One of the arguments of those who supported Flankers in TNI-AU is KH-31P as example.
1. US was able to also buy this KH-31 missile directly from the Russians and used it as a target drone. The Kh-31P, with its high-altitude flight profile, can hit speeds of up Mach 3.5. The sea-skimming Kh-31A can still get up to Mach 2.5 — the system is very cheap and suitable as a target drone.
2. Love it when the Indians or Malaysians talk about the MKI or MKM Growlerski — because it has important limitations that make it not useful against China. Compared to the F-15SG, the Growlerski is so primitive — Singapore has increased the internal cooling capacity of the fighter (as compared to the F-15K) so that the self protection jamming, with frequency hopping and LPI, is integrated into the EW systems within the airframe. No pod is even needed in Singapore’s AESA equipped F-15SGs — giving Singapore dominance of the electromagnetic spectrum.
- With the Russian pods, the Sukhoi is basically a transport aircraft, one of Indian scientists said.
- The second issue is even worse. The IAF realised the SAP-518 pod hadn’t been properly interfacing with the indigenous on-board RWR, therefore killing pilots’ chances to exploit both systems fully.
- Modern fighters like the F-16V or the F-15SG have a superior man-machine interface and LPI AESA radars. The MKI or MKM’s PESA Radar has more power but less simultaneous multi mode performance, less resolution, less jamming resistance and is more detectable. Interestingly, the Su-30MKM carries a missile approach warning sensor and laser warning sensor by Avitronics and has a Thales supplied the HUD, NAVFLIR and the Damocles targeting pod.
- I think there is no need to explain further, why the Russian solutions in their man-machine interface on the MKI and MKM do not work well for both the Indians and Malaysians.
- More importantly, Israel as masters of SEAD has no need for Growlers because they have a more elegant solution (that is different from the American approach), first implemented on the F-16I along with some other classified capability to provide a total SEAD solution.
They argue that Russia are more willing to provide different kind of Missile then US, and in fact they argue that US finally give Indonesia AIM-120 due to Russia already give R-77.
3. The Americans sold the AIM-120 to Singapore at about the same time the Malaysians bought the R-77.
- The only difference was that the Americans wanted Singapore to store our missiles in Guam. But that silly American requirement was removed once Malaysia took delivery of their R-77.
- The Malaysians won an argument with the Americans but lost the logistics war, with Singapore. Singaporeans were rolling over in laughter when Dr M forced their Air Force to buy both the Mig-29Ns and F-18Ds
For me, I'm actually quite nuetral on Flankers as long as all that supports Flankers in Parliament and Administration are willing to open the true costs of integration of Russian asests on TNI mostly Western System and infrastructure.
4. I love the Flanker at air shows and support more purchases of it in Malaysia or Indonesia — you already have it in your inventory.
(a) The Malaysians has to pay quite a bit to integrate East and West with the IFF systems for their air defence system. So the problem can be managed in $$ terms but to me the true cost is something else.
(b) The TNI AU’s lack of dominance of the electromagnetic spectrum over the airspace can result in the death of all TNI AU fighter pilots, flying these wonderful Russian made aircraft (at BVR ranges), should shooting occur against China.
5. I suspect that Indonesian Su-27/30s will not get to the merge, as PL-15 air-to-air missile of the PLA(N) comes with an AESA radar that can home on jam and is thought to have a range of about 200 km, even if the Indonesian fighters have Russian jamming pods installed. The PLA(N) are well briefed on the limits of Russian aircraft and missiles — that they also own and have developed tactics against. In air to air combat, or even against the PLA(N)’s destroyers, the TNI AU lacks control of the electromagnetic spectrum. More importantly, China has modified its Su-30MKK's fire control system to give it the capability to use China’s homegrown weapons, like the YJ-12 and YJ-18 anti-ship cruise missiles. As a Russian product, it originally can only carry the Russian-made KH-31 and KH-41 anti-ship missiles. These two missiles are too old, and their performance have long lagged behind that of China’s YJ-12.
1. How much the costs to build support infrastructure for Flankers and... life time sustainment for them. They talk in Media of high cost of US and Euro assets, when those costs actually including sustainment and cost of Russian assets is not.
6. To have the same life span, you will need 3 to 4 sets of Russian engines to match American platforms. European platforms, are not cheaper than American solutions.
2. TNI wants to build network system, but with mostly Western based assets, how can the Russian one interconnected to that ? Is Russia willing to open their source code to TNI ?
3. Politicall standing for administration is to get involvement in local industry and tech Transfer minimum for local maintenance capabilities. Russia procurement so far not include any of those.
7. Ah the usual internal politics with regard to geopolitics of alliances or partnerships over source codes. An Indian scientist associated with the Indian jamming pod project tells a familiar story: Russia’s unwillingness to share codes (or its insistence on an additional commercial understanding) that could have helped manage the interfacing issues between the SAP-518 pod and Indian RWR better and faster. India is pretty unhappy with the Russians too on this point. Likewise, Singapore is not immune from this as well.
One of benefits from Russia compared to US or Euro for TNI case so far is their willingness to provide multiple Missile system with rather uncomplicated procedures.
8. In 1995, McDonnell Douglas first received a contract to deliver modified Kh-31A missiles as part of a Foreign Comparative Test (FCT) to see if they could meet the Navy's requirement for a Supersonic Sea-Skimming Target (SSST). The American company subsequently worked with the Russian manufacturer, Zveda-Strela, to develop the MA-31. The SSST contract was not very successful.
9. Thanks to FCT, most of NATO understand why the KH-31P does not work against their radar systems.
10. That is what the Indians are trying to do as well with the craptastic KNIRTI SAP-518 advanced jamming pod. India is working on a High Band Jammer (HBJ) pod on an IAF Su-30MKI. India’s DARE has committed to seeing the pod become fully operational with the IAF’s Flanker fleet. Significantly, the HBJ pod will be indigenous. A DARE scientist explains that the HBJ pod currently has three major systems:
(a) the integrated EW suite;
(b) the active array phased transmit-receive unit; and
(c) the cooling system.
While the first two are developed in-house, the complex cooling system is in process, with DARE sourcing an Israeli system for the moment.
TNI-AU already in their strategy (at least from what they give to media ) are looking for Multi-role capabilities. The MinDef actually with this multi years budget system also looking for life sustainment deal.
11. I also support this, as it makes sense.
Again, logically F-16V supposed to be the choices, if we're only looking for TNI-AU needs without others consideration like local industry involvement.
12. Certainly Singapore can continue to help develop and evolve the training syllabus for Indonesian F-16V Instructor pilots, if the TNI AU acquires the F-16V. Good luck.
