RMAF Future; need opinions
- Thread starter Ding
- Start date
There are advantages to such a configuration. The major one is that it is cheaper. The battle management system accounts for a significant part of the cost of an AEW&C system. By offloading it to the ground, you can save on duplicating the system for every airframe. Of course, the drawback is that the plane is tethered to the ground station so you compromise on deployability.
Exactly. The original Swedish version was intended to function mainly as an airborne sensor within Swedens integrated air defence system, hence the limited onboard processing power & the lack of onboard operators - though they can carry a couple of operators if necessary. The Brazilian version has more onboard processing, several mission consoles, & several operators, as do those sold to Greece & Pakistan.
Even if the Phalcon was cheaper and better, RMAF would still not consider it again due to political considerations because it is made by Israel. The coices would be limited to Erieye, Hawkeye 2000, Wedgetail AEW (or a similar system mounted on a cheaper aiframe).
Given diverse geographical layout of the country RMAF will need a system that can function independently as it may have to deploy in both east and west sectors. From what I know east Malaysia does not have an extensive air defence ground envinronment that the west has (has this changed??).
I think gradually it will. If i m not mistaken, half of the MKM will station in east Malaysia.
Y station in the east? are they expecting philipines with its limited n dated aviation to attack malaysa? Ohhh wait.. its to be closer to some1 else...Australia!!
Looks like the plane is really an answer to Howards preemptive strike comments.
Anyways I hope MAF buys another squadron n station them in West as well as replace those MIGS!!!!
Looks like the plane is really an answer to Howards preemptive strike comments.
Anyways I hope MAF buys another squadron n station them in West as well as replace those MIGS!!!!
Paskal, thanks. I looked it up and looks like they bought the THALES DAMOCLES pod which is currently in use with French Navy/ Air ForceIts from french that comes also with the THALES system that the Su-30 mkm is equipped with.The malaysians didnt used the israelis ones due to certain political reason.:
What I read before on some Indian Air Forece related literature mention 1000 hours MTBO and 3000 hrs expected life span for the AL-31F engines but lower hour numbers on the titanium thrust vector modules (probably 500). However I cant remember the exact site now.
I think they are worry about Spratly Islands.
A rumor, given a simple logic, why would Indian show their weakness?
Where did you hear this from? There is no major airbase in the east yet and RMAF would not park the MKM under a typical aircraft hanger. However there is a plan to develop a large airbase somewhere near Kuching to base future combat squadrons. It would take many Malaysia Plans to achieve it.
I actually read it in the news. And yes, it is associated with the new base.
Say that the flankers are based in kuching, how long does it takes them to reach Johor after take off??
Also what is the standard set up configuration for the flankers on a AA mission? Do they carry thier ECM pods in such configuration?
Or are they restricted for wartime only?
Also what is the standard set up configuration for the flankers on a AA mission? Do they carry thier ECM pods in such configuration?
Or are they restricted for wartime only?
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited:
not only that, I head the TVC on AL-31FP have to be manually operated or something like that?
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited:
We have not received an engine that lasted in 4 digits yet. lol. AL-31 are not the hallmark of reliability. And I don't believe any production J-10 is using TVC at the moment. I could be wrong.
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited: