Indonesian Aero News

[Ananda]

From Where will we get such amount of money?
We even have not enough money for the Project 636 subs, more CN235s or even for the required budget for the maintenance of all weaponsystems.
Worldbank, IMF?

Sandhi like I said on other thread, at present (2010) we only have USD 4.5 bio military budgets which represent less than 0.7% of GDP compared to this year GDP (which World Bank analyst agree will be in the amount of USD 700 bio). Of that only USD 1.5 bio that's available for procurements of new asset or upgrading existing asset.

The money for the Kilo is there, please remembered that the financing of the submarines project has been set asside on the budget period of 2005-2009 in the amount of USD 700 mio. This budget been carry over to the period 2010-2014 not because the money is not there, but because the Mindef, The Ministry of Economics, Ministry of State Enterprises and the Navy still can't decide which Submarines we would buy.

Remembered the contradictive argument between the Mindef which in one side say that the Submarines Technology still far from PAL Capabilities and PT Pal (with backup of Ministry of Economics and Ministry of State Enterprises) who said that they can build Submarines and only need Foreign Shipyard/Design House to be their partnet in Technology.

On the credit export, large chunck of Russian Credit Export also has not been used, due to this arguments on Submarines. It's the Navy that said that they want Kilo's. While from other ministry point of view is whoever can provide technology to build the submarines locally with PAL would be the winner.

That's why the Light Frigates programme that seems wil be go ahead soon, since PAL seems near the completion with Foreign Shipyads/Design House which will provide the basis for Local Light frigates.
This is huge amount of money and need a lot of political support from administrations and parlements, which seems this days the support is to build as much as possible locally.

Now for the fighters this's more clear cut. We simply do not have capacities (within DI/IAe) and technology to build Fighters locally for at least another decade or so. Thus Fighters was more clear cut to be sources from outside.
That's why now seems the Russian Credit Export will be given much of that to the Air Forces (who already stated that they want more batch of flankers than current 10, at least another 6, and Medium Range SAM like SA 300).

Personally I don't think we'll go with Kilo. The Navy will not like that, but the bean counters in other ministry will be more inclined to back up South Korean or the German in which both of them already stated their willingness to help PAL build Submarines manufacturing facilities if the prices right.

Now the administrations said that the budget will be gradually increase until reach 1.5% of GDP by 2014. Next year it's already commited USD 7.3 bio for military budgets in shich USD 3 bio already stated for procurements new assets and upgarding existing assets. That's double than this year. If 1.5% going to be reached by 2014, in which many economist local and world bank predicts the GDP will be around USD 1.0 Trillion, than we're talking USD 15 bio, in which half of that will be available for procurements.

However money asside is also not the only problem. Currently our budget practises is single year budget usage. In short those budgets has to be used only in the year budget. Lest said the air force have procurement allocations of USD 400 mio. They also know next year they will get another USD 400 mio at minimum. They're interested in another batch of Flankers amounted USD 300 mio. However they already used USD 200 mio for another procurement, thus only left USD 200 mio.
Under single year budget policy, they can't make contract for that batch of Flankers, even they know by using part of next year budget they can afford to made that contract. However if we using multi year procurements budgets (like many nations already use like US did), the they can make that contract and will be paid in batches wich run multiple years.

That's why from 2005 - 2009, the budgets that being used was in average of 70%. So by doing multiple year budget (in which now being heavely discussed by the respecting ministry) in theory we can:
1. Made large at front contract for procurements which will be paid in batches,
2. This also can reduce the costs of procurements than doing each single contrect every year. US Navy already doing this when contracting their new Super Hornet which according to this month AirForce magazines already save them USD 500 mio.
3. Also by using multiple years budget, you can also tap the money from local state banks wich now still reluctant to financed military procurements due to one big part of no multiple year contract. Banks and Manufactures love multiple year budgets and contracts since it guarantee the availability of the fund for long term projects.

In shot having money thus not guarantee that you can used them. I suspect Mindef now more boldly assesing new asset since the administrations now since more inclined to provide more money, and also since the respective ministry now seems on the verge on agreeing multiple years budget procurement contract.

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

Thanks for your explanation Ananda!

Now the administrations said that the budget will be gradually increase until reach 1.5% of GDP by 2014. Next year it's already commited USD 7.3 bio for military budgets in shich USD 3 bio already stated for procurements new assets and upgarding existing assets. That's double than this year. If 1.5% going to be reached by 2014, in which many economist local and world bank predicts the GDP will be around USD 1.0 Trillion, than we're talking USD 15 bio, in which half of that will be available for procurements.

Good news!

 

[Ananda]

From Jakarta Post:

To quell public confusion on the state of Indonesia’s military relations with the US, the Defense Ministry confirmed that the world’s largest weapons-maker has completely lifted an embargo banning weapon sales to the Indonesian Military (TNI).

In its first clear statement on the embargo’s end, a Defense Ministry spokesman said that Indonesia could procure any type of weapon from the US because there was no longer an embargo.

“The US embargo on the sale of any type of weapon to Indonesia ended completely in 2005,” Indonesian Defense Ministry spokesman I Wayan Midhio said over the weekend.

“After the embargo ended, there were no more distinctions to be made between lethal or non-lethal weapons sales,” he said.

Indonesia can now purchase lethal weapons from the US and there is no “partial prohibition” of arms sales to Indonesia, as was previously reported, he added.
Many observers — even those well-informed on bilateral military relations — said they did not know if Indonesia could buy lethal weapons from the US or not, even after military ties resumed in 2005.

Indonesia recently proposed a plan to purchase American-made F-16 jet fighters, which are categorized as lethal weapons, and C-130H Hercules cargo jets, which are not considered lethal, if the US lifted its embargo, as previously reported.

Wayan said Defense Minister Purnomo Yusgiantoro expressed the government’s intent to buy the aircraft in a bilateral meeting with US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.

The US Congress imposed an embargo that banned international military education and training (IMET) and military equipment sales to Indonesia almost two decades ago.

The embargo was imposed in response to repeated human rights abuses committed by the Indonesian Army’s Special Forces (Kopassus) in West Papua and Timor Leste (then East Timor), which killed more than 100 unarmed civilians, including two US citizens, and injured dozens.

Some experts maintain that the US encouraged Indonesia’s use of lethal force against civilians in East Timor.

Padjadjaran University international relations expert Teuku Rezasyah said history shows that former US president Gerald Ford and former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger gave the Indonesian government a “green light” to send Kopassus to East Timor and ignored reports of violence during official US government visits to Indonesia.

The US Congress said it would lift the ban entirely only if the US government could ensure that Indonesia addressed human rights violations.

An Indonesian government delegation led by former president Megawati Soekarnoputeri, visited the US in 2001 in an attempt to soften the policy.
The meeting between Megawati and former US president George W. Bush resulted in a US commitment to provide US$400,000 in extended IMET and to lift the embargo on non-lethal military weapon sales.

The US Congress has not approved joint military trainings between Kopassus and the US military due to alleged Kopassus human rights abuses.

President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono is expected to raise the issue during US President Barack Obama’s planned visit to Indonesia in November.


(The Jakarta Post)

Another move by Min-Def to quell local opossition on acquiring military hardware from US. This again show indication Min-Def and Air Force intentions to get more F 16 as complementer for Flankers.

 

[Ananda]

Teaming Up With South Korea on KFX, Is It A Good Option for Indonesia ?

From Jakarta Post:

Indonesia and South Korea are getting ready to sign an MoU on the joint-development of a KFX fighter jet program (dubbed Boramae) later this year, following a letter of intent in March 2009 on Indonesian participation in a KFX study. When enacted, the MOU will provide a breakthrough for both countries in terms of bilateral defense collaboration and aircraft technology indigenization.
The defense community and members of parliament believe that the cooperation will help the revitalization of the Indonesian defense industry. MPs urged the government to conduct a feasibility test before embarking on a US$2 billion venture that spans across an eight-year period. It is expected from the collaboration that five prototypes will be built before 2020.

Approximately 200+ aircraft will be manufactured for both the Indonesian and Korean Air Force. Surely there is a sense of pride creeping into every Indonesian’s minds knowing that the biggest Muslim country in the world is going to carry on an indigenize a fighter jet program, debunking the myth that only technologically advanced countries can achieve this.

Indeed, the cooperation will not only allow Indonesia to access the so-called 4.5th generation fighter jet technology, but also help South Korea preserve the bloodline for an indigenous fighter jet program since they can only afford 60 percent of the necessitate fund.

But before we indulge in a techno-nationalism fantasy, several imminent issues need to be pondered. Sarcastic remarks as to why Indonesia uses a jet fighter project as sustenance for the aerospace industry when the capacity of the Indonesian Aerospace is still limited to transport aircraft and helicopter, will inevitably raise.

Therefore, it is important to answer basic questions such as what the “indigenize fighter jet program” means in reality and how this will help revitalize the defense industry. There is also an urgency to shed some light upon the KFX program and whether it fits into the Indonesian strategic and defense-industrial interests.

The first issue is the technical and fiscal feasibility of the KFX project. The controversial project was initiated in 2001, with an estimated cost of $13 billion for the production of 120 aircraft, and has not progressed from a feasibility study since. It is acknowledged that South Korea is lacking both in technical and fiscal abilities to kick start the program, with the Korean Aerospace Industry (KAI) as a prime contractor possessing only 63 percent of technological capability needed.

Established through a merger of three companies in 1999, KAI has a modest experience of developing the indigenous KT-1 Wong Bee trainer, license-producing F-16K and joint-developing T-50 advanced trainer as well as making parts for F-15 (forward fuselage and wings).It does not have an extensive track record as it exports only the KT-1 trainer to Indonesia and Turkey, and is still unable to sell a single T-50 advanced trainer jet despite having been shortlisted for procurement in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Israel, Greece, Singapore and the US.

The second issue is the “sovereignty” of technology contained in the KFX and sustainability of in-service operation, since the KFX will be using subsystems such as engine and avionics from third countries that might present political complication for Indonesia. The KFX will be developed from T-50 Golden Eagle, a supersonic advance jet trainer jointly developed by KAI and the US Lockheed Martin, with the latter provided the avionics system, flight control and wings. In addition to the US, it is possible that Israel also contributes through an Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar that will be built domestically in South Korea.

With the Korean Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) statement about the necessity to bring in international partner from big players such as Boeing, Lockheed Martin, EADS and Saab to help develop the KFX, obviously there will be further third country subsystems fitted into the KFX platform, which bring more complexities of supply in the future. Nevertheless, there is benefit, as Indonesia might be able to absorb world class knowledge through cooperation with those big aerospace companies and establish a position in the global supply chain.

The third issue is risk associated with developing new technology; among them are cost overruns, under performance and delay. Under the MOU, Indonesia will bear 20 percent of the initial budget worth $8 billion, but the real cost can easily stretch out along the process. The risks of cost overruns and delay have taken place in similar collaborations such as the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) and the Eurofighter.

The JSF cost overrun is almost double its initial estimated price within 10 years of project (2001-2010), whereas the Eurofighter experienced cost overrun and “eternal delay” so bad that the participating countries decided to cut down the amount of aircraft order. Indonesia needs to be clear on how flexible they can be in terms of accepting risks incurred from participation in the project and whether the risk will be worthy of being paid off.

The fourth issue is whether the KFX project will really help revitalize the Indonesian defense industry, through job creation, transfer of technology and creation of local supply chains. Jakarta needs to be articulate in the clearest way possible about the expectation of the economic benefits possibly derived from the project.

It is not clear yet as to which model of work share is to be employed, whether it is juste retour (just return) or earned work shares (participation based on demonstrated competencies), or will Jakarta only access the know-how without participating in the production line (which is nearly impossible).
For the sake of comparison, the Eurofighter project helps create 30,000 jobs across Europe.

However, with a cost at $45-50 million per copy, it sees limited prospect of export when facing competition from the JSF and Gripen, not to mention competing Russian and Chinese products in the non-European market.

Aviation Week estimated the break-even-point of the KFX will be reached with production of at least 200-250 aircraft, and it is only if the unit price of each copy can be pushed down to $41 million that makes it possible for export. If Indonesia were to order around 50 aircraft, it is possible to negotiate 20-25 percent of total work-share based on juste retourprinciple, and this will materialize in a significant number of jobs. Without export, however, the long-term economic benefits will likely demise once the project completes.

Experts share doubt whether the KFX can really offer the cutting-edge technology as offered by 5th Generation fighters such as the JSF and the Indo-Russian PAKFA in 2020s, which means in terms of strategic calculation, the KFX may not be the best option to fight with a more technologically advanced enemy.

Facing the 5th G fighter jet race from China, Japan, and Indo-Russia, the South Korean government has a difficult time calculating a trade-off between strategic and industrial interest, between building an indigenous fighter or buy best off-the-shelf (OTS) available on the market. Indonesia may not face a similar dilemma as there is no imminent 5th G fighter race with neighboring countries, but it does not mean that Jakarta do not need to explore another value for the money option.

Another possibility of using defense acquisition as industrial policy tool is using an offsets obligation to accompany the OTS procurement. Alternatively, $2 billion will enable Indonesia to get more than a squadron of cutting-edge OTS technology. Neither joint-development nor procuring OTS will give sovereignty of supply, but the OTS does not only give the advantage of value for money because it bypasses the development cost, but it also ensures getting the attested technology that probably would serve both defense-industrial and strategic interests better.

(The Jakarta Post)

I Put Bold on some comment in this articles on KFX, I Think not even South Korean even dream that KFX will be in par of F 35 or Pakfa. KFX was aimed to replaced F 5, and with Indonesia it's aimed to replaced F 5, Hawk 100/200 and F 16 Block 15.

I Think KFX was aimed to be fighthers with 'near' capabilities of Gen 5, and it'll be aimed as relative cheap-affordable but relatively can provide up dated technology. In sense it's next gen F 5 or more precise KFX to F 35 will be like F 5 in comparison to F 16.

Also the SEA region is not immune from 5th G Fighther race. With Singapore and Australia going to get F 35 on 2020 onwards, some kind of development like KFX can provide Indonesia (if KFX development turn out on schedulle and relatively on budgets) with something (on paper) should be relatively close to F 35.

The writer is an associate research fellow with the Military Studies Program at S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, specializing on small defense economies’ arms acquisition.

On Jakarta Post site already South Korean and Indonesian commenting rather angrilly on the articles. Thus show that politically KFX can move on development based, due to nationalistic pride. However the writter in my oppinion have shown one point that's very relevant, what KFX's aimed to be ?

 

[OPSSG]

@Ananda,

KAI needs volume and if Indonesia is willing and able to pay, it's a good deal for KAI and their track record on development is not bad. I'm more concerned about KAI's long term financial viability (this is because they have not been able to make a sale for the KAI T-50 at UAE or Singapore), rather than concerns voiced in the above article.

What Indonesia gets in return is an industrial base that is KAI dependent, your air force gets new planes and your politicians get to promote local pride. If this joint venture is lucky, maybe a future sale to another ASEAN country or some other 3rd world country (there's a potential that the JV will end up competing with China's offerings) but not to richer countries like Australia or Singapore.

It's about choices and IMO, it's ultimately an Indonesian choice and everyone has to start some where. Just remember, development carries developmental risks and Indonesia does not have the requisite risk reduction tools nor the maturity of the aero-space industrial base in Brazil.

 

[T.C.P]

If everything goes according to plan and he KFX is developed then does any one have any idea in which year its going to hit the production lines. If this date is past 2018 or 2020 would it be wise to go ahead with this air craft?

By 2017 F-35s and PAK FA and HAL FGFA will have entered service and other countries 5 G aircraft will enter advance development stages or even production lines.

OPSSG mentioned that this air craft might have export potential, but I highly doubt it. As this KFX is 4.5 G, it will already have a lot of developed and proven systems for competition- F-18E/F, Mig-35, J-10B, Eurofighter Typhoons, Rafales, SAAB Gripen NG, Su-35s.

BTW does any one have specifications of this air craft?

 

[Ananda]

It's about choices and IMO, it's ultimately an Indonesian choice and everyone has to start some where. Just remember, development carries developmental risks and Indonesia does not have the requisite risk reduction tools nor the maturity of the aero-space industrial base in Brazil.

OPSSG, I agree and personally I would rather IAe to pursue N 219 (the small transport they're going to developed as Twin Otter replacements) and larger derivatives of CN 235 that they will developed using combine technology of CN 235 and now defunct N 250. This will provide more stable based for their future sustainability as Aero Industry.
Still if joining KAI in KFX as Junior Partner will mean IAe will depend on KAI Technology and Platform, but it will provide them with technological opportunity.

If everything goes according to plan and he KFX is developed then does any one have any idea in which year its going to hit the production lines. If this date is past 2018 or 2020 would it be wise to go ahead with this air craft?

By 2017 F-35s and PAK FA and HAL FGFA will have entered service and other countries 5 G aircraft will enter advance development stages or even production lines.

OPSSG mentioned that this air craft might have export potential, but I highly doubt it. As this KFX is 4.5 G, it will already have a lot of developed and proven systems for competition- F-18E/F, Mig-35, J-10B, Eurofighter Typhoons, Rafales, SAAB Gripen NG, Su-35s.

BTW does any one have specifications of this air craft?

TCP, any potential usage outside South Korea and Indonesia (if we joining KFX program) will much depend on the prices and technological package they are going to put. Still with KAI background, I suspects many US origin technology will be put it.

Like I said if they are able to made KFX to F 35 like F 5 to F 16, and they have potential to sell it to someone who wants to have platform that close enough to F 35 but with much lower prices. Remembered they haven't been able to sell T-50 not because it's a bad trainers, but because it's too much for a trainer. In my oppinion T-50 was build with T-38 as target to replaced, but then only limited country that need and can afford kind like T-38 as trainers in the 70's and 80's (the hight of T-38 days)

In short, build something that's relatively excellent in a certain catagory (like T-50 as LIFT trainers) will not means they will get export orders if the specs is not fitt enough (or in case of T-50 exceed the specs) to target market. Thus if they can target certain market and build KFX to what that market need, and they can get export order.
BTW, specs for this aircraft seems still scatchy, and I think KAI still finishing the final specs from several model that already around. Bellow you can see one of the model of KFX.

 

[Ananda]

Confirmation on Indonesia Participation in KFX Program.

From Kompas Newspaper with Google Translation:

SEOUL - Indonesia finally agreed to join in the project development of KF-X fighter who led South Korea, the project was previously delayed for 10 years due to technical problems and funding.

"Indonesia is expected to take about 50 KF-X fighter jets by taking 20 percent of project development cost 8-12 billion U.S. dollars worth it," South Korean Defense Ministry said in a statement. The two countries also agreed to cooperate in the production and marketing of these fighter jets.

The agreement was signed in Seoul by the Korean Ministry of Defence Commissioner and the Secretary General of the Ministry of Defence of Indonesia, Eris Herryanto on Thursday (15 / 7). South Korea had previously introduced the KF-X project in 2000 to produce domestically produced fighter jet. But was suspended because of technical and economic problems, President Lee Myung-Bak on January 2010 and agreed to revive the project amid rising tensions between South Korea and North Korea.

This aircraft will replace all the F-4 fighter jets and F-5 in 2020. South Korean news agency, Yonhap, reported, about 170 F-5 fighter jets are still operating in South Korea.
"Reactivation of the project will begin early next year, and we plan to produce a new fighter jets after a feasibility study completed by the end of 2012," said a South Korean Defense Ministry spokesman.

"We need a foreign partner who will transfer technology and spare parts is the main fighter jet," he said, without mentioning the total funds required. According to the spokesman, in addition to the development of key projects that KF-X, South Korea will also continue to buy advanced fighter jets from foreign companies.

Source: KOMPAS

In My Book, this confirms few things:
1. KFX is aim to replace F 5, and unlike F 35 wich initially aim to replace F 16. Such as that KFX was not build to compete with F 35.
2. With 20% participations DI/IAe will be junior partner to KAI, and the participations will be limited to subcontract on the development and manufacturing.
3. KAI will definetely try to get Mature partners and with its history on T/A-50 strong contender will be Locheed. Thus possibility KFX (if that's happen) will sheed some F 35 technology.
4. For Indonesia, KFX also aimed to replace Hawk 100/200, F 5, and F 16 A/B.

 

[adi]

If everything goes according to plan and he KFX is developed then does any one have any idea in which year its going to hit the production lines. If this date is past 2018 or 2020 would it be wise to go ahead with this air craft?

Difficult to say. This is almost a pure korean project and they run on different schedule pace when it comes to large scale project. T/A-50 and KF-15 for eg.

By 2017 F-35s and PAK FA and HAL FGFA will have entered service and other countries 5 G aircraft will enter advance development stages or even production lines.

KFX is not in the same class as PAK FA. PAK FA has far bigger flight envelop and airframe. The unstated primary goal is to replace F-16, but they can't say that since F-16 is still the most used, biggest source of income for Lockheed Martin. The political pressure to cancel this project will be too great. So the official public goal is replacing F-5 type of plane. It is in Korean and Indonesian interest to downplay this fighter spec because f-16 replacement kfx will be first truly capable non western mid range fighter that can be exported to almost everybody in the world (Egypt, Turkey, pakistan, all latin america, all of africa and smaller asian countries) translation: yes, the second generation KFX will be F-35 direct market competitor.

OPSSG mentioned that this air craft might have export potential, but I highly doubt it. As this KFX is 4.5 G, it will already have a lot of developed and proven systems for competition- F-18E/F, Mig-35, J-10B, Eurofighter Typhoons, Rafales, SAAB Gripen NG, Su-35s.

BTW does any one have specifications of this air craft?

There is no final specification until 2012.

 

[Ananda]

From Jakarta Post:

PT Sari Bahari, a small private company in Malang, is successfully making bombs for the Indonesian Military’s (TNI) fighter jets and rockets for its helicopters, with materials completely procured from local sources, says an official.
News of the company’s success in the local production of certified war weaponry was made public during a visit by Defense Minister Purnomo Yusgiantoro to the company’s plant this week.

Since 2008, the 57 employees of PT Sari Bahari have supplied P100-120 bombs to the Indonesian Air Force for use with its Russian-made SU-27SK and SU-30MK fighter aircraft. The munitions are also said to be suitable for NATO warplanes, such as the F-5E Tiger.
P100-120 bombs are used for practice. Another model, the P100-120L, is intended for combat use.

“The weapons have been tested successfully and we await their certification,” PT Sari Bahari president director Ricky Hendrick Egam told The Jakarta Post on Tuesday.
Sari Bahari also manufactures 70mm rockets that have not yet been certified by the Air Force’s Research and Devlopment Division.

Ricky said Malaysian Air Force had planned to order 1,000 P100-120 bombs.
“The Malaysian Air Force has bee using live bombs for practices. That’s very costly,” he said.
During a test, a Sukhoi jet fighter released a P100-120 bomb while flying at 1524 meters at 833 kilometers per hour.

The Indonesian Air Force requires more than 700 units of practice bombs every year, according to reports.
Ricky said the P100-120s were far cheaper than imported Russian bombs. Russian munitions cost US$4,000 per unit — which is enough to buy three of four of Sari Bahari’s bombs, he added.

The bombs are 1.13 meters long, 27.3 centimeters wide and can weigh up to 56 kilograms. The P100-120’s body is made of nodular iron materials and its slug, which is the hook connected to the aircraft, is made of steel. The tail is made of ST-37.
Another Malang-based company, PT Pindad Turen fills P100-120 bomb canisters with explosives for Sari Bahari.

Basically it is copy from Russian standard Unguided Bombs. Well you have to start somewhere though. You have to build the based for weapons fabrications, before you can move on to next stage. It's tedious work, but with limited budget then that's the way you need to go.

BTW: I Put attachment on the pitcures of the Bomb, however when uploading to this site it's changing to different pictures. Before I upload to the site, I have check on editing stages, and still the picture that's been loaded. Can anybody tell me why it can be change after uploading to the site ? I have that problem several times before.

 

[Ananda]

KFX is not in the same class as PAK FA. PAK FA has far bigger flight envelop and airframe. The unstated primary goal is to replace F-16, but they can't say that since F-16 is still the most used, biggest source of income for Lockheed Martin. The political pressure to cancel this project will be too great. So the official public goal is replacing F-5 type of plane. It is in Korean and Indonesian interest to downplay this fighter spec because f-16 replacement kfx will be first truly capable non western mid range fighter that can be exported to almost everybody in the world (Egypt, Turkey, pakistan, all latin america, all of africa and smaller asian countries) translation: yes, the second generation KFX will be F-35 direct market competitor.

Will have to see on possibility of second generation/batch. It's much depend on Technological packages that will put on the First Gen/Batch. However considered this. Sources in Korea and Indonesia stated that this project need USD 8 bio - USD 12 bio to developed, in which according to Korea Times, South Korea can covered USD 7 bio - USD 9 bio. Compared that to tens of USD Billions that US already put on developing F 35 up untill this level, and you can see more money needed to be put on KFX if it wants to be developed at par with F-35.

I personally still think that KFX will not be developed at par to F-35. Near F-35 will be at mosts since at par with F 35 will jack-up the development costs considerable that in turn will made KFX not affordable for the intended target market which is developing countries.

KFX airframe would have direct lineage from F-16/TA-50, it also absorbs a lot of lesson from Grippen. Engine is unknown and still being finalized. This will be KFX biggest problem. I suspect avionic would be logical development at level of Korean electronic capability (eg. fairly advance, far more so than Israelis all glass avionic) The rest minor thing such as RAM coating, lightweight composite are all in koreas capability.

Korea has world class Consumers Electronics industry. But it's different if we're talking on MIlitary Electronics. KAI sources confirm that they nedd more Third parties partners as technological suppliers. KAI is very good on integrating 'on the shelf' technology since it's much faster and on some level relatively cheaper to do.

Will be interesting though on which supplier will be choose. Looking on Korea and Indonesian sources, for engine for instances, besided GE (which logical considering KAI involvement with them), also come out SNECMA. Also in Avionics, besides names like Honeywell, also come out names like SAGEM. Korea have long comfortability level on rellying to US sources, but recent history can't be told for Indonesia. However Indonesia ussualy have more comfort level on military sourcing with French suppliers. Thus in my oppinion KFX can be build with different modullar packages, like Korean Versions uses GE engines, while Indonesian ones uses SNECMA. Korean (besides they're own electronics) will uses extensive US and Israelli ones, while Indonesia will relly more to French and other European sources.

This's logical if KFX wants to be developed to target wide range export market, since not all country comfortable with US or Israelli avionics and sensors.

For Indonesia, KFX probably will also have trainer and extended range light aircraft role. (eg. for the price of high end training jet, they can get a self produced low end KFX) Indonesian contribution in the early stage would be its huge airspace and a lot of man power to test/debug this plane followed by low cost assembly/testing

I think the bold ones is more true. DI have relatively wide experiences on building relatively Airframes with much cheaper costs.

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Quite strange to be using live bombs for practice. The Russkis have the P-50T bomblet for training which should be cheaper. The 110lb bomb has a light/smoke indicator.

The P100-120 should be a license variant of the OFAB-100-120. According to Rosboronexport release data is 500-1500kph, 5-15000m altitude. Each Su-30mk can in theory carry 32.

 

[Ananda]

Quite strange to be using live bombs for practice. The Russkis have the P-50T bomblet for training which should be cheaper. The 110lb bomb has a light/smoke indicator.

Well according to the article, seems Malaysian do not order practises bombs, or perhaps they ordered it but not in quantity enough. The 1000 potential orders are for the practises bombs. The Article indicated that the Russian build ones costs USD 4000, which can buy 3 of the Indonesian build practises bombs versions. In such one practises bombs only costs USD 1200 - USD 1300. If it's not DIRT Cheap, well I don't what to call them

 

[adi]

Will have to see on possibility of second generation/batch. It's much depend on Technological packages that will put on the First Gen/Batch. However considered this. Sources in Korea and Indonesia stated that this project need USD 8 bio - USD 12 bio to developed, in which according to Korea Times, South Korea can covered USD 7 bio - USD 9 bio. Compared that to tens of USD Billions that US already put on developing F 35 up untill this level, and you can see more money needed to be put on KFX if it wants to be developed at par with F-35.

I personally still think that KFX will not be developed at par to F-35. Near F-35 will be at mosts since at par with F 35 will jack-up the development costs considerable that in turn will made KFX not affordable for the intended target market which is developing countries.

 

[Ananda]

any how, at this moment, F-35 might be the most advance single engine fighter. But nobody can buy it and it's not ready. USAF will get theirs in quantity around 2015 along with first partners.

The rest of B list allies won't get theirs until 2019-2020. D list country like Indonesia won't get F-35 until B or C model is out so Australia and Singapore can maintain their edge. That's 2025 or later. Two decades from now for A model? Way too late to be useful. start working on 2nd gen kf-x already.

Well that's why I'm quite thrill for Indonesia to involved with KFX (as long as it can developed as planned). For me F-35 is getting too overpriced anyway for country like Indonesia to maintain in relative significant numbers. Thus getting involved with KFX potentially will provide Indonesian Industry with relative higher end technology without having to participate with higher costs program like F-35.

I'm no technician, just a financier. Thus I only compared the costs of development that budgeted for KFX and the costs that already put for F-35.
Could that be portion of F-35 costs was overpriced..perhaps..still they developed many technology 'off the shelf'..while KFX according to KAI, will maximize 'on the shelf' technology that already on the development. That's why I put that KFX will be 'near' but not 'at par' with F-35.

Asia geopolitical landscape and sensor technology will be too different, pinning national defense on purchasing F-35 is foolish. How will F-35 fare in 2020-2030 time frame. It's a underpowered one trick wonder. (even counting optimistic 10% T/W improvement each decade, it's still a pokey cow) By the time non NATO countries can buy it, things like photodiode avalanche, new portable spectral sensor, including high resolution weather radar, more advance wide spectrum synthetic aperture radar, disposable UAV, etc will nullify its stealthiness. This is not counting any new detection technology or russian ready with export version of PAK-FA..Discounter Su-35BM probably would cost a third of F-35. Will that delicate conductive polymer skin survive in hot and humid, rough run ways? etc.

In the end I believe, F-35 will pretty much light up on radar screen like any other fighter if not a veritable flying disco-ball. Yet the plane doesn't have the kick like bigger double engine fighters. (F-22, J-11B, PAK-FA, various flankers mod, F-15 mod, etc) It's too slow and out gunned for asian theater. (and no range too) implementing new composite to increase T/W performance will push the price even higher.
[Mod edit: Read the Forum Rules and stop posting unverified rubbish that defies logic in this forum. You have been warned to provide sources to back up your ridiculous claims.

See below for how to cite a source.]

Uuuuhhh You're opening the Hornet Nest..be prepared to get clubbing from F-35 supporters :smash Well I'm not belong to that though

 

[Bonza]

Why do people keep insisting the F-35 is a "one-trick pony"? What about radars? Datalinks? Jammers? Electro-optical sensors? These things are incredibly important in modern air combat, but they get ignored in favour of thrust-to-weight ratios and publicly available (read: incomplete) data on weapon systems.

Once again the "anti-stealth" argument is put forward, and once again I have to ask the question, if such sensor systems are just around the corner, why are hundreds of billions of dollars being spent around the globe to develop LO aircraft? The United States, Russia, China, India, and the United Kingdom being amongst the countries pursuing such aircraft. Why would people in more of a position to know about advancing sensor technology than any civilian pursue a "dead end" so extensively?

Don't take this as some F-35 fanboy nonsense - take it for what it is. These factors I've talked about are true for any modern combat aircraft, Western and otherwise. Think what you want - but at least do the subject material some justice with your thinking, instead of dismissing offhand the billions of dollars of technological development by people in a position to know the realities of air combat (and I'm not just talking about signature management, I'm talking about sensors and datalinks and everything else), whether it's the F-35, the PAK-FA, Gripen NG or any other combat aircraft being developed.

 

[Aussie Digger]

any how, at this moment, F-35 might be the most advance single engine fighter. But nobody can buy it and it's not ready. USAF will get theirs in quantity around 2015 along with first partners.

Yeah, that's because it is intended to replace LEGACY aircraft and it's progressing through it's development just as every single predecessor before it has. The Countries who need to replace their legacy fleets and are interested in F-35 are all looking to upgrade around 2015 - 2020.

Funnily enough the F-35 is planned to be available in operational configuration around that time....

The rest of B list allies won't get theirs until 2019-2020. D list country like Indonesia won't get F-35 until B or C model is out so Australia and Singapore can maintain their edge. That's 2025 or later. Two decades from now for A model? Way too late to be useful. start working on 2nd gen kf-x already.

Funny. Indonesia still thinks the F-16 is useful AND is interested in new builds today. F-16 was first brought into service how long ago? 30 years?

F-35 users are planning to fly it beyond 2040, but 5 years or so after introduction to service is "too late"? Aha...

Asia geopolitical landscape and sensor technology will be too different, pinning national defense on purchasing F-35 is foolish. How will F-35 fare in 2020-2030 time frame. It's a underpowered one trick wonder. (even counting optimistic 10% T/W improvement each decade, it's still a pokey cow)

Under-powered? If you truly believe this, perhaps you could show us another fighter engine demonstrating 43,000lbs of thrust on static test benches?

That "underpowered cow" you refer to, has today using only the F135 engine, DEMONSTRATED more thrust than any F-16 variant, any F/A-18 variant (including the Super Hornet) any Gripen variant, any Mirage variant, any Rafale variant (AND the planned M88 growth engine) any Eurofighter Typhoon variant and any MiG-29 variant.

On top of this, you might want to consider some of the so-called "high power" aircraft.

The SU-30 employs 2x ALF-31 turbofans which produce a combined 55,00lbs of thrust. The SU-30 weighs 20t empty.

The F-15E Strike Eagle has 2x F100 or F110 turbofans which produce combined, about 58,000lbs of thrust. An F-15E empty, weighs about 20t empty.

If the F-35 is "under-powered" then so is the bulk of the world's modern fighter aircraft...

One trick pony, eh? What trick would that be exactly? Better than F-16 level aeroshell performance? Better than F/A1-8 Hornet nose pointing capability? A very low observable airframe? A better sensor and weapon suite than any other aircraft on the planet? Better range on internal fuel alone than (off the top of my head) any other fighter aircraft on Earth?

Which trick is the "one" you are referring to, exactly?

By the time non NATO countries can buy it, things like photodiode avalanche, new portable spectral sensor, including high resolution weather radar, more advance wide spectrum synthetic aperture radar, disposable UAV, etc will nullify its stealthiness. This is not counting any new detection technology or russian ready with export version of PAK-FA..Discounter Su-35BM probably would cost a third of F-35. Will that delicate conductive polymer skin survive in hot and humid, rough run ways? etc.

Synthetic aperture radar, huh? If F-35 was going to be attacked on the ground, or on top of a carrier than it might indeed be in trouble. Unfortunately for your argument SAR, by it's very nature doesn't work too well (or at ALL) in surface to air or air to air modes. Google can explain why...

So what else have we, "photodiode avalanche" eh? You obviously read that somewhere, but the term is avalanche photodiode commonly shortened to APD. If you want to base your defence on optical means supplemented by laser range finders be my guest. I and the rest of the world will stick to radar thanks. The range equations at best for optronics under ideal conditions is around 40k's and that is entirely dependant upon clear weather. Meanwhile you are STILL going to need something to EMIT to provide range data and targetting data to your "spear".

The "emissions cold" F-35 will enjoy a turkey shoot either way it chooses, if you think that relying on optical targeting means is the best option. Either by painting your non-LO aircraft with it's own extremely powerful radar or by sucking up your emissions that you will HAVE to make to provide data to your BVR spear. There is NO such thing as a free lunch and if you want to try to close to within WVR as your ONLY tactic against the F-35, well my friend, you are in for a world of hurt.

So what else have we got? Weather radar? Huh, like pulse doppler, perhaps? Yeah, F-35 will stand no chance...

Disposable UAV? Er, okay. With what sensor systems exactly? Anything that can conduct air to air warfare is not going to be "throwaway". Realtaively simple UAV systems, such as Shadow 200 cost tens of million per "system" today and they most definitely are NOT capable of anti-air warfare. How many of these can be "thrown away" before it becomes un-economical?

In the end I believe, F-35 will pretty much light up on radar screen like any other fighter if not a veritable flying disco-ball. Yet the plane doesn't have the kick like bigger double engine fighters. (F-22, J-11B, PAK-FA, various flankers mod, F-15 mod, etc) It's too slow and out gunned for asian theater. (and no range too) implementing new composite to increase T/W performance will push the price even higher.

The F-35 will NEVER be as visible as a "legacy" fighter aircraft to a radar system. It's designed in LO will ALWAYS remain an advantage, but it is true that it's advantage will change over the years. Fortunately technology on BOTH sides, is not static.

It is very easy and convenient to imagine that counter-stealth technology will advance whilst imaging that stealth technology will remain static and not improve as well. Unfortunately history and reality are not on your side on this issue...

Too slow. Why is this? Do you imagine that M1.6 isn't fast enough? Show me where it hasn't been fast enough in the history of air combat, to achieve a mission?

Fact is, top speed is irrelevant to air warfare. What counts is acceleration and how quickly you can get up to speed. Most aircraft simply don't have enough fuel to get anywhere near their published top spesds, under operational conditions.

Those extremely high speeds are achieved on purpose designed runs. Not on operations. Even a USAF General admitted recently that the M2.5 capable F-15, rarely exceeded M1.2 - M1.4 under ANY combat scenario in it's entire history, so if a M2.5 capable aircraft (under the right conditions) can barely achieve half this speed in combat scenarios, why exactly is M1.6 too slow again?

So who knows. I am one of those who simply fail to appreciate F-35 as mid range work horse.

Perhaps you simply need to have a closer look at what if offers. South Korea, Singapore and Japan at least in the Asian theatre, certainly are...

it's back to performance envelop and affordability minus the gimmicks.

Nonsense. The overwhelming preponderance of low observable designs proliferating amongst next-generation combat aircraft means that sensor and networking capability will become even more of a necessity.

Remember all those counter-stealth devices you were so worried about earlier? They work both ways remember? It is intellectually dishonest to consider that "only" those trying to counter-stealth aircraft will develop such advanced capabilities...

No doubt your sources of information, fail to mention this little tidbit...

PS. F-35 main computer is PowerPC 601 and bunch of two generations ago FPGA, hardly cutting edge. Wii or Sony PSP have more processing power by few clicks.

Aha, this old chestnut. Do Wii's and Sony PSP's have to survive supersonic flight, high G air combat maneuvering and numerous heavy aircraft landings, not to mention potential combat damage, do they?

Do civilian processors have the sort of space, cooling and electricity generation constraints that a fighter jet has, do they?

There is a significant difference between the operating conditions of milspec computers utilised in combat aircraft and civilian computer systems. The F-35's processing capability IS significantly greater than any other current or planned fighter, no matter what you personally consider the "tech" level should be...

 

[Bonza]

In other word, it is easier to paint a horse in rainbow anti radar disco color and slap ever more advance electronics than to make a stealthy cow run as fast as a horse. Making F-15 or flanker to have pretty small RCS plus niftiest electronic toys in the next 20 years will be easier than squeezing more flight performance out of F-35 to be able to chase around modified F-15.

Of course things like basic outline/edge of body or fan blades need to be hidden from radar, because they can't be corrected easily with anti radar material. But I hope everybody here agree , hindsight 20-20, F-117 was a pretty dumb and expensive idea. F-35 is tilting toward diminishing return in flight performance/cost/use of composite vs. rcs shaping. I wouldn't say dumb yet, but certainly doesn't look the best.

There is a reason why f-22, pak-fa and atd-x have closer shape to flanker and F-15.

(I'll provide links in next post to make my argument more sound in next post.)
[Mod edit: Read the Forum Rules and stop posting unverified rubbish that defies logic in this forum. You have been warned to provide sources to back up your ridiculous claims.

See below for how to cite a source.]

I'm sorry, but your vision of how low observability works is totally incorrect. You can't just slap on a coat of paint to get LO performance. There are shaping issues, electronic issues, heat issues - LO isn't achieved solely by managing radar cross section, and managing radar cross section certainly isn't achieved solely by coats of "anti-radar paint". As far as engine performance goes, please read Aussie Digger's post - these large twin-engine aircraft you mention have never gone to their top speeds in actual combat. Those speeds are a legacy of Cold War interception requirements - and if you really believe the highest speed wins, then you should be handing the crown to the missiles, not the aircraft. An AMRAAM or R-77 accelerating to mach 4 + launch speed is going to trump anything in its no-escape zone, no matter what its name is.

Stating that the F-117 "was a pretty dumb and expensive idea" really says more about your ignorance of the topic than it does about any real world circumstances. I apologise for putting it that way, but I can only encourage you to broaden your reading and actually look in to why the F-117 was designed as it was. There's a book called "Skunk Works" by Ben Rich (who actually ran Lockheed Skunk Works) that you might find interesting if you wish to learn about the limitations facing LO aircraft design at the time the F-117 came into being.

 

[Ananda]

Jf-17 ??

From Jakarta Post:

Pakistan Defense Minister Chaudhary Ahmed Mukhtar offers his Indonesian counterpart the latest jet fighter called the JF-17 during his visit to Jakarta on Wednesday.

Defense Minister Purnomo Yusgiantoro responded to the offer, saying that further discussion would be conducted in October.

Minister Mukhtar was here to sign the Defense Cooperation Agreement between the two countries at the Defense Ministry.

“We will see it first before we decide if we have an interest in purchasing the aircraft,” Purnomo said.

He said the JF-17 jet fighter was the product of a joint production between Pakistan and China. The manufacturers claimed the jet to be cheaper and stronger than the US F-16.
Purnomo said he learned there had been 500 JF-17 jet fighters produced; 350 are allocated for Pakistan and the remaining 150 are for China.
“I have been informed that Pakistan’s jet fighter’s level is above the US F-16 jet fighter, as well as Russia’s Sukhoi. But we need to see it first hand,” he said.

Minister Mukhtar said the jet fighter project was a result of years of engineering improvements that was made by the Pakistan defense industry back home.

You know, when Pakistan Manufacturer claim that JF-17 was above F-16, they should check with the purchasing policy of PAF that's still put F-16 as their main 'dream' fighter despite the advancenment of JF-17 to PAF.

I don't know if this'is the real quot or some misunderstand by Jornalists (not the first one), but when your nation air force (PAF) still regarded F-16 as their most advance and capable fighter in the inventory, and continue hoping to get more Blok 52, this kind of claim by their manufacturer and defence ministry will be regarded as contradicted with the account by their own Air Force preferences. Not a smart way to promote your commodity

They should say what close to the reality: "JF-17 was 'value for money' aircraft with capability that can match many of F-16 aspects with much reduce prices..and no political string attach.."

BTW; sources in the Min-Def says that simmilar offer (for JF-17) was being forwarded by the Chinese last year. Just wandering if buying from Pakistan will also means some of the JF-17 being offered also being manufactured in China.

I Know that for every CN-235 that's being sold by DI/IAe, half of parts will be build by CASA, vice versa also if the CN 235 being sold by CASA. Is this the same deal also between China and Pakistan for JF-17 ??

 

[adi]

I'm sorry, but your vision of how low observability works is totally incorrect. You can't just slap on a coat of paint to get LO performance. There are shaping issues, electronic issues, heat issues - LO isn't achieved solely by managing radar cross section, and managing radar cross section certainly isn't achieved solely by coats of "anti-radar paint". As far as engine performance goes, please read Aussie Digger's post - these large twin-engine aircraft you mention have never gone to their top speeds in actual combat. Those speeds are a legacy of Cold War interception requirements - and if you really believe the highest speed wins, then you should be handing the crown to the missiles, not the aircraft. An AMRAAM or R-77 accelerating to mach 4 + launch speed is going to trump anything in its no-escape zone, no matter what its name is.

the advantage of bigger plane: can carry larger diameter missile (more range or faster), or can carry more weapons.