RMAF Future; need opinions

[Tavarisch]

Yes. IIRC RMAF currently has at least 20x AIM-120 C5 (AMRAAM) from the last report - look back in the thread, there is a link. From a maintenance cost and parts stocking standpoint, I hope that the RMAF considers getting a full squadron of the Super Hornets. Your ground crew becomes too free and it is harder to budget for spare engines and other essentials to keep the squadron flying.

Again, Super Hornets are way too expensive to buy in numbers. We maybe buying them in small numbers gradually. But, considering the great amount of attention placed on our military by our most-respected Bapa Khairy (sarcasm), I'd say it would be long till we actually see another Hornet, MiG or Sukhoi.

I'd stick with the Russian stuff, mainly because it's easier to get. The US is not known for exporting it's military stuff with everything in it. Pakistan wanted to get F-16s but didn't get the nice radars that Israel got.

A Mi-24 deal should be sought. Lacking air-support in the RMAF will contribute to it's demise. Either the Mi-24 or Mi-28, whichever is needed.

Any plans for our Army to support possible GBADs system?

 

[STURM]

I'm not advocating replacing the whole fleet with Super Hornets. The main problem with regards to logistics, ground support, etc, is that the RMAF has to support 3 combat types- Fulcrums, Flanker, Hawks. This is at a time when most western airforces are standardising to a single or 2 combat types.
Whilst the Hawk 200s are not in the same category as the rest, they still make up a sizeable portion of this countrys combat fleet.

I agree, Russian stuff is easier to get. But about what life cycle costs and after sales support. Russian stuff is cheaper when you buy it off the shelf without adding any non Russian frills. But when a customer decides to integrate western stuff on Russian products, then integration and certification issues come to play. Thats when the price tag goes way up. As I mentioned earlier, lets see in the near future, which type has a higher operational rate, the Hornets or the Flankers? The F15, F16 and Hornets have been tested extensively in demanding conditions. Can we say the same about the Fulcrum and Flanker?

 

[Mr Ignorant]

The Malaysian taxpayer has already spent billions on the RMAF Fighter purchases. Everyone has offered perfectly good reasons for this, and sometime ago, on this thread, there was a raging debate between me and Aussie Digger about this, however he did make very good points about the par value of the SH, and so did others. It doesn't detract from the fact that the RMAF requires a certain amount of modernization, and certain procurement deals with Thales (air defence radar network) is aimed at repairing this. What irks me is that, instead of investing in fighters, why don't they buy Maritime Patrol aircraft as the Indonesians did with their CN 235s or AWACS?? I would say this would be pressing business need for the RMAF. I hope Air Chief Azizan looks into this.

We've coped pretty well with 8 Hornets, 16 Mig 29s and some 13 Hawk 200s for 10 years (97-07), but maybe it's best if the service puts this off until everyone can agree on one standard type, you know, a one size fits all approach :unknown

 

[the road runner]

Its price tag aside, the advantages are that for the RMAFs requirements, all integration has already been done by the Americans and of course its track record.

I agree totally,and may i ask how the USA projects its POWER/FORCE?
The USA dose this with its NAVY and its F18s.This is the main reason i think the F18 is the aircraft to have in a maratime/littoral environment.I agree that the F18 is a great fit for the Malaysian AF and it has a smaller radar cross section(1m2 for F18EF compared to 4.5m2 for SU30 a massive difference in RCS)

 

[just.sentinel]

Forget the MiG-29s?

What do some of the earlier posts mean about exchanging MiG-29s for MiG-35s? Haha, there is no such thing as a product exchange here mates!

The problem with the MiG-35 is that nobody really really knows what the aircraft's capability is, given that it is not even operational yet. So, it is still too early to tell if it is good for Malaysia.

Malaysia, if it can somehow find the funds for fighter procurements in the coming years (something I doubt will happen, given the economic situation and pressing demands for other procurements), is better off going for either the SU-30MKMs or Boeing F/A-18E/Fs and only one of those two types of aircraft. It would probably make more sense to go for the Russian fighters as they are newer.

The problem, is, however, that politics and personalities come into play in Malaysian defence procurements. It is a matter of who is in-charge at that time and who needs to be, erm, taken care of.

 

[the road runner]

Malaysia, if it can somehow find the funds for fighter procurements in the coming years (something I doubt will happen, given the economic situation and pressing demands for other procurements), is better off going for either the SU-30MKMs or Boeing F/A-18E/Fs and only one of those two types of aircraft. It would probably make more sense to go for the Russian fighters as they are newer

um i think the F18EFG is a more modern plane that the SU30(Su 27PU).please explain what you mean by NEWER

The SU27 was Developed in 1969 and first flew on April 20th 1981.

The F18EF development aircraft contracts were signed on the 7th December 1991 and the first 7 development aircraft rolled out in on 18th September 1995.Also remember APG-79 ASEA radar on the F18EF were designed for Boeings version of the JSF ,the X-32.

 

[Aussie Digger]

I'd stick with the Russian stuff, mainly because it's easier to get. The US is not known for exporting it's military stuff with everything in it. Pakistan wanted to get F-16s but didn't get the nice radars that Israel got.

That's not true.

Here's Pakistan's announcement:

http://www.dsca.mil/PressReleases/36-b/2006/Pakistan_06-09.pdf

Here's Israel's announcement:

http://defense-update.com/products/a/apg68-v-9.htm

Both are fitted with the APG-68 (v9) radar...

And here was the announcment for Malaysia for the Block I Super Hornets, they requested years ago:

http://www.dsca.mil/PressReleases/36-b/malaysia_02-56.pdf


The same standard as USN Block I Supers...

 

[ggk]

Actually the RMAF love the Hornet, easy to maintain and ....you can say its multirole too (Fighter attack).

 

[STURM]

ggk, thats the point I've been trying to make. I'm not putting down the MKMs or Fulcrums [both are highly capable conbat assets] but Russian engines have a lower mean time between failure [MBTF] rate than western engines.
In the past, there was no need for an overhaul, client states would discard the engine and get new ones at subsidised prices from the Soviets. Thats why when the Soviet Union collapsed, the IAFs operational rate for its Russian fleet went way down.

Even today, the IAF still faces delays in getting spares. The RMAF cant afford the same problems. Neither can the IAF or PLAAF but these 2 are much larger air arms with a larger operating budget, ground infrastructure and more resources.

 

[Dzirhan]

Hi Dzirhan. What is the relationship not a good one? Pressure from Russia to buy thier goods only? It is Malaysia`s right to buy from the Indians or Chinese afterall.

Sorry for the late reply, didn't check in as busy finishing up some articles, not any pressure on buying goods, instead wrangling over contractual obligations relating to the SU-30s.

 

[just.sentinel]

Sorry for the late response to the earlier response to my post.

Apologies as I probably was not too clear. My point about the Su-30MKMs being newer was that they are newer to the RMAF fleets. If Malaysia decides to go for F/A-18E/Fs, then that is another totally different platform and a new one (the Super Hornets are very different from the Hornets). It makes more sense to buy additional Su-30MKMs and build two or three proper squadrons of the type.

Moving on slightly, I wonder if it might make sense for Malaysia to seriously consider buying the Su-35 instead of the MiG-35 in the future. This would, again, provide more commonality to the Su-30s than the MiG-35.

 

[renjer]

If Malaysia decides to go for F/A-18E/Fs, then that is another totally different platform and a new one (the Super Hornets are very different from the Hornets). It makes more sense to buy additional Su-30MKMs and build two or three proper squadrons of the type.

Moving on slightly, I wonder if it might make sense for Malaysia to seriously consider buying the Su-35 instead of the MiG-35 in the future. This would, again, provide more commonality to the Su-30s than the MiG-35.

This is a topic of discussion that has been going on for far too long.

The air force chief said that he would like to see a combat fighter fleet of 6 squadrons (I assume this does not include the training squadrons). Therefore, we should consolidate a fleet of 3 squadrons around the Su-30MKMs. The next fighter purchase should look at replacing the MiG-29s, F/A-18s and Hawk 108/208s 10-15 years from now.

In the intermediate term, we need to be focussing on the air force's other requirements. AEW, MPA, CSAR helos, fixed wing transports just cover the platform aspects of these.

 

[OPSSG]

The air force chief said that he would like to see a combat fighter fleet of 6 squadrons (I assume this does not include the training squadrons). Therefore, we should consolidate a fleet of 3 squadrons around the Su-30MKMs. The next fighter purchase should look at replacing the MiG-29s, F/A-18s and Hawk 108/208s 10-15 years from now.

In the intermediate term, we need to be focussing on the air force's other requirements. AEW, MPA, CSAR helos, fixed wing transports just cover the platform aspects of these.

If the MiG-29s are to be retired (as has been hinted in this thread), then Malaysia again is down to 18x Su-30MKMs and 8x F-18 (as frontline fighters/strike aircraft), which then becomes a numbers issue.

Malaysia will need to weight the cost and benefit of acquiring another squadron of fighters first vs the need for an AEW (given the high cost of AEW platforms and the need to protect them). What about stationing a frontline squadron in East Malaysia? Do you think Malaysia will need that first or AEW aircraft first?

 

[TanaTana]

Agree with OPPSG. Since now that there are rumors that the RMAF is interested in looking at JAS-39 Grippen again, maybe it should be the way to go. 2 squadrons of grippen to replace the MiGs and the Hornets should be looked at seriously. There is no hurry in getting the AEW right now.

 

[cm07]

To be honest with this, RMAF has no need to even purchase AEW planes.

In event of any major conflict requiring the usage of combat aircrafts in large numbers, both the RSAF and RMAF will be fighting on the same side (despite all that the citizens on either side of the causeway thinks). The usage of RSAF's G550 will be more than sufficient to operate all the aircrafts within both nations. Rather than duplicating the effort, it is better for RMAF to just procure more viable and modern aircrafts.

Getting rid of the Hornets and Mig29s for a 2XSU-30 / 2XGripen squadrons, following the Tanatana's idea. (The compatibility of a Sweden/Soviet platform though?)

Alternatively, sell the hornets back to USA/trade the Mig 29s for brand new Mig 35Ds. Plus point:a reduction of RMAF ammunition to only Russian munitions (halving the current logistic footprint).

 

[LeClerc]

To be honest with this, RMAF has no need to even purchase AEW planes.

In event of any major conflict requiring the usage of combat aircrafts in large numbers, both the RSAF and RMAF will be fighting on the same side (despite all that the citizens on either side of the causeway thinks). The usage of RSAF's G550 will be more than sufficient to operate all the aircrafts within both nations. Rather than duplicating the effort, it is better for RMAF to just procure more viable and modern aircrafts.

Getting rid of the Hornets and Mig29s for a 2XSU-30 / 2XGripen squadrons, following the Tanatana's idea. (The compatibility of a Sweden/Soviet platform though?)

Alternatively, sell the hornets back to USA/trade the Mig 29s for brand new Mig 35Ds. Plus point:a reduction of RMAF ammunition to only Russian munitions (halving the current logistic footprint).

no,actually,RMAF really need AEW in their inventory.It is said that AEW has been put in the hotlist to be procure since RMK 7 but due to the financial constraint,it cannot be done.Even the chief air force hinted that malaysia in need of AEW.

malaysia has vast area that need to be covered,especially its EEC.so,during the peace time and also during war,how can malaysia rely on their neighbour??singapore has its own requirements that need to be filled,so as malaysia.

yes,its true that malaysia need to produce more viable and modern aircrafts in order to protect our airspace.by looking at the progress,i believe that by the year 2020,it can be achieved.

i don't think getting rid of old hornets and fulcrums is a good idea.we can transfer back the old hornets for newer type of F/A-18EF for less amount of money.and we also can upgrade Mig29Ns to OBT type,with much better capabilities(with TVC;the much needed improvement nowadays).all these can be done with less cost compared with buying new ones.we also can reduce the logistic cost and maintain the manpower and also the expertise in operating those aircrafts.

while malaysia should take a serious look into possibility of buying JAS 39 Gripen(i'm in favour of this aircraft,just like our northern neighbour did),i can say that for a mean time,it looks quite impossible.

having only one origin of ammunition can be quite bad idea.not all type of ammo from Russia is a good one,eventough their price is always the main attraction.still,ammo from western block are far more technological than those from Russia.

 

[STURM]

Does anyone have any info about when the Taming Sari team was formed and disbanded? Also how many PC-7s were in Taming Sari?

 

[Red]

The SU27 was Developed in 1969 and first flew on April 20th 1981.

The F18EF development aircraft contracts were signed on the 7th December 1991 and the first 7 development aircraft rolled out in on 18th September 1995.Also remember APG-79 ASEA radar on the F18EF were designed for Boeings version of the JSF ,the X-32.

My sentiments exactly. There seems to be a persistent misconception that Su-30s are new aicrafts. They are not. They are from the F15 generation albiet with new bells and whistles. That said, the upgrades make the Su-30 capable planes.

 

[STURM]

A main drawback the Su-27/Su-30 family shares with other Russian aircraft, despite the ugrades, is that it requires more maintainance hours for every flying hour than Western types. Even the engines and radar have a lower time between overhaul than Western types. As pointed out by someone in another forum, whilst certainly cheaper to buy, Russian aircraft in the long run have higher life cycle costs.

 

[OPSSG]

A hat tip to YF for the latest news from Jane's Defence Weekly and to Dzirhan for his hints on the problems with the Su-30MKMs earlier:

Problems delay final consignment of Malaysia's Su-30MKM fighters

Malaysia is refusing to accept six Su-30MKMs until Sukhoi fixes problems with the 12 aircraft it has already delivered.... Malaysia has yet to take delivery of its final six Sukhoi Su-30MKM fighters because of a disagreement over the contractual terms.

The six aircraft are ready for delivery, local industry sources told Jane's , but Malaysia is refusing to accept them until Sukhoi fixes integration problems with the avionics on 12 Su-30MKMs that have already been delivered...

Negotiations to resolve the impasse are ongoing, though Jane's understands that both sides are refusing to budge from their respective positions...