What's new

Indonesia Defence Forum

Leopard 2's aren't entirely useless, but our money should be invested in getting smarter weapons and force multipliers.

And yeah it surprised me as well when Andika announced his plans, because it's basically a complete 180 from what his predecessors. He's really not a conservative at all and my most memorable thing about him was when he basically restructured and disband several army administrative commands to make it more efficient. One funny thing that got a lot of staff workers riled up was when he forced everyone in the Army to conduct daily morning PT sessions instead of the old Tuesday and Friday sessions (courtesy of Norwich University it seems haha). I am honestly glad he's in charge and getting rid of all the skeletons in the closet, give me hope honestly.

Andika's philosophy is simple, taking our geography into account he is restructuring the entire army to support the needs of the basic infantryman (Essentially taking what he learned from the US military and adopting it to our needs). This means drones, UGV's, optics, radios, better PPE (armor and helmets), better training, standardizing on a basic truck platform, more helicopters, and improving inter branch coordination. He is also getting rid of a lot of armored vehicles (the M113's especially, you guys have no idea the amount of problems they cause) and replacing them with lighter counterparts.



Singapore fields more than half of it's armor assets abroad in the US, Europe, and Australia. Israel keeps the majority of it's Merkavas in deep storage.

Europe has to share a land border with the Russians, we don't. Europe is one giant flat continent, we're not. Alot of those countries are also investing in AT assets (MMP, Javelin, etc.) more so than full on tanks.

If you don't already realize, we are currently orienting towards COIN. And even if we are in a peer-2-peer conflict, air and naval power is the name of the game. The last peer war was Desert Storm and you can already see how that ended when coalition air power completely decimated Iraqi armor and air defense.

If you want to stop the Liaoning and her support fleet from crossing into our EEZ, you're going to need a lot of Air/Ground launched AShM's supported by AWACS, MPA's, and ELINT/SIGINT assets. Korporal Jupri and his tank crew can do heck-all in that situation.

All those Leopard 2's that you want is basically going to be Q-5 food, that is the reality of modern warfare.

That is facts, not feelings.

General Andika Perkasa, Hendropriyono's son-in-law? the current Army Chief-of-Staff... the last time i heard about him is my circle gossiping about his rapid promotion lately, but now you told me about his programs, i think it's good to hear that he is a competent and reformist officer. In the past, i disliked my perceived "passiveness" of the US Military doctrine, of how it relies on expensive technology too much, but now it's clear that they have all the experiences, weapons and doctrines that we can absorbs and implement into our military, they are the prime template for modern militaries to take example from. We must pursue 155mm artillery platform even harder, both self-propelled and towed, i think CAESARs are good enough, and we need more of them, 128 units maybe? for towed, i really wanted the M777 as our main towed artillery model, certainly it one of the best out there in it's class.

I will be glad if Gen. Andika did implement his program throughoutly, especially the modernization of infantry so it will be up to NATO standart, in training, personnel equipment and capability. It will be interesting to see this new TNI, but i will be glad if they maintain this 450,000+ personnel number, it has been stagnant for decades and i won't like a cut in numbers for the sake of trimming up. Higher defense spending percentage will be a great thing, at least it would help fix many thing caused by lack of budget, among them is military R&D and available acquisition budget at times. There are many lacking things inside the military like the lack of AT assets (the more serious one, tired of RPGs), honestly, thinking about it, these things are more versatile, effective and economical, as the lost of a Javelin fireteam is much less costly in monetary and morale than a million dollars battle tank destroyed in one AT shot. More choppers, especially the like of Apaches and Chinooks is essential thing, as the Army lacked in heli numbers and still too few of "heavy-class" class like these two, Army's mobility and firepower can be tremendously improved by having more of these and using them in the most effective way as an Air Cavalry.

The most curious part, the UGV ground drones, Mr. @Chestnut , can you elaborate more about this? of how this component and technology could be implemented into the Army? how will the infantry doctrine changed with it's implementation?
Is the UGV will be something like this? can you explain it?

I really wanted to talk about the Navy and the Air Force, but talking about them is always complicated, unlike the Army whose change is noticeable in shorter period of time and there's always to talk about the Army. Navy and Air Force business are certainly more long-term and any change take longer time to be noticeable. What we can only do when we talk about them is fun what-if discussions, project progression and reviewing the fleets, and there's always to many "will" and "what-ifs" in it.

But i like to discuss about Navy and Air Force tho.
 
.
Chestnut,

M113 itu diakuisisi sebagai stop gap untuk memenuhi kebutuhan APC roda rantai kita.
Kita butuh hampir 1300 unit APC seperti M113 ini. Dibeli bekas karena harganya bersahabat buat anggaran, bisa beli lebih banyak. Karena dibeli dalam keadaan bekas ya iyalah pasti ada problem. Barang baru pun juga ada problem, apalagi yang bekas. Kalo ranpur nggak ada problem, teknisi harwat nganggur nggak ada kerjaan. Leopard nggak akan dibeli lagi, jumlah 103 biji itu cukup.

Jadi nanti 1 kompi kavmek nurut hitungan saya bakal diisi 1 Leopard buat komandan, 4 harimau, 12 m113 atau yang sejenis, 1 ambulans, 1 kendaraan derek, 2 spaag.

Apache, chinook dan bell memang mau ditambah, tunggu aja.

HellfireIndo,

Caesar bakal lebih dari itu, tapi bertahap belinya.
 
.
Bukan Leo-nya yang gk cocok dengan kondisi geografi Indonesia, mas/mba nya aja yang mikirnya MBT cuma kepake di open filed macem gurun atau dataran luas. MBT juga sangat berguna buat urban warfare, liat kasus Suriah, Irak, sampai Marawi. MBT jadi spearhead buat infantri. Kombinasi mobilitas, firepower, sama protectionnya gk bisa digantiin sama heavy infantry with ATGM. Oh dan kita juga punya perbatasan darat luas di kalimantan kalau anda lupa.


Mas/mba nya juga bilang MBT gk berguna karena gk bisa ngapa-ngapain ngadepin Liaoning/F35.........YA IYALAH LEO 2 ITU KAN MBT, bukan platform ASUW apalagi AAW. Saya malah bakal kaget kalau Leo 2 bisa ngapa-ngapain Liaoning/F35

Kalau kayak gini cara bandingin berguna tidaknya sebuah alutsista mah mas/mba sama aja nelen omongan sendiri. Itu semua aset darat yang mas/mba bilang macem UGV, well equipped well trained infantry, standardized truck/MRAP/4x4 juga gak bakal guna kalau lawan Liaoning/F35.

Kasus MBT Iraq dibabat habis koalisi kok malah nyalahin MBT-nya, ya yang salah AU dan Arhanud AD-nya lah, itu tugas mereka buat ngasih air cover ke elemen kavaleri, bukan malah jadi MBT-nya yang gk guna, where's your logic dude??

Dan lagi walaupun kerjaan utama TNI masih seputar COIN, masa anda mau stuck disitu dan punya militer kapabilitasnya cuma sekedar buat COIN? Bahkan COIN-pun udah bisa jadi urban warfare macem Marawi yang jelas-jelas perlu elemen lapis baja.

Saya kira kebanyakan orang infantry-strong, ternyata ada juga yg AU/AL strong

I hope you realize the reason why MBT's were fielded in Iraq was because they didn't have anything in the 30m-40mm autocannon range for infantry support. They weren't supposed to be used in and around the cities. I can send you the 6000 page Iraq War report that you can read through if you still don't believe me why they were a bad idea. Also, you know another good example of why you shouldn't take MBT's to urban areas? Grozny. Even in Syria you have a bunch of T-72's and Leopard 2 getting blown up by Kornets and RPG-29's. MBT's aren't made for close quarter combat, they were pressed for the role because there wasn't anything else that could fulfill them.

The Kalimantan border is hilly, dense, with few roadways. There's not a lot of places there an MBT can operate. You're not going to need MBT's when a couple of guys with Javelins can do the job a lot better and more efficiently.

And I also hope you realize that I said what we needed were SAMs and AShM's and not just less MBT's. Because so far apart from HellFireIndo almost everyone else here is having trouble reading (or should I say swallowing) what I post. Keep in mind I work for the Defense Industry here, I don't really care what looks cool or what's looks like the best stuff. Yet what I do care about is what would work well for us in the most cost effective and efficient way possible. I am not lying when I say that our military has a lot of problems that needs to be fixed and certain people currently aren't even doing anything to fix it. Jangan terus2an hayalan and look at the bigger picture.

Also you should know that our country's actual decision makers have long regarded that the most plausible coming conflict right now is a Marawi type situation, followed by naval intrusions from our neighbors. You don't need MBT's for that. You need a competent Air Force, Navy, and well supported small unit teams.


Chestnut,

M113 itu diakuisisi sebagai stop gap untuk memenuhi kebutuhan APC roda rantai kita.
Kita butuh hampir 1300 unit APC seperti M113 ini. Dibeli bekas karena harganya bersahabat buat anggaran, bisa beli lebih banyak. Karena dibeli dalam keadaan bekas ya iyalah pasti ada problem. Barang baru pun juga ada problem, apalagi yang bekas. Kalo ranpur nggak ada problem, teknisi harwat nganggur nggak ada kerjaan. Leopard nggak akan dibeli lagi, jumlah 103 biji itu cukup.

Jadi nanti 1 kompi kavmek nurut hitungan saya bakal diisi 1 Leopard buat komandan, 4 harimau, 12 m113 atau yang sejenis, 1 ambulans, 1 kendaraan derek, 2 spaag.

Apache, chinook dan bell memang mau ditambah, tunggu aja.

HellfireIndo,

Caesar bakal lebih dari itu, tapi bertahap belinya.

Oh boy where do I start. I'm just gonna drop a few bombshells on you guys.

The M113's are more than likely going to be retired, the army simply doesn't like them and found that keeping them in service is going to cost just as much as just buying something new. The entire reason they were there isn't a stop-gap, but rather something else.

Also, Pusenkav refused the M113 because they were too problematic to operate, they ended up giving them to the Infantry.

Jadi nanti 1 kompi kavmek nurut hitungan saya bakal diisi 1 Leopard buat komandan, 4 harimau, 12 m113 atau yang sejenis, 1 ambulans, 1 kendaraan derek, 2 spaag.

The decision to procure the Kaplan was political in nature, they would rather just operate the Leopard 2's and Marders and be done with it. There are certain things about the Kaplan that Pusenkav found that made it unsuitable for Indonesian use, why do you think it's taking so long to come into service?

Apache, chinook dan bell memang mau ditambah, tunggu aja.

The Chinook is likely not going to happen, they found that it was too expensive and that you could do the same job with 2 Mi-17's and while still having a similar operational cost. Last I checked they were going with another batch of Mi-17's.
 
Last edited:
. .
Pindad new polymer pistol, named Pindad Armo. It is based on Tanfoglio Force, which in turn was a copy and modification of CZ-75/CZ-85.

Armo V1 with 9,2 cm barrel length, 16 rounds, 780 grams weight
V1.jpg


Armo V2 with 11,2 cm barrel length, 16 rounds, 895 grams weight
V2.jpg


Armo V3 with 12,1 cm barrel length, 19 rounds, 1003 grams weight
V3.jpg
 
Last edited:
.
I hope you realize the reason why MBT's were fielded in Iraq was because they didn't have anything in the 30m-40mm autocannon range for infantry support. They weren't supposed to be used in and around the cities. I can send you the 6000 page Iraq War report that you can read through if you still don't believe me why they were a bad idea. Also, you know another good example of why you shouldn't take MBT's to urban areas? Grozny. Even in Syria you have a bunch of T-72's and Leopard 2 getting blown up by Kornets and RPG-29's. MBT's aren't made for close quarter combat, they were pressed for the role because there wasn't anything else that could fulfill them.

The Kalimantan border is hilly, dense, with few roadways. There's not a lot of places there an MBT can operate. You're not going to need MBT's when a couple of guys with Javelins can do the job a lot better and more efficiently.

And I also hope you realize that I said what we needed were SAMs and AShM's and not just less MBT's. Because so far apart from HellFireIndo almost everyone else here is having trouble reading (or should I say swallowing) what I post. Keep in mind I work for the Defense Industry here, I don't really care what looks cool or what's looks like the best stuff. Yet what I do care about is what would work well for us in the most cost effective and efficient way possible. I am not lying when I say that our military has a lot of problems that needs to be fixed and certain people currently aren't even doing anything to fix it. Jangan terus2an hayalan and look at the bigger picture.

Also you should know that our country's actual decision makers have long regarded that the most plausible coming conflict right now is a Marawi type situation, followed by naval intrusions from our neighbors. You don't need MBT's for that. You need a competent Air Force, Navy, and well supported small unit teams.




Oh boy where do I start. I'm just gonna drop a few bombshells on you guys.

The M113's are more than likely going to be retired, the army simply doesn't like them and found that keeping them in service is going to cost just as much as just buying something new. The entire reason they were there isn't a stop-gap, but rather something else.

Also, Pusenkav refused the M113 because they were too problematic to operate, they ended up giving them to the Infantry.



The decision to procure the Kaplan was political in nature, they would rather just operate the Leopard 2's and Marders and be done with it. There are certain things about the Kaplan that Pusenkav found that made it unsuitable for Indonesian use, why do you think it's taking so long to come into service?



The Chinook is likely not going to happen, they found that it was too expensive and that you could do the same job with 2 Mi-17's and while still having a similar operational cost. Last I checked they were going with another batch of Mi-17's.

Can you give me the name of the report? I'd love to read it since all the other reports/articles that i read (from RAND, USMC, and US Army itself) stated that heavy-armor like tank still has enduring utility in urban warfare. But yes, of course, tanks are only effective when they are protected by other elements especially infantry
 
.
Can you give me the name of the report? I'd love to read it since all the other reports/articles that i read (from RAND, USMC, and US Army itself) stated that heavy-armor like tank still has enduring utility in urban warfare. But yes, of course, tanks are only effective when they are protected by other elements especially infantry

If you have a throwaway email I can send it to you. It's a paid report by the US Army War College so you really cant find it anywhere.
 
.
@Chestnut many thanks for the good reading. Please elaborate more about our current TNI situation and what to expect later.
 
.
Leopard 2's aren't entirely useless, but our money should be invested in getting smarter weapons and force multipliers.

And yeah it surprised me as well when Andika announced his plans, because it's basically a complete 180 from what his predecessors. He's really not a conservative at all and my most memorable thing about him was when he basically restructured and disband several army administrative commands to make it more efficient. One funny thing that got a lot of staff workers riled up was when he forced everyone in the Army to conduct daily morning PT sessions instead of the old Tuesday and Friday sessions (courtesy of Norwich University it seems haha). I am honestly glad he's in charge and getting rid of all the skeletons in the closet, give me hope honestly.

Andika's philosophy is simple, taking our geography into account he is restructuring the entire army to support the needs of the basic infantryman (Essentially taking what he learned from the US military and adopting it to our needs). This means drones, UGV's, optics, radios, better PPE (armor and helmets), better training, standardizing on a basic truck platform, more helicopters, and improving inter branch coordination. He is also getting rid of a lot of armored vehicles (the M113's especially, you guys have no idea the amount of problems they cause) and replacing them with lighter counterparts.



Singapore fields more than half of it's armor assets abroad in the US, Europe, and Australia. Israel keeps the majority of it's Merkavas in deep storage.

Europe has to share a land border with the Russians, we don't. Europe is one giant flat continent, we're not. Alot of those countries are also investing in AT assets (MMP, Javelin, etc.) more so than full on tanks.

If you don't already realize, we are currently orienting towards COIN. And even if we are in a peer-2-peer conflict, air and naval power is the name of the game. The last peer war was Desert Storm and you can already see how that ended when coalition air power completely decimated Iraqi armor and air defense.

If you want to stop the Liaoning and her support fleet from crossing into our EEZ, you're going to need a lot of Air/Ground launched AShM's supported by AWACS, MPA's, and ELINT/SIGINT assets. Korporal Jupri and his tank crew can do heck-all in that situation.

All those Leopard 2's that you want is basically going to be Q-5 food, that is the reality of modern warfare.

That is facts, not feelings.
Finally someone who understand.

What we need mostly is lots of jets,lots of advanxed anti ship missiles and its launching platforms (ships,submarine) and supporting hardware (AWACS,ELINT,SIGINT,etc)

Believe me there will be no ww2 era massive army maneuver in such an island country

Bukan Leo-nya yang gk cocok dengan kondisi geografi Indonesia, mas/mba nya aja yang mikirnya MBT cuma kepake di open filed macem gurun atau dataran luas. MBT juga sangat berguna buat urban warfare, liat kasus Suriah, Irak, sampai Marawi. MBT jadi spearhead buat infantri. Kombinasi mobilitas, firepower, sama protectionnya gk bisa digantiin sama heavy infantry with ATGM. Oh dan kita juga punya perbatasan darat luas di kalimantan kalau anda lupa.


Mas/mba nya juga bilang MBT gk berguna karena gk bisa ngapa-ngapain ngadepin Liaoning/F35.........YA IYALAH LEO 2 ITU KAN MBT, bukan platform ASUW apalagi AAW. Saya malah bakal kaget kalau Leo 2 bisa ngapa-ngapain Liaoning/F35

Kalau kayak gini cara bandingin berguna tidaknya sebuah alutsista mah mas/mba sama aja nelen omongan sendiri. Itu semua aset darat yang mas/mba bilang macem UGV, well equipped well trained infantry, standardized truck/MRAP/4x4 juga gak bakal guna kalau lawan Liaoning/F35.

Kasus MBT Iraq dibabat habis koalisi kok malah nyalahin MBT-nya, ya yang salah AU dan Arhanud AD-nya lah, itu tugas mereka buat ngasih air cover ke elemen kavaleri, bukan malah jadi MBT-nya yang gk guna, where's your logic dude??

Dan lagi walaupun kerjaan utama TNI masih seputar COIN, masa anda mau stuck disitu dan punya militer kapabilitasnya cuma sekedar buat COIN? Bahkan COIN-pun udah bisa jadi urban warfare macem Marawi yang jelas-jelas perlu elemen lapis baja.

Saya kira kebanyakan orang infantry-strong, ternyata ada juga yg AU/AL strong
I think the firepower from a 105mm gun from kaplan is enough to punch through concrete. And although im a big fan of mbt. I must admit that our geography didnt support for more numbers of mbt.

Urban warfare lessons from the middle east in particular israeli operations in lebanon shows that infantry equipped with mobile/light support weapons (ie. Rpg,recoiless rifles,) did most of the job sweeping through enemy territory, sometimes walking through buildings (mouse holing). This combined with drones, and tactical air assets proved to be a deadly force.
 
Last edited:
.
I hope you realize the reason why MBT's were fielded in Iraq was because they didn't have anything in the 30m-40mm autocannon range for infantry support. They weren't supposed to be used in and around the cities. I can send you the 6000 page Iraq War report that you can read through if you still don't believe me why they were a bad idea. Also, you know another good example of why you shouldn't take MBT's to urban areas? Grozny. Even in Syria you have a bunch of T-72's and Leopard 2 getting blown up by Kornets and RPG-29's. MBT's aren't made for close quarter combat, they were pressed for the role because there wasn't anything else that could fulfill them.

The Kalimantan border is hilly, dense, with few roadways. There's not a lot of places there an MBT can operate. You're not going to need MBT's when a couple of guys with Javelins can do the job a lot better and more efficiently.

And I also hope you realize that I said what we needed were SAMs and AShM's and not just less MBT's. Because so far apart from HellFireIndo almost everyone else here is having trouble reading (or should I say swallowing) what I post. Keep in mind I work for the Defense Industry here, I don't really care what looks cool or what's looks like the best stuff. Yet what I do care about is what would work well for us in the most cost effective and efficient way possible. I am not lying when I say that our military has a lot of problems that needs to be fixed and certain people currently aren't even doing anything to fix it. Jangan terus2an hayalan and look at the bigger picture.

Also you should know that our country's actual decision makers have long regarded that the most plausible coming conflict right now is a Marawi type situation, followed by naval intrusions from our neighbors. You don't need MBT's for that. You need a competent Air Force, Navy, and well supported small unit teams.




Oh boy where do I start. I'm just gonna drop a few bombshells on you guys.

The M113's are more than likely going to be retired, the army simply doesn't like them and found that keeping them in service is going to cost just as much as just buying something new. The entire reason they were there isn't a stop-gap, but rather something else.

Also, Pusenkav refused the M113 because they were too problematic to operate, they ended up giving them to the Infantry.



The decision to procure the Kaplan was political in nature, they would rather just operate the Leopard 2's and Marders and be done with it. There are certain things about the Kaplan that Pusenkav found that made it unsuitable for Indonesian use, why do you think it's taking so long to come into service?



The Chinook is likely not going to happen, they found that it was too expensive and that you could do the same job with 2 Mi-17's and while still having a similar operational cost. Last I checked they were going with another batch of Mi-17's.
Chinook is not going to happen? Be replace with Mi17 due to cheaper cost of Mi17? Really?

Let us compare both :

Chinook price usd 39 mio.
Service life 10000 hours
Flying cost per hour usd 4600

Mi17 price usd 18,4 mio
Service life 2000 hours
Flying cost usd 2850 per hour

1 Chinook service life is the same as 5 Mi17.

So you have to buy 5 unit Mi17 to have the same flying service hours as 1 unit Chinook.

5 Mi17 = 5 x usd 18,4 mio = usd 92 mio

Aquisition cost usd 39 mio compare to usd 92 mio to get the same service life hours.

1 Chinook is cheaper than 5 Mi17.

Chinook service life 10000 hours x usd 4600 = 46000000 = usd 46 mio

For flying until 10000 hours 1 Chinook will spend usd 46 mio.

To get the flying hours of 1 Chinook, we will use 5 Mi17.

Thus let's count the flying cost of this 5 Mi17.

5 x 2000 x 2850 = 10000 x 2850 = 28500000 = usd 28,5 mio.

Now we calculate the aquisition cost plus the flying hours cost.

Chinook = 39 + 46 = 85 = usd 85 mio for Chinook.

To get the same flying hours life as Chinook we should spent :

5 Mi17 = 92 + 28,5 = 120,5 = usd 120,5 mio.

85 mio against 120,5 mio.

Who is cheaper? 85 mio.
Who will have 85 mio spending? Chinook.

Thus still Chinook is cheaper than Mi17.

Now please check for loading capacity.

Mi17 could load 4000 kgs = 4 tons
Chinook could load 10886 kgs = 10,8 tons

To get the same flying hours as 1 Chinook

Mi17 = 4 ton x 5 unit x 2000 hours = 40,000 ton

Chinook = 10,8 ton x 10000 = 108,000 ton

40,000 ton vs 108000 ton

Which is heavier ? 108000 ton

Who have the capacity of 108000 ton during its life? Chinook.

Let us calculate the cost per ton during its or their life :

Chinook :

85 mio / 108000 ton =
85,000,000 / 108,000 = 787.03 = usd 787 per ton for Chinook.

Mi17 :

120,5 mio / 40000 ton =
120,500,000 / 40,000 = 3012.5 = usd 3012.5 per ton for Mi17.

Usd 787 vs usd 3012,5

Which is cheaper? Usd 787

Who has payload cost of usd 787? Chinook!

For all aspect who is the winner?
Chinook is the winner.

Our defense minister Pak Ryacudu stated clearly that Indonesia will buy Chinook.

So who is dumbest?
Woof Woof or Chestnut?
Chestnut.
 
.
Chinook is not going to happen? Be replace with Mi17 due to cheaper cost of Mi17? Really?

Let us compare both :

Chinook price usd 39 mio.
Service life 10000 hours
Flying cost per hour usd 4600

Mi17 price usd 18,4 mio
Service life 2000 hours
Flying cost usd 2850 per hour

1 Chinook service life is the same as 5 Mi17.

So you have to buy 5 unit Mi17 to have the same flying service hours as 1 unit Chinook.

5 Mi17 = 5 x usd 18,4 mio = usd 92 mio

Aquisition cost usd 39 mio compare to usd 92 mio to get the same service life hours.

1 Chinook is cheaper than 5 Mi17.

Chinook service life 10000 hours x usd 4600 = 46000000 = usd 46 mio

For flying until 10000 hours 1 Chinook will spend usd 46 mio.

To get the flying hours of 1 Chinook, we will use 5 Mi17.

Thus let's count the flying cost of this 5 Mi17.

5 x 2000 x 2850 = 10000 x 2850 = 28500000 = usd 28,5 mio.

Now we calculate the aquisition cost plus the flying hours cost.

Chinook = 39 + 46 = 85 = usd 85 mio for Chinook.

To get the same flying hours life as Chinook we should spent :

5 Mi17 = 92 + 28,5 = 120,5 = usd 120,5 mio.

85 mio against 120,5 mio.

Who is cheaper? 85 mio.
Who will have 85 mio spending? Chinook.

Thus still Chinook is cheaper than Mi17.

Now please check for loading capacity.

Mi17 could load 4000 kgs = 4 tons
Chinook could load 10886 kgs = 10,8 tons

To get the same flying hours as 1 Chinook

Mi17 = 4 ton x 5 unit x 2000 hours = 40,000 ton

Chinook = 10,8 ton x 10000 = 108,000 ton

40,000 ton vs 108000 ton

Which is heavier ? 108000 ton

Who have the capacity of 108000 ton during its life? Chinook.

Let us calculate the cost per ton during its or their life :

Chinook :

85 mio / 108000 ton =
85,000,000 / 108,000 = 787.03 = usd 787 per ton for Chinook.

Mi17 :

120,5 mio / 40000 ton =
120,500,000 / 40,000 = 3012.5 = usd 3012.5 per ton for Mi17.

Usd 787 vs usd 3012,5

Which is cheaper? Usd 787

Who has payload cost of usd 787? Chinook!

For all aspect who is the winner?
Chinook is the winner.

Our defense minister Pak Ryacudu stated clearly that Indonesia will buy Chinook.

So who is dumbest?
Woof Woof or Chestnut?
Chestnut.

I hope you do realize that they're not planning on using the airframes for every hour. Also, according to Mil Design Bureau the Mi-17 has a service life of 12000 hours, so I don't know where you're getting 2000 from unless you're cherry picking. Which honestly I'm highly suspecting.

You also forgot to factor in the fact that we already operate 11 Mi-17's, thus receiving spare parts and having maintenance would be a lot cheaper than buying a new platform and having to set up the relevant infrastructure support for them. Again, you're basically only factoring in things that only help your position and not seeing the bigger picture.

Also, I've met Ryamizard, several times actually. And yes, a lot of things he said should not be taken as truth. Weapons purchases if you don't already know have relevant budgetary and political strings attached. For example he kept saying that the Su-35's would arrive last year yet that never materialize did it?

I get my information first hand because I work in the industry and these projects are the ones I work on with Puspenerbad. I'm not an amateur on 'formil' that just wanks at every announcement made and take them at face value. Maybe if you stopped fantasizing about this stuff you can be like others on this forum and realize that I'm not being disingenuous nor are my intentions bad.

I'm not the one having a wet dream of several Indonesian civil organizations getting military equipment for no reason.

I'm not the one cherry picking facts.

I'm not the one who has no grasp on defense policy making and the importance of a standardized logistical infrastructure.

I'm not the one who only reads stuff from someone else whenever it fits my agenda.

I'm not the dumb one here.
 
Last edited:
.
I hope you do realize that they're not planning on using the airframes for every hour. Also, according to Mil Design Bureau the Mi-17 has a service life of 12000 hours, so I don't know where you're getting 2000 from unless you're cherry picking. Which honestly I'm highly suspecting.

You also forgot to factor in the fact that we already operate 11 Mi-17's, thus receiving spare parts and having maintenance would be a lot cheaper than buying a new platform and having to set up the relevant infrastructure support for them. Again, you're basically only factoring in things that only help your position and not seeing the bigger picture.

Also, I've met Ryamizard, several times actually. And yes, a lot of things he said should not be taken as truth. Weapons purchases if you don't already know have relevant budgetary and political strings attached. For example he kept saying that the Su-35's would arrive last year yet that never materialize did it?

I get my information first hand because I work in the industry and these projects are the ones I work on with Puspenerbad. I'm not an amateur on 'formil' that just wanks at every announcement made and take them at face value. Maybe if you stopped fantasizing about this stuff you can be like others on this forum and realize that I'm not being disingenuous nor are my intentions bad.

I'm not the one having a wet dream of several Indonesian civil organizations getting military equipment for no reason.

I'm not the one cherry picking facts.

I'm not the one who has no grasp on defense policy making and the importance of a standardized logistical infrastructure.

I'm not the one who only reads stuff from someone else whenever it fits my agenda.

I'm not the dumb one here.

This "Mr Woof Woof" is a guy from JakartaGreater, who made article "Mari Kita Berhitung...." which creamed the pants of many Indonesian military fansboys.
 
. .
Chinook is not going to happen? Be replace with Mi17 due to cheaper cost of Mi17? Really?

Let us compare both :

Chinook price usd 39 mio.
Service life 10000 hours
Flying cost per hour usd 4600

Mi17 price usd 18,4 mio
Service life 2000 hours
Flying cost usd 2850 per hour

1 Chinook service life is the same as 5 Mi17.

So you have to buy 5 unit Mi17 to have the same flying service hours as 1 unit Chinook.

5 Mi17 = 5 x usd 18,4 mio = usd 92 mio

Aquisition cost usd 39 mio compare to usd 92 mio to get the same service life hours.

1 Chinook is cheaper than 5 Mi17.

Chinook service life 10000 hours x usd 4600 = 46000000 = usd 46 mio

For flying until 10000 hours 1 Chinook will spend usd 46 mio.

To get the flying hours of 1 Chinook, we will use 5 Mi17.

Thus let's count the flying cost of this 5 Mi17.

5 x 2000 x 2850 = 10000 x 2850 = 28500000 = usd 28,5 mio.

Now we calculate the aquisition cost plus the flying hours cost.

Chinook = 39 + 46 = 85 = usd 85 mio for Chinook.

To get the same flying hours life as Chinook we should spent :

5 Mi17 = 92 + 28,5 = 120,5 = usd 120,5 mio.

85 mio against 120,5 mio.

Who is cheaper? 85 mio.
Who will have 85 mio spending? Chinook.

Thus still Chinook is cheaper than Mi17.

Now please check for loading capacity.

Mi17 could load 4000 kgs = 4 tons
Chinook could load 10886 kgs = 10,8 tons

To get the same flying hours as 1 Chinook

Mi17 = 4 ton x 5 unit x 2000 hours = 40,000 ton

Chinook = 10,8 ton x 10000 = 108,000 ton

40,000 ton vs 108000 ton

Which is heavier ? 108000 ton

Who have the capacity of 108000 ton during its life? Chinook.

Let us calculate the cost per ton during its or their life :

Chinook :

85 mio / 108000 ton =
85,000,000 / 108,000 = 787.03 = usd 787 per ton for Chinook.

Mi17 :

120,5 mio / 40000 ton =
120,500,000 / 40,000 = 3012.5 = usd 3012.5 per ton for Mi17.

Usd 787 vs usd 3012,5

Which is cheaper? Usd 787

Who has payload cost of usd 787? Chinook!

For all aspect who is the winner?
Chinook is the winner.

Our defense minister Pak Ryacudu stated clearly that Indonesia will buy Chinook.

So who is dumbest?
Woof Woof or Chestnut?
Chestnut.

Mr.Woof Woof, i think i have talked you somewhere in other corner of the internet, Mr. Tukang Ngitung isn't it? You are the ambitious kind of forumer i see, you are consistent with your opinion and viewpoint about having better and more armament options is the go-to strategy, or in other word, more budget and more ambitious weapon acquisitions for the TNI.

For most of the time, i tend to agree with your selections of interesting armaments for the TNI, many of them are indeed good in my opinion, as i also wanted more of them like the F-16 Vipers, MBTs, the SPHs, American "premium" choppers etc... but there's consistent problem with many of your arguments, you are a bit unwilling to compromise with contrasting information and putting too much emphasize on numerical value of armaments, you tend to only see the numerical advantage of things, either in the number of units or quality presented in raw numbers.

Don't get me wrong as i said earlier that i often agree with your weapon selection, but in case that there's more credible information contrasting our opinion, we should change our opinion and reshape it to fit in the "reality", that is TNI's real strategic plan and current situation, not the other way around, even though we are so sure that our opinion does make sense, it does make sense, but not always fits the current situation and strategic needs. I do supports the idea of buying Chinooks and more Apache AH squadrons (at least 3-4 full squadrons), heck i even wants the TNI to standardize the AH-64E Apaches and AH-1Z Vipers (perhaps for the Marines) as the Military's main Attack Helis, while also get some ToT from these Heli deals so that we can design our own in the future. But, i can't really know if it will happen soon or will ever happen to begin with, i can only make speculations and putting together pieces of information from TNI and the Defense Ministry, and that's the limit of my credibility to support my arguments.
 
.
Just for fucking record

Selasa, 30 Apr 2019 16:55 WIB

Dapat Rp 126 T, Kemenhan Raih Anggaran Terbesar di 2020
Hendra Kusuma - detikFinance

29d1f60f-af76-4f4f-b3ad-f2d7ac17e879_169.jpeg
Foto: ptdi
lg.php

Jakarta - Kementerian Pertahanan (Kemenhan) tercatat menjadi institusi yang anggarannya paling besar di tahun 2020. Kemenhan pun menggeser Kementerian PUPR di tahun sebelumnya menjadi yang paling tinggi alokasi anggarannya.

Hal itu diungkapkan oleh Kementerian Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional ( PPN/Bappenas) saat acara Rakorbangpus dan Temu Konsultasi Triwulan II Bappenas-Bappeda 2019.

"Rakorbangpus ini menitikberatkan pada koordinasi perencanaan program untuk merealisasikan target RPJMN 2020-2024," kata Bambang di Kantor Bappenas, Jakarta, Selasa (30/4/2019).


Berdasarkan dokumen Bappenas, Kemenhan mendapatkan pagu anggaran di 2020 sebesar Rp 126,8 triliun sedangkan Kementerian PUPR sebesar Rp 103,8 triliun.

Menteri Keuangan Sri Mulyani Indrawati mengatakan anggaran belanja negara di tahun depan akan meningkat seiring dengan program prioritas pengembangan sumber daya manusia (SDM).

"Belanja negara juga harus makin baik dan berkualitas," ujar Sri Mulyani.

Baca juga: Kapan Biaya Pindah Ibu Kota Dianggarkan? Sri Mulyani: Belum Matang


Berikut 10 kementerian/lembaga dengan anggaran terbesar di tahun 2020:

1. Kemenhan: Rp 126,8 triliun
Prioritas: pengadaan, pemeliharaan, perawatan alutsista. Sebelumnya Rp 107,6 triliun.

2. KemenPUPR: Rp 103,8 triliun
Prioritas: Pembangunan jalan mendukung konektivitas dan pengembangan kawasan. Sebelumnya Rp 107 triliun.

3. Polri: Rp 89,7 triliun
Prioritas: Penyelesaian tindak pidana umum, narkoba, korupsi, dan pengamanan unjuk rasa. Sebelumnya Rp 95,03 triliun.

4. Kemenag: Rp 65,2 triliun
Prioritas: Biaya Operasional Sekolah (BOS), Kartu Indonesia Pintar (KIP), tunjangan penyuluh keagamaan dan revitalisasi sarpras. Sebelumnya Rp 62,15 triliun.

5. Kemensos: Rp 62,7 triliun
Prioritas: Pemberian Bantuan Tunai Bersyarat, Bantuan Pangan Non Tunai. Sebelumnya Rp 41,30 triliun

6. Kemenkes: Rp 56,7 triliun
Prioritas: Jaminan Kesehantan Nasional (JKN). Sebelumnya Rp 59,10 triliun.

7. Kemenkeu: Rp 44,3 triliun
Prioritas: Peningkatan Sistem Perbendaharaan dan Anggaran Negara (SPAN), Sistem Aplikasi Keuangan Tingkat Instansi (SAKTI), dan Modul Penerimaan Negara (MPN), perpajakan. Sebelumnya Rp 45,68 triliun.

8. Kemenhub: Rp 41,7 triliun
Prioritas: Pembangunan Bandara, kereta api, dan pelabuhan pendukung konektivitas. Sebelumnya Rp 48,20 triliun.

9. Kemenristekdikti: 39,7 triliun
Prioritas: Biaya Operasional Perguruan Tinggi, Bidik Misi. Sebelumnya Rp 41,28 triliun.

10. Kemendikbud: Rp 34,5 triliun
Prioritas: KIP, revitalisasi SMK, pembangunan ruang praktik siswa SMK, dan kompetensi guru. Sebelumnya Rp 40,09 triliun.

https://m.detik.com/finance/berita-...126-t-kemenhan-raih-anggaran-terbesar-di-2020

Hanya pagu, di RAPBN bisa ditambah sesuai dgn kondisi
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom