Indonesia Indonesian Army,Tentara Nasional Indonesia-Angkatan Darat (TNI-AD)

[Madokafc]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498500275707219968

Not enough, looking at high attrition of modern warfare at armored vehicles and such, ours inventory would not last in a week or less than that against peer or near peer country let alone superpower country like China.

 

[Madokafc]

And don't forget logistics such as fuel.

Well, need more tanker transport in the Navy and commerce fleets in working condition if you want to ensure fuel logistic keep working.

 

[HellFireIndo]

Not enough, looking at high attrition of modern warfare at armored vehicles and such, ours inventory would not last in a week or less than that against peer or near peer country let alone superpower country like China.

It's always bothering me that people always assume that their own self is always in not good enough condition and worst-case scenario always happen, but the other side is always in perfect condition and they are gods whose plan will not fail.

People assume it would not last 1 week or even less. Since when do people start to assume there will be instantaneous and constant engagement at all times, that equipment depletes in real-time? It doesn't work like that. People treat warfare very simplistically, that is "equipment is like phone battery, more equipment is more battery, and that like clock ticking equipment goes away over time in a constant manner until it reaches 0%".

You guys literally just discussed about superpower whose plan bogged down against an inferior enemy, right in front of your eyes, and then immediately go back to the thinking that superpower always wins and their plan never fails. What the hell, all of those discussions are useless, you guys learned nothing from them anyway.

 

[Madokafc]

It's always bothering me that people always assume that their own self is always in not good enough condition and worst-case scenario always happen, but the other side is always in perfect condition and they are gods whose plan will not fail.

People assume it would not last 1 week or even less. Since when do people start to assume there will be instantaneous and constant engagement at all times, that equipment depletes in real-time? It doesn't work like that. People treat warfare very simplistically, that is "equipment is like phone battery, more equipment is more battery, and that like clock ticking equipment goes away over time in a constant manner until it reaches 0%".

You guys literally just discussed about superpower whose plan bogged down against an inferior enemy, right in front of your eyes, and then immediately go back to the thinking that superpower always wins and their plan never fails. What the hell, all of those discussions are useless, you guys learned nothing from them anyway.

In near peer conflict do you expect both sides only using Ak47, L1A1 or M16 ? And going pew pew one time or two then fall backs into the jungle just like what happened during Confrontation in Borneo jungle five decades ago?

Heck even Malaysian hold in their inventory more than 500 NLAW, thousand of RPGs, Carl Gustav and hundreds launcher of Bakhtar Sikhan ATGM. They also had another high caliber arms in their posession. Both sides too already in posession of modern equipment like radar, thermal imaging sensor, UAV, and so on. We should take everything into the table, high intensity of modern warfare is beyond the level of engagement of what our armed Forces had experience before in Aceh, East Timor, Papua and so on.

 

[HellFireIndo]

In near peer conflict do you expect both sides only using Ak47, L1A1 or M16 ? And going pew pew one time or two then fall backs into the jungle just like what happened during Confrontation in Borneo jungle five decades ago?

Heck even Malaysian hold in their inventory more than 500 NLAW, thousand of RPGs, Carl Gustav and hundreds launcher of Bakhtar Sikhan ATGM. They also had another high caliber arms in their posession. Both sides too already in posession of modern equipment like radar, thermal imaging sensor, UAV, and so on. We should take everything into the table, high intensity of modern warfare is beyond the level of engagement of what our armed Forces had experience before in Aceh, East Timor, Papua and so on.

And in the Confrontation, it wasn't "one week or less" wasn't it? Give a consistent example, don't mix up historical examples, with hypothetical scenarios. Even confrontation wasn't just Infantry vs Infantry, there you got a question: Why didn't they deploy what you call "high caliber arms" back then? If they don't have then their bule master did have it, so why weren't they deployed?

You see, you assumed that the 500 NLAW is stationed in East Malaysia, and they can be deployed ASAP and at the same time assume we will advance in such column and there will be a 1-week hypothetical scenario of Army mindlessly advancing just like that? That's not how it works.

"High-intensity modern warfare" but how? Heck, I am the foremost proponent of modernization and reforming away from the old Infantry-focused paradigm. But I don't think, I DONT ASSUME enemy is ALWAYS "more competent than me, all of his equipment are ready, and they will not make mistake", while at the same time assuming we are incompetent, all of our equipment is never ready, and we will make mistake. Clausewitz literally wrote about this, mentioning how EVERYONE always assumes the enemy is ALWAYS stronger, and that there is no way to fight a stronger enemy.

As you can see BOTH SIDES MAKE MISTAKES ALL THE TIME. None of them, in the recent conflict, pull up a totally competent move, they both sucks, they didn't do as planned, it didn't go as planned.

What I want to say here is that, modernization is good, more equipment good, but WE NEED TO GET RID OF THAT THINKING, THINKING ENEMY ALWAYS BETTER, WE ALWAYS LESS.

That is why I say is useless to discuss recent conflict, none of you learn a thing, you will assume we are small Ukraine doomed to fail and Enemy is Unstoppable Ultra Genius Russia. When recent conflict teaches us that there is no small Ukraine and there is no Unstoppable Russia, so get out of that brainset.

 

[Madokafc]

And in the Confrontation, it wasn't "one week or less" wasn't it? Give a consistent example, don't mix up historical examples, with hypothetical scenarios. Even confrontation wasn't just Infantry vs Infantry, there you got a question: Why didn't they deploy what you call "high caliber arms" back then? If they don't have then their bule master did have it, so why weren't they deployed?

You see, you assumed that the 500 NLAW is stationed in East Malaysia, and they can be deployed ASAP and at the same time assume we will advance in such column and there will be a 1-week hypothetical scenario of Army mindlessly advancing just like that? That's not how it works.

"High-intensity modern warfare" but how? Heck, I am the foremost proponent of modernization and reforming away from the old Infantry-focused paradigm. But I don't think, I DONT ASSUME enemy is ALWAYS "more competent than me, all of his equipment are ready, and they will not make mistake", while at the same time assuming we are incompetent, all of our equipment is never ready, and we will make mistake. Clausewitz literally wrote about this, mentioning how EVERYONE always assumes the enemy is ALWAYS stronger, and that there is no way to fight a stronger enemy.

As you can see BOTH SIDES MAKE MISTAKES ALL THE TIME. None of them, in the recent conflict, pull up a totally competent move, they both sucks, they didn't do as planned, it didn't go as planned.

What I want to say here is that, modernization is good, more equipment good, but WE NEED TO GET RID OF THAT THINKING, THINKING ENEMY ALWAYS BETTER, WE ALWAYS LESS.

That is why I say is useless to discuss recent conflict, none of you learn a thing, you will assume we are small Ukraine doomed to fail and Enemy is Unstoppable Ultra Genius Russia. When recent conflict teaches us that there is no small Ukraine and there is no Unstoppable Russia, so get out of that brainset.

What the fuck bullshit you are talking about mr genius? Someone asked how much we are going in the modern warfare considering our armor and arms including zeni tools? It is enough with what in our inventory?


We got 400 or so Anoa 2
200 or so Komodo
100 or so Leopard 2
90 or so Scorpion light tank
200 or so AMX13
150 or so AMXVCL troops carrier

And hundreds more of other armor from various Type,

And got thousands trucks from various Type and so on

The attrition Rates of battle during the last Nagorno karabakh is around 40 or so armored vehicles per day, the Ukraine and Russian battle cost Twice more than that as people like Oryx only Made visual confirmation the casualties in equipment can be far from that's. And i am already said with such attrition Rates our inventory would only last in seven days of high intensity conflict with all of the proliferation of anti armor capability even among our neighbor let alone Giants like China? The rest is up to you, i can't fix an idiot

 

[Lordimperator]

THINKING ENEMY ALWAYS BETTER, WE ALWAYS LESS.

Well PLA is far better than us

 

[Madokafc]

Well PLA is far better than us

He seemingly doesn't know what it is attrition Rates means? Even Malaysian can bit us quite hard, let alone PLA which can Chew us in one bit as it is if we are staying in place and not change our way of thinking.

 

[HellFireIndo]

Basically conception of war among some of the members here

What the fuck bullshit you are talking about mr genius? Someone asked how much we are going in the modern warfare considering our armor and arms including zeni tools? It is enough with what in our inventory?


We got 400 or so Anoa 2
200 or so Komodo
100 or so Leopard 2
90 or so Scorpion light tank
200 or so AMX13
150 or so AMXVCL troops carrier

And hundreds more of other armor from various Type,

And got thousands trucks from various Type and so on

The attrition Rates of battle during the last Nagorno karabakh is around 40 or so armored vehicles per day, the Ukraine and Russian battle cost Twice more than that as people like Oryx only Made visual confirmation the casualties in equipment can be far from that's. And i am already said with such attrition Rates our inventory would only last in seven days of high intensity conflict with all of the proliferation of anti armor capability even among our neighbor let alone Giants like China? The rest is up to you, i can't fix an idiot

BUT ATTRITION WHERE? WHERE IS THE BATTLEFIELD? WHO COMMANDED? WHEN AND HOW LONG?

Do not take statistics purely on numbers, you must take into context the situation there, the geography, the length, the intensity, the GOAL, everything. "40 vehicles per day" are when 1. Both armies are in close proximity to each there, 2. Pitched battle, 3. Conventional warfare. I mean there are MANY factors to put into the equation, not just simply total loss divided by the number of days, but completely disregard the environment we are talking about. When the enemy never ever land, how can we even lose 40 vehicles per day? when they cannot spot us? when they didn't even engage?

No, people don't think about that, they think like the pictures above, 2 armies go straight at each other, and initiate a meat grinder on a sterile space, disregarding any geographical context, simply seeing who can last longer, hence assuming the "attrition rate" is linear.

Well PLA is far better than us

Then how are they gonna invade? people here assume PLA the same way people look at Russia today. We know Russia makes mistakes, their invasion didn't go as planned, and they were resisted, so much that it derails their overall effectiveness. That is if we assume they will invade. In any case of a hypothetical war between China and Indonesia, CHINA WILL NEVER EVER DEPLOY ALL/ EVERYTHING AT ONCE AT US. It is insane to suggest they will come here with all 2.000.000 troops, all the planes, all the ships, everything. That's not gonna happen because that's simply not how things work! So we are working against a PLA task force, not the entire PLA! and even then amphibious warfare limits the number of troops they can send, heck Russia move along their own land border and could muster at most 200.000, and this and that number of weapons still bogged down. Japanese came here initially with less than 50.000, any hypothetical PLA amphibious invasion will not exceed 100.000. So how can that qualitatively in context still be "far better"?

PEOPLE SAY WE TAKE ATTRITION, BUT THE ENEMY DON'T TAKE ATTRITION???

If you say there will be attrition, then that would be a bigger problem for the attacker, wtf people see the probability of attrition as only damaging ourselves but not the enemy???????

That is the problem people, you guys only see disadvantages, but always fail to see advantages, that's useless mindset.

 

[HellFireIndo]

They really did change the camo into this

 

[BBOn]

View attachment 40417
They really did change the camo into this

Ah now they more become philipino

 

[Madokafc]

View attachment 40381
Basically conception of war among some of the members here


BUT ATTRITION WHERE? WHERE IS THE BATTLEFIELD? WHO COMMANDED? WHEN AND HOW LONG?

Do not take statistics purely on numbers, you must take into context the situation there, the geography, the length, the intensity, the GOAL, everything. "40 vehicles per day" are when 1. Both armies are in close proximity to each there, 2. Pitched battle, 3. Conventional warfare. I mean there are MANY factors to put into the equation, not just simply total loss divided by the number of days, but completely disregard the environment we are talking about. When the enemy never ever land, how can we even lose 40 vehicles per day? when they cannot spot us? when they didn't even engage?

No, people don't think about that, they think like the pictures above, 2 armies go straight at each other, and initiate a meat grinder on a sterile space, disregarding any geographical context, simply seeing who can last longer, hence assuming the "attrition rate" is linear.


Then how are they gonna invade? people here assume PLA the same way people look at Russia today. We know Russia makes mistakes, their invasion didn't go as planned, and they were resisted, so much that it derails their overall effectiveness. That is if we assume they will invade. In any case of a hypothetical war between China and Indonesia, CHINA WILL NEVER EVER DEPLOY ALL/ EVERYTHING AT ONCE AT US. It is insane to suggest they will come here with all 2.000.000 troops, all the planes, all the ships, everything. That's not gonna happen because that's simply not how things work! So we are working against a PLA task force, not the entire PLA! and even then amphibious warfare limits the number of troops they can send, heck Russia move along their own land border and could muster at most 200.000, and this and that number of weapons still bogged down. Japanese came here initially with less than 50.000, any hypothetical PLA amphibious invasion will not exceed 100.000. So how can that qualitatively in context still be "far better"?

PEOPLE SAY WE TAKE ATTRITION, BUT THE ENEMY DON'T TAKE ATTRITION???

If you say there will be attrition, then that would be a bigger problem for the attacker, wtf people see the probability of attrition as only damaging ourselves but not the enemy???????

That is the problem people, you guys only see disadvantages, but always fail to see advantages, that's useless mindset.

Up to you lah Mr genius

 

[JATOSINT]

At this rate maybe we should allow every squadron, battalion, and warship to create their own camo

 

[HellFireIndo]

Did they still use the bright green color of the old camo model?

It appears as though they edited Multicam camo with old DPM colors

Bruh I have a problem with DPM's (and other TNI camo) bright colors, but now they are using DPM color on the new camo

Old DPM

DPM of today that I have problem with

 

[HellFireIndo]

Up to you lah Mr genius

Maybe either critique my points (if you can) or simply admit the issue that I have raised. That's a better idea than simply evading an argument. Heck, it's not even an argument because I haven't even proposed any opinion just yet.

 

[Umigami]

I want to see a physically fit lower rank soldier wear it first (so non of those big ugly tanda pangkat, and no big belly) before I rate this camo.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498886158679670784

 

[HellFireIndo]

I want to see a physically fit lower rank soldier wear it first (so non of those big ugly tanda pangkat, and no big belly) before I rate this camo.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498886158679670784

Dudung belly look like ranjau laut

You can use this method to rate the camo: See the soldiers stand in front of a bush, if they blend well then it is a good camo.

 

[Required]

It appears as though they edited Multicam camo with old DPM colors

Bruh I have a problem with DPM's (and other TNI camo) bright colors, but now they are using DPM color on the new camo

Old DPM
View attachment 40418

DPM of today that I have problem with

View attachment 40419

Old DPM is Perfect for Bushes, Jungle, even in our Kebon/farmland.

Why they changed the color in the first place???

The New DPM only blend well in dense old forest. With field of View no more than 100m.

Don't forget if there's rain, they will look like black stick. They deserve better.

 

[Umigami]

 

[R4duga]

View attachment 40459

maintenance ? "for life cycle contractor support services for the Javelin Weapon System"