The Indonesian Army

[STURM]

My question related with charateristic and capabilities of Mistral and Starstreak that are very close and similar. The difference betwen those two misiles system is on guidance, which IR in Mistral and Laser Beam Riding on Starstreak.

True but think about it. A target fired at both types of missiles at the same time will have a hard time getting away. Granted, an arguement can be made that the TNI-AD should only operate a single type of MANPADS but maybe it wanted both IR ones and laser guided/beam riders.

@Sturm, yes, there are logic to operated both IR and Beam Riders..However is the difference on guidance of IR and Laser Beam really that significant for SHORAD ?

Well I just little bit disapointed on procuring another SHORAD system, which basically did not provide significant difference on existing SHORAD system in the Inventory.

I've spoken to people who operated both the Starburst and IR missiles such as Igla. They said beam riders are harder to use and require more training. In the case of the Starburst - which Starstreak is intended to replace - the gunner has to keep his eyes on target until missile impact and it's a line of sight weapon. Both types have their respective merits and negative points. Almost every fighter has chaff/flare launchers but very few have stuff to defend against beam riders. Beam riders however are notoriously expensive.

With VL MICA seems going to be used by TNI-AL, then TNI-AD better saved the budget for Starstreak for procurement of VL MICA (which off course more expensive) later on....

Starstreak is a Very-Short Range Air Defence [V-SHORAD] system. MICA is still considered a point defence sysyem but has more range than a V-SHORADS: both are intended for slightly different purposes or scenarios. BTW, the Rapier which the TNI-AD has retired was also classified as a SHORADs.

 

[Ananda]

Both types have their respective merits and negative points. Almost every fighter has chaff/flare launchers but very few have stuff to defend against beam riders. Beam riders however are notoriously expensive.

With the deactivation of Rapier, this the list of active and additional SHORAD in TNI-AD inventory:

1. Polish Grom (IR Guidance)
2. Swedish RBS 70 (Laser Beam Riders)
3. French MBDA MISTRAL (IR Guidance)
4. UK's Thales Starstreak (Laser Beam Riders)

Too many system for Shorad, all below 8 km range. The Starstreak from what I heard should be replacement for RBS 70, however I also heard from different sources that the Army still study offered from SAAB on upgrading RBS 70 to RBS 70 NG. Granted Posih Grom does not perform as expected, but that's why Mistral is there, and with close relationship of MBDA to Indonesian defense industry, it should be the only SHORAD in inventory.

I'm not expert on this, but for me it show not a coherent well plan procurement move by the Army. Yes VL MICA by definition still a SHORAD Point Defence, but combination of MISTRAL and VL MICA can provide better performance portfolio then the current combination.

 

[STURM]

The good thing about the Grom is that it is mounted on a stabilised mount - the Poprad - and has its own alerting device but then the same will also apply to Starstreak.

I could be mistaken but the fact that there are several types of MANPADs in service is due to Indonesia not wanting to be too dependent on any one supplier. It will be intersting to see what is evetually ordered as a replacement for the Rapier: my guess ithat it will probably be lorry mounted MICA or maybe even something with a longer reac like ASTER 15.

 

[Ananda]

VL MICA in my opinion have more chances being used by the Army compared Aster 15. Budgetary reasons alone, favored VL MICA. Logistically with VL MICA seems being the choice for ex NR and PKR 10514, just like Mistral it is more cost effective to operated.

Still everything can changes after next ellection. Jokowi team seems have more preferences with Rusian stuff, while Prabowo team seems more western oriented. Still whoever win, politically will be under pressure to take whichever product that provide better cooperation with Indonesian local industry. That's where I see MBDA can have the edge,

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

With the deactivation of Rapier, this the list of active and additional SHORAD in TNI-AD inventory:

1. Polish Grom (IR Guidance)
2. Swedish RBS 70 (Laser Beam Riders)
3. French MBDA MISTRAL (IR Guidance)
4. UK's Thales Starstreak (Laser Beam Riders)

Too many system for Shorad, all below 8 km range. The Starstreak from what I heard should be replacement for RBS 70, however I also heard from different sources that the Army still study offered from SAAB on upgrading RBS 70 to RBS 70 NG. Granted Posih Grom does not perform as expected, but that's why Mistral is there, and with close relationship of MBDA to Indonesian defense industry, it should be the only SHORAD in inventory.

I'm not expert on this, but for me it show not a coherent well plan procurement move by the Army. Yes VL MICA by definition still a SHORAD Point Defence, but combination of MISTRAL and VL MICA can provide better performance portfolio then the current combination.

The KOBRA -- ZUR-23-2KG -- Grom system, is it just "not as expected" or really one big dissappointment? And in what way?
Maybe they should then replace the KOBRA system with more Starstreaks (the whole Forceshield package) or Mistrals.
Four different VSHORADs is way too much.

 

[Ananda]

Closest any official statement that I can find (gather from various local media and forum), only indicating the Grom missiles is not show satisfactory performance and the Army already asked the Polish manufacturer to rectify it. From what I can gather it is related to performance of the IR seaker.

Don't know if the Polish manufacturer already successfully rectified the problem or not..and what is the current performance of the Grom in the inventory. Still it's not an excuse in my opinion to get another SHORAD system. Well unless the RBS is on the way go...and the Army need another Laser Beam rider SHORAD in the Inventory.

For me I still questioned the need to have both IR and Beam rider SHORAD though. Then again I'm not an expert on this. However if RBS still maintained in the Inventory and the Army still pursued the course to modified them to RBS 70 NG..then why need the Strastreak ?

 

[STURM]

For me I still questioned the need to have both IR and Beam rider SHORAD though.

Like I said; both have their merits and their downsides. Very few fighters are equipped with a self-defence suite to deal with beam riders but almost all have a flare launcher. And even if a fighter was equipped or protected against beam riders; it would have a hard time dealing with both simultaneously.

 

[Ananda]

Well Sturm..I then come back to the initital problem..SHORAD..With less than 8 km range..those missiles most likely on present battle situation facing low flying target like helicopter or UAV..or COIN Fighther at most..but not modern fast jets fighters..

Those modern Fighthers most likely already launch their attack way outside those SHORAD range. For that, why bother to have 2 sets of tracking..or more than 2 kind of SHORAD..like the situation facing TNI-AD..

With that limitation SHORAD then only capable to provide direct field air cover to mobile battlefield unit. Thus providing easy and uniform logistics is essential in my opinion. In such you need 'as much' uniform missiles platform as possible. Getting 4 missiles SHORAD systems with 2 different set trackers (thus different set of operational charateristics)..is counter productive for a mobile battle field units.

In such, some of the thingking (at least officialy) that those SHORAD being used as air defense for fixed strtaegic sites..also not in line with reality of current modern batlle field environment...

Well again this is just my perplexed 'two cents' on the way of thingking in Indonesian Army..rather then offcial statement of more effective and efficient procurement practise based on direct users need..the reality their still pursue this multiple systems for SHORAD..say otherwise..

Rathers then save those limited and valuable budget to just focus on one (or two at max) systems of SHORAD..and used the budget to get longer range SAM..they (in my opinion) wasted that on additional SHORAD system..

More woringly..the most likely winner on Presidential Races..comes from Opposition that historically have different 'taste' of equipment sources..Well then it can goes another round of waste procurement...

I might be pesimistic at this moment on continue rationality for defence equipment procurement (despite some improvement on accountability in procurement practises the present administration already shown)..Will see if the 'old' Indonesian waste practices still there to continue in the next administration..

Looking on the historical practises of the Opposition (which more likely will come as next administration)..I'm not high in hoping..I could be wrong though..
International world seems put high remark for Indonesian next likely President..but for me considering which party he's coming from..and their track record when they are in the power..not really put much confidence in me.

 

[STURM]

Well Sturm..I then come back to the initital problem..SHORAD..With less than 8 km range..those missiles most likely on present battle situation facing low flying target like helicopter or UAV..or COIN Fighther at most..but not modern fast jets fighters..

V-SHORADS are indeed a last ditch or point defence weapons and are intended to supplement longer range systems as part of a layered air defence network. Even if a particular country had adequate early warning assets and medium air defence systems; there is no guarantee that an enemy fighter will not get through those defences. It is telling that even countries with top tier militaries still deploy V-SHORADs to deal with leakers. Also, given the costs involved; there is a limit as to how many medium range systems can be afforded by most countries.

Those modern Fighthers most likely already launch their attack way outside those SHORAD range. For that, why bother to have 2 sets of tracking..or more than 2 kind of SHORAD..like the situation facing TNI-AD..

Even in this age of stand off smart munitions there probably will still be instances where shorter range dumb bombs or unguided rockets will be used. There is also the question of affordability to consider.

I'm not disputing that there makes little sense in having 2 diffferent kinds of beam riders. What I am saying is that using beam riders in conjunction with heat seekers makes sense and that beam riders have certain advantages over heatseekers and vice versa. At the end of the day, it all depends IMO on having early warning devices to que V-SORADS; stuff like ADAD.

I suspect - and could off course be wrong - that a problem with Grom is that it is unable to pick up targets with very low heat signatures, like UAVs and target drones.

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

Originally Posted by Ananda View Post
Well Sturm..I then come back to the initital problem..SHORAD..With less than 8 km range..those missiles most likely on present battle situation facing low flying target like helicopter or UAV..or COIN Fighther at most..but not modern fast jets fighters..

V-SHORADS are indeed a last ditch or point defence weapons and are intended to supplement longer range systems as part of a layered air defence network. Even if a particular country had adequate early warning assets and medium air defence systems; there is no guarantee that an enemy fighter will not get through those defences. It is telling that even countries with top tier militaries still deploy V-SHORADs to deal with leakers. Also, given the costs involved; there is a limit as to how many medium range systems can be afforded by most countries.

Originally Posted by Ananda View Post
Those modern Fighthers most likely already launch their attack way outside those SHORAD range. For that, why bother to have 2 sets of tracking..or more than 2 kind of SHORAD..like the situation facing TNI-AD..

Even in this age of stand off smart munitions there probably will still be instances where shorter range dumb bombs or unguided rockets will be used. There is also the question of affordability to consider.

I'm not disputing that there makes little sense in having 2 diffferent kinds of beam riders. What I am saying is that using beam riders in conjunction with heat seekers makes sense and that beam riders have certain advantages over heatseekers and vice versa. At the end of the day, it all depends IMO on having early warning devices to que V-SORADS; stuff like ADAD.

I suspect - and could off course be wrong - that a problem with Grom is that it is unable to pick up targets with very low heat signatures, like UAVs and target drones.

Read more: http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/army-security-forces/indonesian-army-10167-44/#ixzz37CM6kC1w

Two different ADS with both different tracking system, IR and Laser beam riding, is ofcourse a good idea, but as Ananda said, to procure every time only different low end SHORADS + many kinds of different AAA (S-60, Rh-202, Type 85, 40/L70, ZUR-23-2KG and in the future the Oerlikon Skyshield 35 mm) is a waste of money and a logistic nightmare, even if the government is expecting that potential enemies will only attack with helicopters and piston engine aeroplanes.....
Some sort of invasion of Bell 204s, Alouette IIs and Cessna 172....

 

[STURM]

even if the government is expecting that potential enemies will only attack with helicopters and piston engine aeroplanes.....
Some sort of invasion of Bell 204s, Alouette IIs and Cessna 172....

What makes you so sure that the only targets TNI-AD Triple A and V-SHORADS will be faced with will be helicopters and piston engine aeroplanes?

There is always the possibility that other types of airborne threats will make it through whatever AD network is in place and that there will be a need for point defence weapons.

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

What makes you so sure that the only targets TNI-AD Triple A and V-SHORADS will be faced with will be helicopters and piston engine aeroplanes?

There is always the possibility that other types of airborne threats will make it through whatever AD network is in place and that there will be a need for point defence weapons.

Because such low end SHORADS/MANPADS and AAAs are only suitable for these targets, not for strategic bombers, cruise missiles, PGM/LGBs and jetfighters or even airliners above the 5000 meters

Maybe the Oerlikon 35 mm Skyshield is capable to take down cruise missiles, but we havent receive it yet.

 

[STURM]

You're not anwering my question :]. Let me re-phrase it: how sure are you that point defence systems will not have to deal with low level fighters? And who can say for certain that there will not be instances of Su-30s or F-16s [or similar fighters] having to use unguided rockets or dumb bombs; in which case they would be well within range of stuff like Grom and RBS-70?

Criuse missiles are intended to be dealt with by longer range, more networked, more capable stuff. MANPADs are intended to be point defence weapons to deal with whatever targets they are faced with that ideally are flying below 10,000 feet, be it UAVs, helicopters or fighters and are intended to supplement whatever other AD weapons are in place as part of a layered defence. I understand the logic in not procuring several types of MANPADS but I'm also pointing out that there might be instances where MANPADs will be faced woth targets other than helicopters, prop powered aircraft and UAVs. Several Top Tier armies - despite having more capable, longer range AD weapons - still employ MANPADS and I doubt very much if these MANPADS are not intended to also deal with low flying fighters that get past other systems.

 

[Ananda]

Sturm, I agree with Sandhi Yudha that most likely (as I have point out on my previous post), those SHORAD will likely facing low fyling threats which in form of helicopters and UAV on present battlefield environment.

Yes, your scenario of fighters with dumb munitions have to fly low and come within those SHORAD range. However realistically in my oppinion comes where they already launch long range attack that pacified most of anti air assets. This scenario mostly I'm refering to fixed strategic targets.

Therefore as I have put on my post, most likely those SHORAD will follow mobile battle formation/coloums, which under current battlefield environment like we see in the Gulf war, being taken out by Attack Helicopters or relatively slower ground attack fighters like A-10, SU-25, or COIN fighters like Super Tucano.

Thus more uniform SHORAD assets need to be employed by any particular Army, for easing the logistics for their mobile units. This what I and Sandhi Yudha questions the policies of TNI-AD which employed too many SHORAD systems, which we believe not beneficial for their logistical purposed on mobile operations.

Based on your posts I believe you understand with the logics. I can also agreed with your point that combined IR and Laser Beam Riders on SHORAD can be more beneficial. For me if TNI-AD used only combination of Mistral and Startreak, then I can agreed with this procurement. However why in same time they still maintained Grom and RBS which also mobile IR and Beam Riders SHORAD..?

This is why I questioned their policies. Hopefully, they in the future will only stick with Mistral and Startreak combination for V-SHORAD. However considering their historical practices, and whose likely to come out on the next administration, I really affraid that will not happen.

New systems can come out for another procurement round, which resulted TNI-AD will continued piled out different systems with no effective logistics policies to follow. Hopefully I'm wrong.

 

[STURM]

Sturm, I agree with Sandhi Yudha that most likely (as I have point out on my previous post), those SHORAD will likely facing low fyling threats which in form of helicopters and UAV on present battlefield environment.

Sorry I'm not trying to be argumentative but I firmly believe that V-SHORAD units - both in the rear and at the front - will face a variety of targets which will not be confined to UAVs and helicopters: in times of conflict nothing is certain. Also, there will be instances - especially for CAS - where not only helicopters but also fighters might have to come in low to deliver ordnance; and that ordnance might consist of ordnance which will require the platform to come in below 10,000 feet. There is also funding to consider; there is a limit as to how many medium range systems and stand off munitions that most countries will be able to afford.

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

Sorry I'm not trying to be argumentative but I firmly believe that V-SHORAD units - both in the rear and at the front - will face a variety of targets which will not be confined to UAVs and helicopters: in times of conflict nothing is certain. Also, there will be instances - especially for CAS - where not only helicopters but also fighters might have to come in low to deliver ordnance; and that ordnance might consist of ordnance which will require the platform to come in below 10,000 feet. There is also funding to consider; there is a limit as to how many medium range systems and stand off munitions that most countries will be able to afford.

Thank you Ananda, you already answered Sturms question, and actually explained what i want to explain.
I think we three of us share quite the same opinion:
1. Using two different SHORADS with different guidance system is a good idea.
2. Operating many kinds of SHORADS with only two different guidance system is useless.
3. SHORADS are effective against helicopters and low and slow flying aeroplanes, and indeed low flying jetfighters. (Ofcourse they try to fly high, fast and as far as possible, but sometimes they have to come closer and lower, specially if they have to fly below the clouds.

 

[OPSSG]

July 22, 2014 - President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has dismissed Indonesian Army’s chief of staff Gen. Budiman, earlier than his scheduled retirement in September.

“[The Indonesian Military] Commander called me to pass the order,” said Budiman as quoted by tempo.co on Monday, although he said he did not question his early dismissal. Budiman said that he received the call from Indonesian Military Commander Gen. Moeldoko at 6:45 p.m. on the same day.

Budiman, who was appointed to his position in September, was under spotlight last month after the news of his involvement in the campaign team of a presidential candidate, according to media reports. Until the time of print, it was still unclear if the President’s decision was linked to the allegation.

Interesting that SBY is cleaning house, even at the sunset of his term in office. I am really sad to see him go into the sunset. IMHO, he is one of the better Presidents in the recent years; and he is a friend to Singapore (for which I remain grateful). I doubt if, the Indonesia-Singapore relations can be maintained at the current state. I am of the view, it is likely to get worse no matter who comes to power as the next Indonesian president (both candidates) will not upgrade or repair ties to previous levels under SBY.

 

[Ananda]

Interesting that SBY is cleaning house, even at the sunset of his term in office. I am really sad to see him go into the sunset. IMHO, he is one of the better Presidents in the recent years; and he is a friend to Singapore (for which I remain grateful). I doubt if, the Indonesia-Singapore relations can be maintained at the current state. I am of the view, it is likely to get worse no matter who comes to power as the next Indonesian president (both candidates) will not upgrade or repair ties to previous levels under SBY.

Too soon to tell OPSSG. Jokowi seems set to be the next President. He's a novice on International politics, and come from Megawati/current opposition party that tend to be more tough Nationalistic agenda.

Still remembered Megawati also the President that under her term, despite Nationalistic bravado, also the one that agree to sold some 'strategic' assets to Foreign holder (including Indonesian Satellite and Telco operator Satelindo to Temasek).

Also Jokowi Vice President is Jusuf Kalla, which also SBY Vice President in his first term. JK is more International savy compared to Megawati. It all depend to Jokowi himself, whether he will be an Independent thinking thus more coperative to his own team like JK, or he will be what his opponent paint him, as just Megawati puppet.

In short, what come to surface in Indonesian politics, will not entirely will be the true final policy. Let's see for the next 6 months on his administration. Then you can begin to see the true policy of Jokowi as the next Administration of Indonesia.

Btw; SBY dismissed The Army Chief also being rumoured because he is close to Jokowi camp and probably will be strong candidate for Defense Minister under Jokowi. If this true, then it can be seen the move as to free him for the Job (which under current regulation must be hold by Civilian or non active TNI).

 

[madokafc]

One thing must be noted, TNI AD doesn't and will not operate medium or long range SAM system as part of distribution of responsibility and tasks between Force of Arms in TNI. TNI AD will be forever just operating Manpads like SAM and AA gun systems to cover her own area of commands and task forces when doing some sort of military expeditions. The same standards have been applied to Marine forces too

And then if TNI in near future acquire such systems (i mean long range and medium range SAM) the responsibility will fall into Kohanudnas. They will oversee the utilization of such systems and organizing the systems with the other of their systems (there is a plan for Kohanudnas to operate fleets of interceptor/air superiority fighter).

 

[Ananda]

One thing must be noted, TNI AD doesn't and will not operate medium or long range SAM system as part of distribution of responsibility and tasks between Force of Arms in TNI. TNI AD will be forever just operating Manpads like SAM and AA gun systems to cover her own area of commands and task forces when doing some sort of military expeditions. The same standards have been applied to Marine forces too

If in the future TNI acquired long range/theater SAM, like S-300/400 or Patriot, then yes that can and should belong to Kohadnunas (Air Defence Comand). This already being done, the last time TNI got theater SAM system (SA-2), which controlled by the AF.

However I disagree in TNI-AD will only have V-SHORAD by design. Some talk in media before, already mentioned the Army on planning having longer range air defence system then what they have at this moment. Not talking about theater SAM, but more like 10-20 km range of land based VL MICA, Aspide, or Russian TOR system.

This kind of system still part of Modern Army layered Air Defence in the field. What we are talked before is more on questioning the Army policy of multiple similar V-SHORAD system in the inventory.

Anyway;
Some more picture of possible design of PINDAD medium tank (collaboration with turkish FNSS), come out in local on line media. Pindad it self already mentioned in local media that they are narrowing the 105 mm gun system turret to Cockeril, Denel, and Oto Melara design, whille sourcing the engine to French or German ones.

They hope to get the prototype rolling by 2016. The weight should be on 30+ ton class. This hope will be the back bone of Indonesian Army Tank fleet, as the Leo 2, seems more and more will be focused on Industrialized/Urbanized Java island or Bali and Sumatra that practically those islands have much better infrastructure than other Indonesian islands.