Indonesia Defence Forum

[umigami]

Yup, talking about Medium tank, there is already a document saying we have plan to acquire more than 100 of them. And if we see the time schedule, it shows it is the need for 2020-2024 period only.

Gotta say there's actually no plan to procure kaplan in this 4 years

@Kansel any update regarding KaplanMT procurement?

 

[Gundala]

Should we?

In a way we should. The choice is to lean more to one superpower that is "own/run" by political party or "own/run" by more private/industry. I personaly go to the second one as its more predictable. But the thing is in geopolitic point of view in relation to translating National interest Pak Jokowi administration has been keblinger in a way. Opening the pipe to Chinese investements/loan and hope it can create somekind of leverage for them to back off in Natuna case has been failing miserably. We failed to see that the private sector means not much in regard to influencing China state diplomacy. They are not US!!

If the above case has been put to US Company then the result might be different as the private sector can heavily influence Govt state policy. On the other hand we pushing to nationalize US base company such as freeport, Exxon Mobil, national payment gateway (in relation to Visa/Mastercard US base company), etc. Neraca dagang; With China we import more, with US we export more with value in 2019 about USD 12 bil surplus. Then we lobby US for the SU-35 Purchase? On the other note we Sidelined F16V purchase for other Fighter? See the irony?

Our Govt see their mistake. We starting to open up for US investment or should I say "tailored" exclusively for US investor such as Souverign Wealth Fund. But will it be enough? Certainly not, we need to buy more US product and we already have plan to do so in regard to Hercules, Viper, additional Apache, etc. But there is something or rather "some power" that put them on hold. One obrolan di warung kopi with friends we discuss/gossip this issue, then a friend of mine said "selain rudal, apa ada kontrak pembelian alutsista dgn US di masa pmrnthan Jkw?". I frooze for a sec....its a rethoric question which can be interpreted in many different way....

Idk how we going to do it, and I dont have complete picture of the geopolitic situation as good as A1 class information. Perhaps there are something they know that made them do what they did. I just light up my ciggy, seruput my coffee and hope for the best

looks like the dsme 209 still a go

I think Pak Jokowi statement that said dia ingin program kapal selam nasional jalan terus can be a hint that it has a high chance that the project going to have a go. I followed this thing from a start and I agree with Chestnut on this case that we need platform more then we need additional advance sub. IMHO we need to prioritize Naval technology more then fighter technology simply because our ships industry is larger and more diversify then our dirgantara industry.

 

[IblinI]

Because reverse engineer does not always mean improve, my guy.

Sometimes, state actors buy equipment to reverse engineer in order to develop countermeasures against them. For example, how China likely learned how to defeat (and improve upon) the Russian SAP-518 ECM pod by reverse-engineering and developing their own for their J-16.

And if you don't want to use China, here's an article of when the US Navy bought Kh-31 missiles in order to test and reverse-engineer them in order to develop countermeasures against them for their ships.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...missiles-so-they-bought-real-ones-from-russia

Now, the Kh-31 is essentially useless and obsolete.

The aircraft you posted is a heavily modified J16D growler version(day and night difference of a J16 carrying an ECM pod), which made its first flight somewhere 2015, even though the PLAAF received the first batch of Su-35 in Dec 2016 .

 

[Cromwell]

looks like the dsme 209 still a go
View attachment 661183

DSME has strong supports from KKI & PT.PAL, strong enough to ensure 2nd batch continuation. I posted previously which showed greater local participation in 2nd batch ( 1st one was 9 Millions US$ out of 1 Billion US$ while 2nd one would be 15% work of share from contract value which around 1.2 Billion US$ ). What we should be thinking is about what comes after 2nd batch, The Ministry indicates a plan for something equipped with AIP in years to come.

 

[Nike]

DSME has strong supports from KKI & PT.PAL, strong enough to ensure 2nd batch continuation. I posted previously which showed greater local participation in 2nd batch ( 1st one was 9 Millions US$ out of 1 Billion US$ while 2nd one would be 15% work of share from contract value which around 1.2 Billion US$ ). What we should be thinking is about what comes after 2nd batch, The Ministry indicates a plan for something equipped with AIP in years to come.

Better came with Doosan Cang hoo class aka KSS III

 

[Nike]

Yup, talking about Medium tank, there is already a document saying we have plan to acquire more than 100 of them. And if we see the time schedule, it shows it is the need for 2020-2024 period only.

The fund is limited nowadays, better to invest more on APC and IFV first they can be used directly to support units in Poso and Papua.

 

[Chestnut]

Thanks for the long and detailed reply. But all of these still don't answer our problem in purchasing U.S. made jets/missiles/parts.

And what exactly is the problem?

 

[Cromwell]

Better came with Doosan Cang hoo class aka KSS III

Well the contract for 3rd batch is still far ahead anything now is still speculative though i agree with you, considering long term partnership, greater participation & existing facillity i suppose we should go for DSME 2000

 

[JCMan]

Because reverse engineer does not always mean improve, my guy.

Sometimes, state actors buy equipment to reverse engineer in order to develop countermeasures against them. For example, how China likely learned how to defeat (and improve upon) the Russian SAP-518 ECM pod by reverse-engineering and developing their own for their J-16.

And if you don't want to use China, here's an article of when the US Navy bought Kh-31 missiles in order to test and reverse-engineer them in order to develop countermeasures against them for their ships.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...missiles-so-they-bought-real-ones-from-russia

Now, the Kh-31 is essentially useless and obsolete.

So the Chinese wanted to and then succeeded in reverse engineering some monkey model Russian defense tech, did I understand it correctly? Bravo! Then clearly the Chinese have superior technology compared to the Russians because they can copy Russian downgraded techs.

Oh wait..

 

[JCMan]

The aircraft you posted is a heavily modified J16D growler version(day and night difference of a J16 carrying an ECM pod), which made its first flight somewhere 2015, even though the PLAAF received the first batch of Su-35 in Dec 2016 .

Thanks for providing yet another explanation of how easy it was to debunk some opinion based claims as opposed to factual based ones. Respect.

 

[Kansel]

@Kansel any update regarding KaplanMT procurement?

It's called renbut "rencana kebutuhan" it's still planning not included in MEF blueprint gotta say

 

[NEKONEKO]

What we should be thinking is about what comes after 2nd batch, The Ministry indicates a plan for something equipped with AIP in years to come.

We also need to think how to improve local content being used, our BUMN should reach out to foreign partner for partnership (kita belum mampu mengembangkan teknologi sendiri).
More submarine will be ordered in the future, opportunity for our local company to expand their portfolio and try to get a share of the pie.

I'm looking at ya LEN.

 

[JCMan]

Because China only need the engine used for Su 35 not the whole platform system, aka Saturn AL41F in which came from development of Saturn AL31. In which the family machine had been used to powered Chinese J11 family in from of WS10A and being produced since 2010 or maybe earlier. Russian never allow China to bought only the engine so they offered the Su 35 as a whole package as Russian know China doesn't need Russian fighter anymore afterall.

That's why China never intended to buy Su 35 at large number, their attitude is different when compared the first time they are buying Su 27 and Su 30 in early 1990. And you should know where China put Su 35 squadron of their, they put it in Guangdong part of 2nd Aviation Division, Southern province of China where they only had to facing less complex supposed enemies of their like Vietnam or Taiwan and other ASEAN countries.

That's the claim that the Chinese made to provide justification for their internal public and stakeholders as to why they needed to buy the Su-35 when they can supposedly make better indigenous planes. Much like how our MoD sometimes needed to explain why we needed to buy helicopters made by Agusta Westland when we can build the same kind of choppers made by PTDI in collaboration with Airbus Military.

My point is, you don't reverse engineer technologies that you consider inferior to yours or that you can already manufacture yourself. This fact alone disproved a sly claim made by some guy who are supposedly expert in the ins and out of the defense industry and as a suggestion that he or she should just stick to an area of expertise and refrain from spreading false opinions which are not grounded on factual, verifiable and substantiated details.

I like rumors as much as the the next guy, but ones that aren't factually verifiable are just bedtime stories which insults our intelligence and made us feel like being taken for ride and bordering, dare I say, fanboyism?

 

[JCMan]

Among other things the PUSENKAV commander told me was how:

1.) The vehicle is rear heavy, so the vehicle moves with the elevated up by a few centimeters, limiting the driver's vision.
2.) It has too high of a profile.
3.) The turret is outclassed in firepower.
4.) The Army in unwilling to spend million-billions for what they see as only a marginal improvement over vehicles that they currently operate.

Like I said before, the Kaplan MT is more of a political project than an actual project born out of requirement by the Army. From the tone of his voice, the PUSENKAV commander implies that Pindad either did not consult them at all or only took basic inputs during the entire design process.

Actually my real gripe is with this statement, the one regarding the Russian vs Chinese fighter jet technology is just a snipe to show how easy it was to debunk a non factual opinion.

I know for a fact that Pindad worked very closely with Pussenkav during the design phase of the MMWT. The opsreq was from the Pussenkav and detailed specifications were also provided by them including but not limited to its STANAG protection level requirement, the calibre of the gun to be used, automotive performance, number of crews, even the placement of the engine. It would have been a commercial suicide for Pindad to develop the tank "without consulting or took only basic inputs" from Pussenkav, as they could end up spending millions of their own dollars on development costs only to see the user ended up refusing to buy their product.

The Pussenkav commander that you mentioned obviously did not paint the overall picture or hide certain details in the story, but boy am I not convinced of how he sounded way too much like what the media was saying about the tank.

1. How the tank was rear heavy and looked "mendongak" which was already explained by the designer himself that it was intentionally made that way to help the tank climb certain degrees of obstacles as per stated in the opsreq.
2. The high profile would have been a fatal flaw if the Harimau was designed as a tank destroyer like the Centauro, but Harimau was intended to act more in the battlefield fire support and flanking maneuver role.
3. Again, the decision to use the 105 mm was dictated by the tank's intended role. They could've installed the 120 mm gun if Pussenkav wanted a tank destroyer instead, but how many 120 mm rounds could the tiny turret hold as opposed the 105 mm rounds? Your Pussenkav commander must have known more about this than he make it out to be.
4. A tank designed in 2016 only had marginal improvements compared to the Scorpion which were purchased in the 1990's? I know a lot of people who will disagree with this statement almost immediately, but what do I know? Since you knew the head honcho, right? But please ask your Pussenkav commander friend about these "marginal" improvements, how marginal were these improvements exactly?

 

[Nike]

That's the claim that the Chinese made to provide justification for their internal public and stakeholders as to why they needed to buy the Su-35 when they can supposedly make better indigenous planes. Much like how our MoD sometimes needed to explain why we needed to buy helicopters made by Agusta Westland when we can build the same kind of choppers made by PTDI in collaboration with Airbus Military.

My point is, you don't reverse engineer technologies that you consider inferior to yours or that you can already manufacture yourself. This fact alone disproved a sly claim made by some guy who are supposedly expert in the ins and out of the defense industry and as a suggestion that he or she should just stick to an area of expertise and refrain from spreading false opinions which are not grounded on factual, verifiable and substantiated details.

I like rumors as much as the the next guy, but ones that aren't factually verifiable are just bedtime stories which insults our intelligence and made us feel like being taken for ride and bordering, dare I say, fanboyism?

That's not rumour when China in fact capable to build their own fifth generation fighter in build and suited for their own network centric warfare, had their own Made JHMSC, had their very long range BVR missile, had their more advance AESA radar thanks to the more advance electronic and components industrial power of China compared to Russia. That's a fact and not rumour!!!

And another thought is why China only bought small number of 24, when China keep producing J16 and the likes in more higher number?