Malaysian airforce questions

[pezfez]

is it fair to say that the rMAF is the best in the south east asia theatre, and since there are aussies here, how would RMAF stand up against the aussie air force?

considering they have like 18 F-18Ds (boeing is looking to upgrade to F), 18 Mig-29NUBs, and getting 18 Su-30MKM :eek . they also have about 25 F-5 tigers sitting in storage (bae and thales are looking to upgrade them also). that's a nice @$$ list of a/c

another question, why so many difference a/c? logistical problems should arise. i would have just gone with all 54 su-30MKM instead dividing them up

 

[gf0012-aust]

is it fair to say that the rMAF is the best in the south east asia theatre, and since there are aussies here, how would RMAF stand up against the aussie air force?

considering they have like 18 F-18Ds (boeing is looking to upgrade to F), 18 Mig-29NUBs, and getting 18 Su-30MKM :eek . they also have about 25 F-5 tigers sitting in storage (bae and thales are looking to upgrade them also). that's a nice @$$ list of a/c

another question, why so many difference a/c? logistical problems should arise. i would have just gone with all 54 su-30MKM instead dividing them up

It's a bit unfair to do a comparison with the RAAF as Australia has more aircraft in the mix, and we have a combined doctrine philosophy.
The upgraded Hornets are now considered to be the tactical equivalent of the Super Hornet except for absolute load out. The SH can carry more. The RAAF Hornets have been modified substantially in the last 18 months, so they are not the same as a typical A/B

Australia also has the Wedgetail in it's favour, so that means that we have a minimum 450km interrogation range advantage over other countries in region. The JORN system has over 3500km viewing capability, so in real terms we can see aircraft taking off from an airfield if necessary. The Orions are also geared up for AEW style work and are capable of battle management at a land level as well (as they were used for recently).

AFAIK, some RMAF pilots are complaining about servicability issues with the Sukhois, and the last time I spoke to some IAF pilots (May last year) they had also expressed similar misgivings and complaints.

Singapore probably has the next strongest air force in region. They have a capable ORBAT and once they decide on the EF2000/F-15D/Rafale, then they will be very potent.

I think the other thing that needs to be considered is Dissimilar Air Combat Training. The nation that practices this a lot, usually has the more flexible and capable pilot stream.

Finally, any airforce is logistically and operationally smarter if it reduces its platform mix, but it needs to meet national doctrine and it (in the case of Malaysia) sometimes is structured to reflect political requirements and statements.

RMAF doesn't really have a hi-lo combat mix, so that can be a bit confusing on that basis. But, if the combination works, then so be it. I'm still under the impression that RMAF prefers the Hornet due to reliability and logistical imperatives.

 

[Aussie Digger]

This question is a bit of a moot point as Australia and Malaysia are allies under the Five power defence agreement, but Australia's policy (up until now one could argue...) has been to maintain a qualitative and quantitative edge, in military terms over any Country within our immediate region. On pure aircraft v aircraft terms, the RAAF operates 71 upgraded F/A-18A/B aircraft which have been widely regarded as inferior only to the Super Hornet amongst Hornet operators, whereas Malaysia only operates 8 F/A-18C/D Hornets, 18 SU-30MKM (I don't think these are in service yet are they?) and 18 Mig -29 aircraft (44 fighters in total) and 25 F-5 Tigers (though as you point out these aircraft are in storage). The RAAF also operates 36 upgraded R/F-111 C/G strike/recon aircraft and 19 AP3-C Orions.

From pure aircraft numbers, it is clear the RAAF possesses an edge over Malaysia at present, though this may dwindle somewhat in years to come, with the F-111 being retired rather prematurely.

The RAAF is also continuing the F/A-18 upgrade program with an all new Electronic Warfare self protection System, JDAM bombs, the AGM-158 JASSAM precision standoff missile (which will also be fitted to the AP-3C Orion) and other enhancements to be fitted in coming years. The RAAF will also be receiving it's first 2 (of 6) Wedgetail AWACS in 2005 and new air to air refuellers in 2006/7, so the RAAF is well placed to maintain and even improve it's air combat capability in coming years...

 

[gf0012-aust]

If you look at the members of the 5 Power Defence Agreement, then Malaysia, Singapore, Australia and NZ are the strongest alliance in Sth East Asia. The UK footprint in the FPDA is different in contemporary terms in the sense that they have a limited permanent footprint.

The advantage of the FPDA is that we have common operational processes and actively train with each other. As a deterrent to any hostile nation, it's a very potent force.

If you add up the ORBAT of the 4 countries in the region, there are some impressive end numbers.

Some of the more keener posters in here might want to add them up.

 

[umair]

As far as the FPDA airpower is concerned, I take the Kiwis to be the weak link in the combined ORBAT.They in my opinion did'nt do well in disbanding the fighter element of their airforce.In case of a future conflict in the region this'll only end up taxing the abilities of their allies.
Of all the FPDA countries, Singapore (from my POV) is the most cushy when it comes to airpower at the present.Their present fleet of Falcons and Skyhawks(?) coupled with their expeted new high end fighters would give them the most overall capable fleet in the region till the time Aussie JSFs became operational.
Malaysia, however seems to be getting itself into a logistical and interoperatabilty tangle with it's mix of russian and US types.There are people better than me to elaborate on this, so I leave it to them.

 

[gf0012-aust]

As far as the FPDA airpower is concerned, I take the Kiwis to be the weak link in the combined ORBAT.They in my opinion did'nt do well in disbanding the fighter element of their airforce.In case of a future conflict in the region this'll only end up taxing the abilities of their allies.
Of all the FPDA countries, Singapore (from my POV) is the most cushy when it comes to airpower at the present.Their present fleet of Falcons and Skyhawks(?) coupled with their expeted new high end fighters would give them the most overall capable fleet in the region till the time Aussie JSFs became operational.
Malaysia, however seems to be getting itself into a logistical and interoperatabilty tangle with it's mix of russian and US types.There are people better than me to elaborate on this, so I leave it to them.

Yes, I didn't want to malign our cousins to the right and south east of Sydney, but their ORBAT has taken a bit of a hiding. Their Orions are equiped with Mavericks though (IIRC???) OTOH, their SAS guys are very much able to frighten an enemy force, they are extremely well regarded and very very competent operators.

Singapore has some very professional personnel, but their force structure is very much an Israeli model in doctrine and structure. ie fast, savage and immediate. (which isn't surprising as they have close links to Israel)

Australias ORBAT is different in the sense that we have a vision of long range engagement and interdiction offshore, and upping the tempo as an OPFOR closes the gap. Aust does have the advantage of having the longest range sensors available. IIRC the OTHR is longer in reach than anything the Russians developed, and is certainly longer than US systems (which is why they have recently signed an agreement to access the technology as part of the anti-ballistic missile program)

 

[ZhangKe]

is it fair to say that the rMAF is the best in the south east asia theatre, and since there are aussies here, how would RMAF stand up against the aussie air force?

considering they have like 18 F-18Ds (boeing is looking to upgrade to F), 18 Mig-29NUBs, and getting 18 Su-30MKM :eek . they also have about 25 F-5 tigers sitting in storage (bae and thales are looking to upgrade them also). that's a nice @$$ list of a/c

another question, why so many difference a/c? logistical problems should arise. i would have just gone with all 54 su-30MKM instead dividing them up

...well...I got some friends serviced in malaysia royal air force...those malay pilots was a joke

 

[gf0012-aust]

...well...I got some friends serviced in malaysia royal air force...those malay pilots was a joke

matey, you really need to qualify your statements a bit more. a "one-liner" will just leave you open to attack by some of the malaysian posters in here - and justifiably so.

Try and add some detail before this degenerates into a flame war and you get perceived as a flamer.

cheers. gf

 

[pezfez]

i understand that the aussies have the numbers (always will, larger country, money etc.), and as you've pointed out, also quality but...

aren't they malaysian f-18 going to upgraded the same way as the aussie f-18s. and aussie digger malays have 18 f-18(from www.cramble.nl). and also according to them, malaysia is actively seeking an awacs, and it even mentions the aussie wedgetail awacs. the serviceability of the sukhois in india and malaysia, i would allocate that towards growing pains, give them some time

gfaust - do u recall that article in janes or afm about the new su-30s in the region (malaysia and indonesia) vs the JSF, it pointed out a bleak future for the aussies with their JSF agains the sukhois. also the malays r getting the vympel r-77 for the mkms, and wondering what is the raaf's answer to that?

i also think that until singapore gets their new a/c (eurofighter/rafale/etc), i think malaysia has an edge over them right now with the mkms/mig29/f18 vs the f-16 blk 50s

excuse my ignorance, what in the world is Orbat? (operational radius maybe :? )

 

[gf0012-aust]

i understand that the aussies have the numbers (always will, larger country, money etc.), and as you've pointed out, also quality but...

aren't they malaysian f-18 going to upgraded the same way as the aussie f-18s. and aussie digger malays have 18 f-18(from www.cramble.nl). and also according to them, malaysia is actively seeking an awacs, and it even mentions the aussie wedgetail awacs. the serviceability of the sukhois in india and malaysia, i would allocate that towards growing pains, give them some time

gfaust - do u recall that article in janes or afm about the new su-30s in the region (malaysia and indonesia) vs the JSF, it pointed out a bleak future for the aussies with their JSF agains the sukhois. also the malays r getting the vympel r-77 for the mkms, and wondering what is the raaf's answer to that?

i also think that until singapore gets their new a/c (eurofighter/rafale/etc), i think malaysia has an edge over them right now with the mkms/mig29/f18 vs the f-16 blk 50s

excuse my ignorance, what in the world is Orbat? (operational radius maybe :? )

I'll try and give you a reasonable answer, but it will be kind of longish.

Australia has always prided itself on being able to maintain a quality edge over other nations in the region, that has been due to a number of reasons, including the fact that we had the largest economy in the region (IIRC larger than all of sth east asia combined). We started to understand that the old days of having the strongest economy was being eroded by thye fact that the Russians (who always had good capability, but always failed on quality consistency) were about to seel cheaper and sometimes just as if not more capable platforms into the region.

The first wake up call was Malaysia. One of the things that had to be considered, was what would happen if Malaysia turned against Australia under a more belligerent govt (and this was hilighted by the prev difficult times we had with matahir and some of our Prime Ministers) So we had to work on a worst case assumption. After flying off against the RMAF we realised that our quality edge was at risk, so the Hornet Upgrades (HUG-Bugs) was accelerated through. Those upgrades were done in co-operation with the USN and USMC who obviously had data etc on how to deal with energy efficient sukhois and their typical weapons fit. Although I do know that there have been concerns about the Su-Vympel mix, I am also aware that there are counters to it. It's a "catch-22" situation for us, training with the RMAF gives us the ability to work out whether our theories on how to counter the Indonesian AF Su's will work, and yet we can't really talk about it in the open as we don't want to go into detail about how we can react to what is in fact a superior flyaway platform. We also train DACT against USAF and USN aggressor squadrons so as to finesse our skills. Those are invaluable as it means that we get to obtain real feedback from US pilots who have flown against similar platforms. eg the Gwalior data would have been exchanged at certain levels with the RAAF.

Australia definitely has the capacity to see further than anyone else in the region, even an AWACs has only 1/9th (and that is unclassified range estimates) of our JORN system. So we can literally see an "enemy" aircraft take off from it's airfield if we so choose. It's also why the US has signed a co-operation agreement with the Aust Gov as they want to gain access to our technology. The JORN system also has persistently picked up stealth aircraft. Australia also has a satellite system in place under the management of what we call DIGO. Those satellites can detect unusual heat sources in their orbit path. In a crude way it's a variation of a ballistic missile launch detection system, we can see an unusual heat source signature and measure activity around that heat source. Again that is the unclassified detail, and obviously the system sensitivity is not in the public domain.

There is a limit to what I can say about capability, but on some of the known flight characteristics of the F-22 (which is a hybrid cousin of the JSF), DACT exchanges with the USAF/USN/USMC and RMAF/RSAF there is higher degree of confidence about how to counter the Su package.

The other factor is that the RMAF are a far more competent outfit than the Indonesian AF, so we know that they (Indon AF) are not as good in a flyoff.

Singapore are also a very capable entity. For want of a better comparison and benchmark, we tend to look at how our allies under the Five Power Defence Agreement can cope with dealing with a resurgent IndonAF, and we've never had huge concerns or a doubt that the SAF or the RMAF could stop them, even with less capable platforms.

The future of air combat will be unmanned though, a UAV and a missile are able to out turn the best pilot in the world - they don't blackout as such a UCAV and a missile can be designed for absolute energy thrust/bleed and power combinations - far more than any manned aircraft can cope with.

Finally, ORBAT = Order of Battle

Hope that helps.

 

[pezfez]

thanx gfaust

never heard of the jorn system

what is indonesia gonna do with 8 flankers? and why is it considered a threat?

btw, r u in the defense industry?

 

[gf0012-aust]

thanx gfaust

No worries

never heard of the jorn system

It's a long range over the horizon radar system. declared range is 3500km

what is indonesia gonna do with 8 flankers?

not a lot, they didn't manage their F-16's any better

and why is it considered a threat?

we've been involved in 2-3 shooting matches with indonesia in the last 45 years. They also tried to destablise Malaysia with a communist insurgency. hence the reason for the 5 Powers Defence Agreement. Malayasia, Singapore, UK, Aust and NZ have an alliance of mutual support in place. If Indonesia attacks any member, then the others will assist in their defence

btw, r u in the defense industry?

yes

 

[Aussie Digger]

Gf, New Zealand haven't fitted Mavericks to their Orions AFAIK, but they are "contemplating" obtaining a standoff precision attack/Maritime Strike Capability for them (much as Australia is). I wonder if they will go ahead with THAT project though, it seems far too warlike for their socalist Government's liking, to my mind!!! They do use Mavericks on their SH-2G Super Sea-Sprites though. Yes NZ have dropped the ball, but that is their Politicians fault not the servicemen and women of the NZDF. Those people are extremely capable operators. If you ever seen NZ infantry in action you'll know what I'm talking about, very similar to the All-Blacks Rugby side, massive ferocious Maori's almost to a man... NZ is still a good ally to have on our side and do possess some good army and naval capabilities, even if their air force is a bit weak at the moment. Just a note on AWACS here, the Malaysians looked at the Wedgetail AWACS that Australia is acquiring but ruled it out on the grounds that it was too expensive. The Wedgetail has been judged as having far greater capability than the E-2C Hawkeye and Erieye that Malaysia is looking at now. Indonesia is looking at acquiring a totla of 48 Flankers which is a bit more of a threat...

 

[gf0012-aust]

Gf, New Zealand haven't fitted Mavericks to their Orions AFAIK, but they are "contemplating" obtaining a standoff precision attack/Maritime Strike Capability for them (much as Australia is). I wonder if they will go ahead with THAT project though, it seems far too warlike for their socalist Government's liking, to my mind!!! They do use Mavericks on their SH-2G Super Sea-Sprites though. Yes NZ have dropped the ball, but that is their Politicians fault not the servicemen and women of the NZDF. Those people are extremely capable operators. If you ever seen NZ infantry in action you'll know what I'm talking about, very similar to the All-Blacks Rugby side, massive ferocious Maori's almost to a man... NZ is still a good ally to have on our side and do possess some good army and naval capabilities, even if their air force is a bit weak at the moment. Just a note on AWACS here, the Malaysians looked at the Wedgetail AWACS that Australia is acquiring but ruled it out on the grounds that it was too expensive. The Wedgetail has been judged as having far greater capability than the E-2C Hawkeye and Erieye that Malaysia is looking at now. Indonesia is looking at acquiring a totla of 48 Flankers which is a bit more of a threat...

I wasn't intending to trivialise Kiwi personnel, it is of course the govt that has stuffed things up, I just didn't show proper due ddiligence and clarify my comments a little. I've worked with some maori SAS blokes, believe me, they were one scarey bunch of blokes. You wouldn't want to get on the wrong side of them. As for the Kiwi Orions, I was under the assumption that they had railed and certified mavericks for them, but did not carry them. (part of the weapons qualifier??)

The wedgetail is supposed to be rated higher than some of the E-3's in service. What I found interesting with the E3 was that some operators preferred analogue over the digital, they swore black and blue that it was better. :eek I'm still struggling to comprehend how an ESA solution could not outperform an analogue equivalent.
Wedgetail is rumoured to have a better 360 degree coverage than the Israeli Phalcon, but the Phalcon is more focussed on forward interrogation.

It's also one ugly plane. (Phalcon)

 

[Aussie Digger]

You're not wrong, that bulbous nose is hideous. You could be right about the mavericks, I've never seen any NZ Orions carrying Mavericks though, maybe it's a "trick up their sleeve"?

 

[pezfez]

48 flankres, wait that is a threat, but with no awacs, so not a huge threat
ne ways, what did they do with their 8 or 16 so f-16s (which blocks were they?)

gfaust, if u don't mind me asking, which category of defense industry (aerospace, land systems, naval systems) and i presume for australia (never heard of ne defense systems or companies from aussie land)

i'm also trying to get into the defense industry (trying to get into a college that has special intern program at boeing and honeywell), aerospace perhaps

and yeah, the phalcon is butt ugly, with a tumor

again thanx for answering by berage of questions

 

[gf0012-aust]

gfaust, if u don't mind me asking, which category of defense industry (aerospace, land systems, naval systems) and i presume for australia (never heard of ne defense systems or companies from aussie land)

i'm also trying to get into the defense industry (trying to get into a college that has special intern program at boeing and honeywell), aerospace perhaps

I currently have my own company and act as an agent for various technologies, mainly maritime (submarine focus), but I also deal with aerospace (logistics, parts) and land warfare (armoured vehicles, accoustic detection systems). I also do project managment and/or project recovery (sometimes they are closely connected, )

Prev I worked in all 3 areas on diff projects, land (specforces vehicles, Infantry Fighting Vehicles, armoured cars, small arms), maritime (submarines, mine warfare, accoustic warfare), aerospace (asw/aew platforms, CSAR, rotors)

I've also been attached to R&D projects, ballistics, ballistics management technology, systems integration, AEW, system security. Also had to deal with physical security, planning analysis etc..

So it's been a varied career.

I like it, the industry has been good to me, I spend too much time travelling though - last year I spent 3/4 of the year travelling overseas assessing new technologies, attending conferences and shows.

You need to be single or divorced if you want to keep on doing what I do, or you need an understanding partner.

Find a good company that treats you with respect, demonstrate keeness and loyalty and they will invariably look after you, but defence companies can be quite brutal. Find a skill set and develop it.

The future lies in comms and datalinking, so study up on broadband and secure comms if you are unsure and if thats within your interest.

BTW, I love my job! :roll

 

[Aussie Digger]

You should get a digital camera, I'm sure you could provide some outstanding non-classified photo's for the gallery here. The rest of us are restricted to publicly available sources (nowadays)...

 

[gf0012-aust]

You should get a digital camera, I'm sure you could provide some outstanding non-classified photo's for the gallery here. The rest of us are restricted to publicly available sources (nowadays)...

I will, last year they were all 35mm. I've preferred it for quality issues. I've got some conferences and expos coming up in the next few months so I'll start running some on here when I return etc... I've just got some 64meg CFlash cards, that gives me over 260 JPEGS per Flash card.