Search results

It's more or less you just have to ask Roketsan to do the software integration work for you and in turn they will go and deal with LM about all the backend stuff, you don't need the actual source codes since the weapon itself can already receive data from the Radar. You only need source codes...

SOM is already integrated with the F-16.

Look at it this way, having something as small as an MPA refueling base would benefit us more in the long run. For one, you'd have better early warning capability over anything we have or would have in the near future. And two, it gives you depth in the sense that it would make "you know who"...

Then I guess we're doomed. Without US support or a standardized Air/Naval platform, we're pretty much won't be able to hold out for more than a few days.

I'll see when I believe it. You're going to need an Air Force defense budget larger than Singapore's to do that. Which right now I very much doubt when our entire budget is still lower than their overall budget.

Well with this logic, having half of your fleet unable to fly due to not having the money to operate them also stops you from achieving that goal.

I actually don't think an EF + Rafale can happen. The Tranche 1 EF's operational costs are disproportionately high that it would just kill the budget to operate the F-16's, which the Air Force will NOT be happy about. It's either the EF or Rafale at this point. Dassault has an advantage since...

Again, you only get to pick 2. We can not afford to EFFECTIVELY OPERATE more than 2 airframe types. Either F-16 + Flanker, F-16 + EF, or F-16 + Rafale. They're not going to retire the F-16 since it's the main workhorse of the fleet.

We don't have money to introduce 2 platforms AND maintain the F-16's.

I'm just saying from experience, it's not above our government to stretch things when it comes to scrutiny.

Somewhat regularly from what I've been told. P-8's and C-17's, Could just be the government OFFICIALLY saying no to appease the local masses but behind the scenes, well 🤷‍♂️...

Ask @Gen3115

Wasn't there a couple of P-8's landing and refueling here? @Gen3115

Like it or not, you're pretty much stuck having to retire something when you DON'T have the budget to keep all of them flying. I get your point but at this point we're just talking about common sense finances here.

Wouldn't work, cost of introducing a platform such as the Rafale is going to eat up a ton of budget until it reaches IOC/FOC. One existing platform has to go and I very much doubt it would be the F-16.

The problem with the Azeris is that their branches do not communicate much on the battlefield. This lapse in operational interoperability and communication is the reason why they are struggling to make gains in the NK region DESPITE having total air-superiority. The same logic applies to the...

Keep in mind this was handled under Ryamizard, so you can sum it up yourself pretty much. With this last part, you can argue that there might a be (predicted) lower operating cost since a notional TNI-AU SHornet would largely be land based and isn't subjected to constant salinized air that are...

IIRC there wasn't any malicious wrong doing on PT PAL's or DSME's part, rather the Indonesian Navy wanted them to cut costs and corners and they got what they asked for in the end; A sub that had problems BECAUSE they asked the shipbuilders to cut costs and corners. What's happening right now...

So wait, what happens if we join the Quad? Does it become the Quint?

The road-map is literally the F-16V, I don't know what else MenHan wants at this point.