Indonesia Indonesian Air Force, Tentara Nasional Indonesia-Angkatan Udara (TNI-AU)

[Lordimperator]

Another footage from Boramae.

Not until we improve S60 to be satellite killer.

Are there any PTDI logo on that plane?

 

[Gundala]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1546423732016906240

Can you feel that?
Puting beliung about to come...

I feel you man, I hope all this future cooperation ith Franco can have much better result then before

Considering that the Rafale is soon to be a done deal, the visit of the commander of the French Air and Space Force is actually for discussing or gathering inputs to build Indonesia's own space force.

Spoiler: Let's see...

Yes, I just pulled that out of my own a** a.k.a hoax

ya, "space force"? well we can always offer our huge air space area for their future satelite as long as we can also have some access to it for example. Win win solution?

 

[Umigami]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1547074230289715200

 

[Gary]

Should have add more NASAMS instead.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1546945489651769344

 

[Soman45]

Should have add more NASAMS instead.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1546945489651769344

KM-SAM Block 2 is already M/LRSAM with ABM capabilities, similar to patriot PAC-3. better than NASAMS IMO

 

[FPXAllen]

Should have add more NASAMS instead.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1546945489651769344

Well, the wording of his tweet doesn't really explain whether the KM-SAM is already the preferred choice, or still one of the candidates for our air force's LR-SAM acquisition project.

Because if it's the latter, then TNI-AU is also eyeing SAMP-T, and probably another batch of NASAMS as well.

Just my 2 kepeng though...

 

[Gary]

KM-SAM Block 2 is already M/LRSAM with ABM capabilities, similar to patriot PAC-3. better than NASAMS IMO

yes true, but Imo we need to purchase more NASAMS batteries first, each major cities with significant economic activity and industry as well as sensitive infrastructure must be defended by at least a battery of NASAMS for low flying cruise missile attacks.

Then once we manage to build a strong low layer air defense then we could talk about BMD, again imo, we have more to fear from a cruise missile saturation attack than ballistic ones. Each of our potential foe (North and South) have amassed more cruise missile recently.

Australia Announces Plan To Procure Tomahawk And JASSM-ER.

The Australian government has announced its plan to acquire Tomahawk cruise missiles for the Royal Australian Navy’s Hobart class destroyers.

www.overtdefense.com

 

[Lordimperator]

yes true, but Imo we need to purchase more NASAMS batteries first, each major cities with significant economic activity and industry as well as sensitive infrastructure must be defended by at least a battery of NASAMS for low flying cruise missile attacks.

Then once we manage to build a strong low layer air defense then we could talk about BMD, again imo, we have more to fear from a cruise missile saturation attack than ballistic ones. Each of our potential foe (North and South) have amassed more cruise missile recently.

Australia Announces Plan To Procure Tomahawk And JASSM-ER.

The Australian government has announced its plan to acquire Tomahawk cruise missiles for the Royal Australian Navy’s Hobart class destroyers.

www.overtdefense.com

please replace those Mbah Mbah S60...
dont forget IKN
ideally how many battery NASAMS/ equivalent should be have by the armed forces?

 

[R4duga]

yes true, but Imo we need to purchase more NASAMS batteries first, each major cities with significant economic activity and industry as well as sensitive infrastructure must be defended by at least a battery of NASAMS for low flying cruise missile attacks.

Then once we manage to build a strong low layer air defense then we could talk about BMD, again imo, we have more to fear from a cruise missile saturation attack than ballistic ones. Each of our potential foe (North and South) have amassed more cruise missile recently.

Australia Announces Plan To Procure Tomahawk And JASSM-ER.

The Australian government has announced its plan to acquire Tomahawk cruise missiles for the Royal Australian Navy’s Hobart class destroyers.

www.overtdefense.com

i also wish indonesia planning to operate a balloon/aerostat based radar system like TARS that were used by singapore if we talked about preventing cruise missile, those kind of thing might help to detect cruise missile during it's low altitude flight/terrain hugging phase.

 

[FPXAllen]

I mean we're in 2022

The confusion began when long ago someone has forgotten to write "CE" after the year number... Thus, the ancient old warrior still carries on.
...

Joke aside, those guns are arguably one of the most cost-effective weapons against drones though - especially when considering their maximum effective firing range. But they will need to be heavily modified and upgraded first with newer shells and detection/firing systems before even thinking of deploying them on the current battlefield against modern and well-equipped enemies.

 

[Mandala]

What is it with this Indos guy? Instead of discussing it in that "particular forum" he goes ranting at PDF forum.

Well you can guess which "particular forum" he was referring to.

 

[Gary]

The S60 and L70 actually belonged to the army air defense, but anyway just to make this short. The army air defense should just switch to all MANPADS solution and retires all current gun based solution (stored in a garage for use in an emergency only). The cost to upgrade those obsolete gun with modern FCS and shell (if there's even one) just not worth the money, might as well stock up more Starstreak/Mistral or even better start replacing the AAA batteries with land based CIWS (Oerlikon Millenium, C-RAM ??)

While MERAD air defense which belongs to the air force should've do follow up order for more NASAMS, at the minimal another 2-3 battery should be secured for purchase. For a country our size 10-20 battery is a must. Only then BMD capable missile in the terminal phase must be acquisitioned.

 

[Gundala]

What is it with this Indos guy? Instead of discussing it in that "particular forum" he goes ranting at PDF forum.

Well you can guess which "particular forum" he was referring to.

Well thats what happen if you talking to your self?

Anyway, I totally agree with AlphaMike. Adding more NASAMS seems logical unless they see some flaw with the existing one. But before that we need more GCI in-place to have larger coverage and better situational awareness before the threat even come close. Todays Defense program is far from perfect but at least the structure is better then previous one.

 

[FPXAllen]

While MERAD air defense which belongs to the air force should've do follow up order for more NASAMS, at the minimal another 2-3 battery should be secured for purchase. For a country our size 10-20 battery is a must. Only then BMD capable missile in the terminal phase must be acquisitioned.

The locations of our AFBs are well known and already on the list of potential first strike targets should there be a dramatic escalation of conflict - which nobody can guarantee will not happen in the next five years or so. Therefore, I can see the reasoning behind the air force's attempt to acquire ABM capability to protect at least some of our most strategically located bases even though our MR-SAM coverage is still laughably pathetic.

Besides, it seems that TNI-AU is not looking for a "pure" ABM like THAAD, for example. What they want is an LR-SAM system that can do both jobs that NASAMS can not.

 

[Gary]

The locations of our AFBs are well known and already on the list of potential first strike targets should there be a dramatic escalation of conflict - which nobody can guarantee will not happen in the next five years or so. Therefore, I can see the reasoning behind the air force's attempt to acquire ABM capability to protect at least some of our most strategically located bases even though our MR-SAM coverage is still laughably pathetic.

There's only 3 countries in Asia Pacific with BMs capable of reaching our land, while there's 7 countries around us which is capable of cratering our airbase with their cruise missiles. We need a rational sense of urgency here.

Besides, it seems that TNI-AU is not looking for a "pure" ABM like THAAD, for example. What they want is an LR-SAM system that can do both jobs that NASAMS can not.

There's no such thing as pure ABM. An ABM works like ABM does but divided in which phase the interception occurs.

intercepts happen in either this phase :

1. Boost
2. Mid-course
3. Terminal

what differentiate ballistic missiles are the height of its apogees, the higher the apogees the longer reach it has. Now for maximum safety you might want to opt to kill ballistic missile as early as boost phase followed in midcourse if interception failed in boost, and Terminal phase would be your last chance to kill before the payloads rain down on you.

Now we can't do interception in either boost or midcourse, why not ? for one because of geography, even if we have the necessary ABM to do the job we don't have any host countries willing to host our interceptor missile so far further away from us. Because hey hey ...

So for now, boost phase interception are ruled out from the very beginning.

In midcourse, geography aren't really much of a problem. You just need the money, technology and around $500M to throw around per interceptor trying to kill a ballistic missile its apogee with around 56% chance to hit. Something like this.

Hence we only have one option left to try our luck killing a BM. during its terminal phase, which means the missile are now plunging right into you. The current solution in the Terminal phase on sale right now ranges from the IRBM capable THAAD (or soon to be ICBM capable THAAD-ER), or SRBM capable solutions like the ASTER 30, PAC2/3, S300VM.

SO what we do now ? There's only 3 out of 7 of our Asian neighbors that deploy ballistic missile capable of cratering our land (CN,INDIA,NK) the other 4 like Vietnam or Myanmar are too short legged or with questionable accuracy. If China, India or NK were to lob missile at us it would be either an IRBM or an MRBM, none of which are capable to be intercepted in its terminal phase by ABM system on offerings.

So what's even the point ?

And then there's the issue of cost..........how many interceptors we could afford ? on the contrary we could happily buy hundreds of AMRAAMS for NASAMS.

 

[NEKO]

Therefore, I can see the reasoning behind the air force's attempt to acquire ABM capability to protect at least some of our most strategically located bases even though our MR-SAM coverage is still laughably pathetic.

Even our radar coverage is still lacking and there is still a lot of blind spot, at least we will get quite significant number of new GCI radar.

 

[FPXAllen]

There's no such thing as pure ABM

I should've phrased it better. What I meant was that THAAD is optimized for an anti-ballistic missile role with a hit-to-kill approach using kinetic energy - hence it likely won't be much effective against aircraft or cruise missiles.

none of which are capable to be intercepted in its terminal phase by ABM system on offerings.

If we're talking about intercepting SRBM/MRBM, wasn't it the main idea behind the ABM interception capability of the SAMP/T and KM-SAM? Speaking of which, aren't they also capable to take down cruise missiles as well? All those, in addition to their "traditional role" of aircraft interception, may very well be what the air force is really after.

Now I'm not against the idea of adding more NASAMS batteries instead of looking for other choices. And if it can do all the jobs above, I don't even see the point of it other than, well, some parties trying to push sales for some kickbacks perhaps. But that's just where the question lies: Can it do all the roles that the air force is looking for?

 

[Madokafc]

Km Sam, nasam and other is just for high value area like Capital city level, Typical Indonesian Forces air defense units actually like this one and most of large Cities with million or hundreds thousand of population, billion US Dollar annual revenue actually protected by this kind of weapons and equipment

 

[R4duga]

LMAO, goodbye elang hitam, i wonder what indos response to this.

interesting stuff regarding "tetek bengek" of our drone development here:
https://www.alinea.id/nasional/saat-drone-kombatan-mendadak-sipil-di-tangan-brin-b2fgx9BFz

now regarding KF-X....

we seriously need our own DARPA or DRDO.

 

[Windchime]

Correct.

But the right term is assembly, not manufacture. Afaik, we only got the right to manufacture the wing.

I don't know if we will do final assembly in Indonesia like how PT DI did it with CN-235 and heli Panther and doing the final installation, or we will send the wing to Korea and they'll do the final assembly & installation and fly the fully finished plane to Indonesia.

If it's the former where we can do the final installation of software, hardware, troubleshooting etc. in Indonesia like how PT DI did it with CN-235 & heli Panther, then it's really huge and the $2B research cost is worth the money. But if it's the latter where we can only manufacture the wing, then it's not really worth it.

Replying here since this thread is more suited for the topic.

Indonesia will supply few composite parts afaik, of which there is the wing. Also, TNI-AU batches will be assembled in PTDI iirc.

More importantly, KF-21 for ROKAF and IF-X are of different configurations, albeit very similar(almost to the point of being identical, especially on the HW side), the latter is tailored to be operated by Indonesians. The reason Indonesia is supposed to receive one of the prototypes is not just for the sake of joint development, but rather this particular prototype is to be used for this exact purpose; to develop, test and certify the Indonesian configuration IF-X. Here PTDI and other Indonesian engineers would do the work with help from their Korean counterparts.

Also, I reiterate this every time I see a similar argument on the net : IF-X program for Indonesia is not just building some parts nor is comparable to CN-235/N-219 program.