions too easily. My 2 cents....

From you comments, I find a superpowerful army, hehe, you are so confident, the confidence is from pride and ignorance,

 

[BoQ77]

Timelines,
In 2009, the Hong Ha shipyard started to build the first TT-400TP, a 400 tonnage gunboat by modular method, and completed after over 2 years in 2011. The director said that they sent engineers oversea to study on this method maybe since 2004.
In 1999, Vietnam bought 2x of Molniya built entirely in Russia. 2007 received.
In 2011 they started to build Molniya domestically in BaSon shipyard, and integrated weapons on it.

In 2006 contracted for 2 first Gepards, received 2010
2016 next 2 Gepard on going build, no domestic plan.
2009-2010 rumor about Sigma-class started
2011 first DN-2000 start, 2016 8x DN completed, no Sigma-class updated.
-----------
I found a link between these.
Engines are not problem to Vietnam, no matter they're Ukraine or German.
It could be translated as:
Vietnam bought 2x first Molniya boats for training and performance test, while keep negotiating on KH-35 production line.
They ever think about buying or build Molniya based on detailed design at high price or just buy the basic design and self built it ?
Once TT-400TP project succeeded on the latter way in 2011, they restarted the domestic Molniya project.
Look deep into TT-400TP project, Hong Ha shipyard director said
"Even foreign specialists are surprised that TT-400TP naval gun could shoot exact at first shot, while they need several adjustment before getting the perfect shot" That means there're different method of building applied, maybe in foreign facility they didn't adopt modular approach.

The director said "buying basic design costs only some hundred thousand dollars ( and Hong Ha must develop into details ) so that the domestic hull cost is about 1 million dollars at the time ( 2009-2011 )

Ba Son shipyard may get benefit from that experiment in Molniya project. The Molniya is basically different from TT-400TP by missiles and sensors only.

Molniya boats are only fruitful with domestic Kh-35 production.

Modular method XP in TT-400TP and gunboat, CIWS integrated
Missiles production and integrated sensors XP in Molniya
DN-2000 modular approach succeeded.

Let imagine what combined XP could be ?

>> this lead to @Carlosa to think about transform DN-2000 to missile guided frigates. Yes they are prepared for that.
>> and modular 1000+ tonnage ship, also follow Carlosa.

Đại tá kể: “Các chuyên gia nước ngoài ngạc nhiên noi rằng ở nước họ phải bắn thử mấy lần, rồi về phải chỉnh lại bắn mới đúng mục tiêu. Nhưng tàu do người VN đóng chỉ cần bắn thử một lần đã đạt độ chính xác đến hoàn hảo”.

Bước ngoặt đột phá

Bảy năm trước, khi nhận công tác giám đốc Nhà máy Z173, đại tá Nguyễn Văn Cường luôn trăn trở với câu hỏi: tự đóng tàu chiến trong nước hay mua? Đây là việc rất hệ trọng của quốc gia. Nếu mua thì mua tàu mới hay mua tất cả vật tư rồi chuyển giao công nghệ, để chuyên gia nước ngoài qua hướng dẫn cách đóng tàu? Hoặc là chỉ mua thiết kế sơ bộ, sử dụng nguồn nhân lực sẵn có và các chuyên gia trong nước, cho người đi nước ngoài đào tạo rồi tự đóng?

Vài số liệu về tàu pháo TT400TP

TT400TP là lớp tàu pháo có vũ khí điều khiển tự động hoạt động trên biển với bốn nhiệm vụ: tiêu diệt tất cả tàu chiến đổ bộ và tàu hộ tống của địch; bảo vệ căn cứ các đội tàu đổ bộ và đội tàu hộ tống ở vùng hoạt động của các lực lượng và tàu phục vụ các lực lượng rà quét mìn; bảo vệ tàu dân sự trên biển và trinh sát chiến thuật cảnh giới mặt nước.

Chiều dài dài nhất 54,16m, chiều rộng rộng nhất 9,16m, tốc độ tối đa 32 hải lý/giờ. Tàu hoạt động liên tục trên biển 30 ngày đêm, có khả năng tác chiến trong điều kiện gió cấp 9, 10 và sóng cấp 8, tầm hoạt động 2.500 hải lý.

Hai năm sau, ban lãnh đạo Z173 đề xuất mua thiết kế sơ bộ tàu chiến và thiết kế vũ khí. Nhà máy sẽ phối hợp với Viện Thiết kế của quân đội để thiết kế, thi công công nghệ.

“Nếu mua bản thiết kế và chuyển giao công nghệ thì giá mỗi chiếc tàu lên đến hơn 10 triệu USD! Mua bản vẽ thiết kế sơ bộ chỉ tốn mấy trăm ngàn USD, còn thiết kế công nghệ thì mình chủ động làm. Khi đó, giá thành sản xuất một chiếc tàu sẽ rẻ hơn rất nhiều, chỉ gần 1 triệu USD, tiết kiệm được 90%!” - ông Cường cho biết.

Đại tá Cường nhìn nhận: “Con người là quan trọng nhất. Trước đó, chúng tôi đã đóng mới thành công tàu cảnh sát biển TT400, cũng mua thiết kế sơ bộ của nước ngoài. Vậy tại sao không thể đóng được tàu chiến? Tại sao chúng ta không dám đi con đường mà chưa ai dám nghĩ, dám đi trong khi có rất nhiều người tài như vậy?”.

Hàng trăm kỹ sư giỏi nhất của Z173 được đưa đến các học viện, ra nước ngoài tập huấn hơn ba năm để chuẩn bị cho dự án mang tính lịch sử này. Ban lãnh đạo Nhà máy Z173 đã chủ động đàm phán với các đối tác nước ngoài, tự bỏ tiền mua bản thiết kế sơ bộ rồi báo cáo chứng minh cho chủ đầu tư (Quân chủng Hải quân) và Bộ Quốc phòng: Z173 chắc chắn đóng được tàu chiến.

Ngày 22/4/2009, con tàu TT400TP đã được đặt ky (sống chính của tàu). Đại tá Lê Văn Thước, phó giám đốc kỹ thuật, cho biết: “TT400TP được đóng theo phương pháp mới của thế giới là đóng tổng đoạn từng môđun độc lập (trong mỗi môđun được thiết kế và bố trí lắp đặt các thiết bị gần như hoàn chỉnh, sau đó chỉ cần cẩu - đấu - lắp tổng thành các đoạn môđun lại). Vì thế, các trang thiết bị đóng sẵn có thể đưa lên trước, tiến độ nhanh hơn, độ chính xác cao hơn. Nhưng từ bệ khuôn (phương pháp đóng tàu truyền thống) đến môđun là một bước tiến lớn về chuyển đổi công nghệ đóng tàu. Để làm được điều này, phải có con người và công cụ”.

Và không ai khác, chính các kỹ sư Nhà máy Z173 đã thiết kế thành công trên máy vi tính cái nào cần trước, cái nào cần sau... Các cán bộ, kỹ sư của nhà máy cũng phối hợp với chuyên gia ở các viện nghiên cứu trong nước ứng dụng phần mềm tiên tiến để triển khai thiết kế toàn bộ phần công nghệ, thiết kế các hệ thống trong không gian ba chiều và dùng phần mềm để phóng dạng, biến hình...

 

[Carlosa]

Timelines,
In 2009, the Hong Ha shipyard started to build the first TT-400TP, a 400 tonnage gunboat by modular method, and completed after over 2 years in 2011. The director said that they sent engineers oversea to study on this method maybe since 2004.
In 1999, Vietnam bought 2x of Molniya built entirely in Russia. 2007 received.
In 2011 they started to build Molniya domestically in BaSon shipyard, and integrated weapons on it.

In 2006 contracted for 2 first Gepards, received 2010
2016 next 2 Gepard on going build, no domestic plan.
2011 first DN-2000 start, 2016 8x DN completed.
-----------
I found a link between these.
Engines are not problem to Vietnam, no matter they're Ukraine or German.
It could be translated as:
Vietnam bought 2x first Molniya boats for training and performance test, while keep negotiating on KH-35 production line.
They ever think about buying or build Molniya based on detailed design at high price or just buy the basic design and self built it ?
Once TT-400TP project succeeded on the latter way in 2011, they restarted the domestic Molniya project.
Look deep into TT-400TP project, Hong Ha shipyard director said
"Even foreign specialists are surprised that TT-400TP naval gun could shoot exact at first shot, while they need several adjustment before getting the perfect shot" That means there're different method of building applied, maybe in foreign facility they didn't adopt modular approach.

The director said "buying basic design costs only some hundred thousand dollars ( and Hong Ha must develop into details ) so that the domestic hull cost is about 1 million dollars at the time ( 2009-2011 )

Ba Son shipyard may get benefit from that experiment in Molniya project. The Molniya is basically different from TT-400TP by missiles and sensors only.

Molniya boats are only fruitful with domestic Kh-35 production.

Modular method XP in TT-400TP
Missiles production and integrated sensors XP in Molniya

Let imagine what combined XP could be ?

Nice, nice, but as I understand, the integration of weapons and sensors is done by Russian engineers that come to Vietnam to do that and when they are finished, they formally give the warrantee of such weapons and sensors to Vietnam. That's what I used to read. I think is the same for both TT-400TP and Molniya, but I'm not sure.

 

[BoQ77]

Nice, nice, but as I understand, the integration of weapons and sensors is done by Russian engineers that come to Vietnam to do that and when they are finished, they formally give the warrantee of such weapons and sensors to Vietnam. That's what I used to read. I think is the same for both TT-400TP and Molniya.

For a nearly 100% hull built domestic, the high stability is essential for naval gun to shoot exact.
BPS-500 suffered the consequence.

A Myanmar stealth FAC ( look not solid build ?)

Vietnamese boats for Spratly operation in shoals

 

[Carlosa]

Timelines,
In 2009, the Hong Ha shipyard started to build the first TT-400TP, a 400 tonnage gunboat by modular method, and completed after over 2 years in 2011. The director said that they sent engineers oversea to study on this method maybe since 2004.
In 1999, Vietnam bought 2x of Molniya built entirely in Russia. 2007 received.
In 2011 they started to build Molniya domestically in BaSon shipyard, and integrated weapons on it.

In 2006 contracted for 2 first Gepards, received 2010
2016 next 2 Gepard on going build, no domestic plan.
2009-2010 rumor about Sigma-class started
2011 first DN-2000 start, 2016 8x DN completed, no Sigma-class updated.
-----------
I found a link between these.
Engines are not problem to Vietnam, no matter they're Ukraine or German.
It could be translated as:
Vietnam bought 2x first Molniya boats for training and performance test, while keep negotiating on KH-35 production line.
They ever think about buying or build Molniya based on detailed design at high price or just buy the basic design and self built it ?
Once TT-400TP project succeeded on the latter way in 2011, they restarted the domestic Molniya project.
Look deep into TT-400TP project, Hong Ha shipyard director said
"Even foreign specialists are surprised that TT-400TP naval gun could shoot exact at first shot, while they need several adjustment before getting the perfect shot" That means there're different method of building applied, maybe in foreign facility they didn't adopt modular approach.

The director said "buying basic design costs only some hundred thousand dollars ( and Hong Ha must develop into details ) so that the domestic hull cost is about 1 million dollars at the time ( 2009-2011 )

Ba Son shipyard may get benefit from that experiment in Molniya project. The Molniya is basically different from TT-400TP by missiles and sensors only.

Molniya boats are only fruitful with domestic Kh-35 production.

Modular method XP in TT-400TP and gunboat, CIWS integrated
Missiles production and integrated sensors XP in Molniya
DN-2000 modular approach succeeded.

Let imagine what combined XP could be ?

>> this lead to @Carlosa to think about transform DN-2000 to missile guided frigates. Yes they are prepared for that.
>> and modular 1000+ tonnage ship, also follow Carlosa.

What do you mean by XP, Modular method XP or combined XP?

One thing that I wonder is, why don't they enlarge the hull of the TT-400TP in order to make a bigger corvette?

 

[BoQ77]

What do you mean by XP, Modular method XP or combined XP?

One thing that I wonder is, why don't they enlarge the hull of the TT-400TP in order to make a bigger corvette?

No. TT-400TP is easy way to DIY only. Small and cheap. Failure could be acceptable
As the Hong Ha director said, they need to practice and expect to get perfection at the third TT-400TP ( but he get success at first one )

Next should be stealth modular crafts which are more complicated to design into modulars.
DN-2000 XP ( Experience ) is needed to do that.

As I know 8x DN-2000 built at 4 different shipyards , 2 each. For what? Experience in mass production of complicated modular designs.

Below are modules of Molniya M3, M4 ( in 2014 )

 

[Carlosa]

No. TT-400TP is easy way to DIY only. Small and cheap. Failure could be acceptable
As the Hong Ha director said, they need to practice and expect to get perfection at the third TT-400TP ( but he get success at first one )

Next should be stealth modular crafts which are more complicated to design into modulars.
DN-2000 XP ( Experience ) is needed to do that.

As I know 8x DN-2000 built at 4 different shipyards , 2 each. For what? Experience in mass production of complicated modular designs.

Below are modules of Molniya M3, M4 ( in 2014 )

Sounds really good. Do you think they will actually build a warship based on the DN-2000? That would be very nice.

Damn, how am I supposed to know that XP means Experience?

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

@Carlosa : could you just make a conclusion for modern weapon or better quality soldier in few lines, and we cleanup our post for a cleaner thread ?



It's ok for us to have negative but constructive comments. I don't know well about IDF to ignite any comparison, Thanks to the lady, I could read some interesting comparisons between VPA and IDF or Israel and US.
I just remind ARVN ( South Vietnam ) was ever trained to US model, and it's a mistake.

Thai soldiers are better equipped than VPA, could be a fact. But that fact doesn't tell Thai soldiers fight better than Viet.

Below is comment from Hamburger Hill battle
The U.S. and ARVN units participating in Apache Snow knew, based on existing intelligence information and previous experience in the A Shau, that the operation was likely to encounter serious resistance from PAVN. Beyond that, however, they had little intelligence as to the actual strength and dispositions of PAVN units. Masters of camouflage, the North Vietnamese completely concealed their bases from aerial surveillance. When PAVN forces moved, they did so at night along trails under triple-canopy jungle. They effected their command and control mainly by runner and wire, leaving no electronic signature to monitor or trace. U.S. battalion commanders had to generate their own tactical intelligence by combat patrols, capturing equipment, installations, documents, and occasionally prisoners of war to provide the raw data from which to draw their assessment of the North Vietnamese order of battle and dispositions. It was this time-consuming and hit-or-miss task force which characterized the main efforts of Colonel Honeycutt's 3/187th Infantry during the first four days of the operation.

Nobody is saying the Vietnamese army are weak. I just said the Thai army are better equipped. Carlosa just put words over my mouth. I'm just pointing about his hypocrisy that saying RTA are "weak" because apparently he has bias against them. While I don't even say anything bad about VPA other than valid criticism. Also to be noted is that Thailand have no need for a large standing army like Vietnam because they are pretty much covered by the west. Comparing the RTA with the VPA is like comparing a walking man with the one that is running. If Thailand is really serious about defending itself you can bet you arse that they will have more weapons than Vietnam, GDP wise.

This is only a suggestion, but I think instead of looking at the IDF you might want to learn about its enemy:
http://www.conflictsforum.org/2006/how-hezbollah-defeated-israel/
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/07/world/middleeast/07hezbollah.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Hezbollah is a militia trained like an army and equipped like a state, and its fighters “are nothing like Hamas or the Palestinians,” said a soldier who just returned from Lebanon. “They are trained and highly qualified,” he said, equipped with flak jackets, night-vision goggles, good communications and sometimes Israeli uniforms and ammunition. “All of us were kind of surprised.”

I'm only suggesting because you & Carlosa seems to be a proponent of Asymmetric warfare.

 

[Carlosa]

Nobody is saying the Vietnamese army are weak. I just said the Thai army are better equipped. Carlosa just put words over my mouth. I'm just pointing about his hypocrisy that saying RTA are "weak" because apparently he has bias against them. While I don't even say anything bad about VPA other than valid criticism. Also to be noted is that Thailand have no need for a large standing army like Vietnam because they are pretty much covered by the west. Comparing the RTA with the VPA is like comparing a walking man with the one that is running. If Thailand is really serious about defending itself you can bet you arse that they will have more weapons than Vietnam, GDP wise.

This is only a suggestion, but I think instead of looking at the IDF you might want to learn about its enemy:
http://www.conflictsforum.org/2006/how-hezbollah-defeated-israel/
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/07/world/middleeast/07hezbollah.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0



I'm only suggesting because you & Carlosa seems to be a proponent of Asymmetric warfare.

That's fine man, but I fail to see how the Thai military is better equipped, really, I don't see it, other than a carrier without aircraft and 2 AWACS planes, I don't see anything that stands out. Their army itself is more like an infantry force with very old tanks. Their air force is probably their best part, but again, is mainly old aircraft and if you look at what the 3 branches of the military are buying, they only buy stuff in very small quantities.

Yes, you are right, they don't have "real enemies", Vietnam could only wish to be in that situation.

If you tell me Singapore, I definitely agree with you.

I have a very different take on the so called Hezbollah defeated Israel thing, surviving a war because your opponent limited itself to only using part of their available force is not victory to me. And I do respect Hezbollah, they are very good fighters, but not enough of them and no enough means to possibly even think about defeating Israel, but anyway, that's a big issue and we can be talking for ever about that.

Anyway, going to the main topic, have to be fair and allow Vietnam enough time to modernize their military. They have very limited resources and they do buy some big ticket items here and there that take a lot of money away from the budget and on top of everything, considering what the threat is, they really have a very long shopping list of stuff to buy that many other countries would not need to buy. It takes time and there are too many baskets that they need to fill. They have to spend a lot of money on the coast guard, that's money that could go into the navy, again, many baskets to fill.

Madokafc is right about some things that she said, but that's only a part of the picture and that picture also have many positive things, my point is, lets be fair and balanced. That's all.

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

That's fine man, but I fail to see how the Thai military is better equipped, really, I don't see it, other than a carrier without aircraft and 2 AWACS planes, I don't see anything that stands out. Their army itself is more like an infantry force with very old tanks. Their air force is probably their best part, but again, is mainly old aircraft and if you look at what the 3 branches of the military are buying, they only buy stuff in very small quantities.

Yes, you are right, they don't have "real enemies", Vietnam could only wish to be in that situation.

If you tell me Singapore, I definitely agree with you.

I have a very different take on the so called Hezbollah defeated Israel thing, surviving a war because your opponent limited itself to only using part of their available force is not victory to me. And I do respect Hezbollah, they are very good fighters, but not enough of them and no enough means to possibly even think about defeating Israel, but anyway, that's a big issue and we can be talking for ever about that.

Anyway, going to the main topic, have to be fair and allow Vietnam enough time to modernize their military. They have very limited resources and they do buy some big ticket items here and there that take a lot of money away from the budget and on top of everything, considering what the threat is, they really have a very long shopping list of stuff to buy that many other countries would not need to buy. It takes time and there are too many baskets that they need to fill. They have to spend a lot of money on the coast guard, that's money that could go into the navy, again, many baskets to fill.

Madokafc is right about some things that she said, but that's only a part of the picture and that picture also have many positive things, my point is, lets be fair and balanced. That's all.

You mostly talking about military hardware. Of which Thai has really no need of it yet. The problems Thailand has is with rebellion in the south and smugglers on the north among other things. Of which there is no need for the thing you just said. Many country don't have what you have, but it doesn't mean they are weak. It just mean they have no need of it.

So did Vietnam beat China in 1979 war or what?

Given time a monkey can wrote Shakespeare, but the purpose of this thread is to give input on Vietnam's military. Otherwise why bother posting in this thread if we have to wait for it. The problem with VPA has been explained by Madoka many time. With the addition of many aging equipments (which are in the process of being replaced) they still stuck in soviet military thinking (Of which Madoka said they are considering reforming their armed forces. Probably along western lines.)

 

[Carlosa]

You mostly talking about military hardware. Of which Thai has really no need of it yet. The problems Thailand has is with rebellion in the south and smugglers on the north among other things. Of which there is no need for the thing you just said. Many country don't have what you have, but it doesn't mean they are weak. It just mean they have no need of it.

So did Vietnam beat China in 1979 war or what?

Given time a monkey can wrote Shakespeare, but the purpose of this thread is to give input on Vietnam's military. Otherwise why bother posting in this thread if we have to wait for it. The problem with VPA has been explained by Madoka many time. With the addition of many aging equipments (which are in the process of being replaced) they still stuck in soviet military thinking (Of which Madoka said they are considering reforming their armed forces. Probably along western lines.)

As I said, she is right, but it is a partial picture, lets also give credit where credit is due and lets not generalize or deny the positives as she often does.

If Thais don't need the hardware, then can't say that they are better equipped.

 

[BoQ77]

If you have to guess whether the next transport or surveillance aircraft ordered by Vietnam is Russia or Western. What's your answer ?
------------
Vietnam ordered 3x CASA C-212 Aviocar, @Carlosa could help us to understand what embedded in it.
3x EADS CASA C-295 ( Airbus )
6x Viking Twin Otter DHC-6 from Canada, integrated ELTA ELM-2022A sensor
------------

Ikhana has also completed modifications on the final pair of Viking Air-built DHC-6-400 Guardian maritime patrol and utility aircraft that are poised for delivery to the Vietnam Navy, marking the completion of the service’s first fleet of fixed-wing aircraft. The six Guardians are the first Western-made aircraft to be operated by the Vietnamese military and have been assigned to Air Force-Naval Brigade 954, with three configured for maritime patrol and three equipped for utility, VIP and transport missions.

Under the Vietnam Guardian program, Ikhana completed integration of a chin-mounted Elta search radar system with an electro-optical/infrared sensor suite. The interior was also modified with an operator console with an adjustable operator seat, observation “bubble” windows, lavatory and galley, as well as utility seats. The aircraft, which are operating in a mix of float- and wheel-equipped configurations, are also provisioned with Ikhana’s recently developed 14,000-lb. increased-payload capability package.

Representatives of the Vietnamese Navy, in collaboration with the GAET Company from the Ministry of Defense, worked with Viking and its local representative, Canam Active Enterprises Inc. for several years to develop this contract. The 6 Twin Otters are said to have sold for about C$ 6 million each. Three will be equipped for amphibious operations, with convertible interiors covering VIP, commuter, and utility layouts; the other 3 will be equipped as designated “Guardian 400” maritime patrol variants. The sale also includes sensor package options, and a comprehensive spares support package.

Ikhana Aircraft Services in Murrieta, CA handled the Guardian 400 conversion. Their RWMI DHC-6-400RG Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) raises the Twin Otter’s maximum operating weight from 12,500 pounds to of 14,000 lbs. on wheeled landing gear, or 13,600 lbs. on amphibious floats. An IAI Elta ELM-2022A maritime radar system and MiniPOP day/night surveillance turret are added, along with crew operating and convenience stations that include a lavatory and upgraded climate control.

The ELM-2022A is especially interesting. Its 256-target Track-While-Scan (TWS) capability is very good, but may be challenged in the very crowded environs of the South China Sea. In addition to maritime surveillance of large targets up to 200 nmi, IAI notes that the ELM-2022A “shares a high degree of commonality with the EL/M-2032 Fire-Control Radar [that equips many fighters], enabling Air-to-Air operationa [sic] modes.”

The Twin Otter’s low operating cost and endurance make that a very interesting option for Vietnam, which needs better aerial and maritime awareness. The 3 Guardian 400 Twin Otters are a long way behind even the small C295-AEW collaboration between IAI and Airbus. On the other hand, they’re an affordable start that can also help Vietnam begin the process of training their fighter pilots to operate with surveillance aircraft.

P3C - One of maritime surveillance aircraft

C-295 AEW, another design that is more familiar with Vietnam Air Force ( they get the delivery of 3x C-295 )

Airbus says an AEW version of the C295 would have a mission endurance of up to 9h, and be capable of operating at an altitude of up to 26,000ft (7,930m).

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

As I said, she is right, but it is a partial picture, lets also give credit where credit is due and lets not generalize or deny the positives as she often does.

If Thais don't need the hardware, then can't say that they are better equipped.

She's entitled to her own opinion. But I can understand her. I'm supportive of the Philippines modernization effort, but it doesn't mean I don't criticize them from time to time. In fact its healthy to point out the flaw in our military (cause we paid for them). On Vietnam's case its a bit hard because there's zero transparency & procurement plans are done behind closed door. So I don't really bother with Vietnam.

Thais soldiers are better paid, their equipment & training followed NATO standard, currently have the better tanks. In those area the Thais excel. Better equipment doesn't mean military hardware like SCUD or such, even simple things like NVG, body armors or even boots also count. For example Malaysia are better equipped than us. That's a fact. Weaker, no.