A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Su-27/30 are in-service with TNI-AU. 2 examples of each.dreamwarrior73 said:if spare parts and range and requirement of bombers are the issue. then Su-27/30 is the right solution at lower cost because:
1. Su-27/30 already in TNI-AU service. by right some kind of spare parts supply chain is in place.
2. Su-27/30 have the range that TNI-AU required.
3. Su-30 is a fighter bomber.
4. Su-27/30 is the fighter with prestige and edge that TNI-AU is looking for.
Whilst similar they are NOT identical. Being somewhat different creates pressures on the logistical chain that are simply unnecessary.
Nor are they cheap to buy, maintain or fly. The spare parts train is FAR from assured not so much due to political concerns but moreso because of an inability to supply as required.
In addition to this their availability rates from all reports, even in Countries that CAN afford to arm and support them properly (which Indonesia currently can't) is very ordinary and far inferior to most Western fighters.
No matter how good a fighter on paper, if it's on the ground it's useless.
For these reasons I'd still argue for a rationalised fleet of F-16's or alternatively late model MiG-29SMT variants, supported by multi-role tanker/transport aircraft. Later variants are fitted with in-flight refuelling probes to extend the range.
Indonesia may be able to equip it's C-130's with an in-flight refuelling system with the savings made by rationalising on a single fleet of fighters, with a hose and drogue system to support MiG-29 being relatively easily installed on the C-130. This would provide the range benefits of the larger SU-30 fighter, but offer greater flexibility.