Indonesia Indonesian Navy, Tentara Nasional Indonesia-Angkatan Laut (TNI-AL)

[wahyu845]

Nah jika ini benar pasti kita mungkin memiliki 6 Kelas Nagapasa dan 2 hingga 4 Kelas Scorpene atau Tipe-214 pada tahun 2030. Kita mungkin

take another DSM product ? did they learn from the previous case?

 

[Gary]

Egyptian Osa class sunk by Israel using Gabriel missile.
Syrian Komar class sunk by Israel using Gabriel missile.
Syrian T-43 class minesweeper sunk by Israel Gabriel missile.
INS Eilat sunk by Egyptian using Styx missile.
PNS Khaibar, PNS Muhafiz sunk by Indian using Styx missile.
Iranian FAC sunk by Iraq, using SS-N-2 missile.
Etc.

This type of operation might work if its Indonesia V Malaysia, Indonesia V Vietnam. Basically 2 navies without proper airpower backing. On all of the above occasion, the navy played only a minor role (Six day war, Indo-Pak and Iran-Iraq war are mainly air-ground war).

the most relevant military operation for us is the Falklands campaign between the Argentine armada V Royal navy. All of the RN casualties are from air launched munitions.

 

[Cromwell]

We need a deep throughout evaluations on what's wrong with Nagapasa Class and how to minimise those mistakes.

 

[Anmdt]

Well fake or not they did promote this mutant 143 m during Philmarine exhibition. Maybe they are offering it for export while we are using the original Babcock Arrowhead 140 design. Just my guess though.

VL Brahmos is indeed not a selection of many operators around the world thus less likely to be for the export market. And it falls upon what was described earlier for Indonesian Navy with the VLS break down.

DSME Reveals More Details About Stalled Indonesian Submarine Program - Naval News

DSME CEO revealed new details about the delayed submarine contract between the company and Indonesia during the Jakarta International Expo.

www.navalnews.com

I am really amazed by DSME's patience here. With Type-214's, despite of all defaults being stemmed from the design which Germans have made both in Greek and Korean Type-214s, we were able to hear all matters related to stability, permanent heel angle (Angle of Loll) after surfacing, troubles with emergency surfacing etc and acoustic signature matters but with Indonesian Nagapasa we are not able to hear what the actual matter is. But based on what leaks, it is clearly related to Indonesian Navy-specific equipments that Korean Navy has not picked for their submarines.

In this case, if something was not in lieu of contract or not fulfilling requirements by the acceptance (Sea trials) then Indonesia shouldn't have given a pass at the SAT and not completed the payment of the project. And if anything has emerged within the warranty term then DSME was bound to pay it off. Neither seems to happen, then what is the actual matter?

 

[Cromwell]

VL Brahmos is indeed not a selection of many operators around the world thus less likely to be for the export market. And it falls upon what was described earlier for Indonesian Navy with the VLS break down.


I am really amazed by DSME's patience here. With Type-214's, despite of all defaults being stemmed from the design which Germans have made both in Greek and Korean Type-214s, we were able to hear all matters related to stability, permanent heel angle (Angle of Loll) after surfacing, troubles with emergency surfacing etc and acoustic signature matters but with Indonesian Nagapasa we are not able to hear what the actual matter is. But based on what leaks, it is clearly related to Indonesian Navy-specific equipments that Korean Navy has not picked for their submarines.

In this case, if something was not in lieu of contract or not fulfilling requirements by the acceptance (Sea trials) then Indonesia shouldn't have given a pass at the SAT and not completed the payment of the project. And if anything has emerged within the warranty term then DSME was bound to pay it off. Neither seems to happen, then what is the actual matter?

Yes The Navy never specifies the details on what's wrong with Nagapasa Class only we know they are problematic but we never know what the problems are, that's why if there are indeed defects in the submarines even as claimed some are unrepairable, i want a full evaluation from both PT.PAL and DSME also Navy then publish the results of those defects if there are any and how to minimise or repair if can, all of the defects found ( if there are any )

 

[JATOSINT]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1591048803758788608

 

[Anmdt]

unrepairable

Such a submarine wouldn't even pass Harbor acceptance test. If this is the case the trouble is bigger than we have thought. This implies whomever Indonesian Navy has assigned as the responsible for acceptance test was wholly incompetent and it should raise more question's than what is wrong with DSME's design - production. Whoemever is spreading this "unrepairable", " beyond repairs" claim, shall consider other end of the spear as well that might go deeper in Indonesian Navy than it goes in DSME.

An un-repairable submarine wouldn't even pass a depth test, to begin with. I mean, it shouldn't be able to pass the depth test that is the most extreme one.

For Type-214 we openly hear whatever has gone wrong (stability, unwanted noise levels, cavitation etc) , and even recently the parts related to AIP components, despite many people tries to relate these parts (ones happening recently) with DSME, those are related to German origin parts of AIP.

 

[JATOSINT]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1591076821424275458

 

[rai456]

This type of operation might work if its Indonesia V Malaysia, Indonesia V Vietnam. Basically 2 navies without proper airpower backing. On all of the above occasion, the navy played only a minor role (Six day war, Indo-Pak and Iran-Iraq war are mainly air-ground war).

the most relevant military operation for us is the Falklands campaign between the Argentine armada V Royal navy. All of the RN casualties are from air launched munitions.

Land based anti-ship missiles would work well enough and are cheaper. Also the airforce isn't big enough if you want to rely on air launched missiles. What type of air launched missiles do we even have?

 

[Lordimperator]

What type of air launched missiles do we even have?

For now only Sukhois has AShM. F16 doesnt have harpoon. For the upcoming Rafale with exocet and maybe mirage 2000 could do the same.

 

[Madokafc]

Land based anti-ship missiles would work well enough and are cheaper. Also the airforce isn't big enough if you want to rely on air launched missiles. What type of air launched missiles do we even have?

Tactical and strategic use of air launched, submarine launched and surface ships launched AShM is much higher compared to land based system unless you can Drive the enemy into particular choke points area within the killing range.

 

[Madokafc]

For now only Sukhois has AShM. F16 doesnt have harpoon. For the upcoming Rafale with exocet and maybe mirage 2000 could do the same.

F16 fitted with targeting pod and Armed with JDAM can do much better to sink the enemy warships.

 

[Lordimperator]

F16 fitted with targeting pod and Armed with JDAM can do much better to sink the enemy warships.

How would it be fare against PLAN aaw frigates?

 

[Gary]

Land based anti-ship missiles would work well enough.

How do you know? Air power has proven to b persistent in its ability to deliver what surface forces can't. Mobility plays its role here.

and are cheaper.

When the Argentines pummelled the RN in San Carlos bay, they do so with Skyhawks and Mirages armed with unguided Iron bombs, tell me if coastal defense could do the same feat with dumb projectiles.

Seriously all opponents of air power should just sit down and watch what air power can do. It has been proven again and again that any "alternatives" with promises of being "cheap" just couldn't imitate let alone replace what air arms can do.

Also the airforce isn't big enough if you want to rely on air launched missiles.

Why aren't the air force big enough ? Who's to blame here?

What type of air launched missiles do we even have?

That's why we need to invest. Harpoons must be standard on F-16s, AM-39 must be part of Rafale weapons package. We're brave enough to press for F-15ex, I'm sure we could press equally hard for the US to sell us QUICKSINK.

 

[rai456]

F16 fitted with targeting pod and Armed with JDAM can do much better to sink the enemy warships.

The LRASM would be great but probably not available.

 

[rai456]

How do you know? Air power has proven to b persistent in its ability to deliver what surface forces can't. Mobility plays its role here.


When the Argentines pummelled the RN in San Carlos bay, they do so with Skyhawks and Mirages armed with unguided Iron bombs, tell me if coastal defense could do the same feat with dumb projectiles.

Seriously all opponents of air power should just sit down and watch what air power can do. It has been proven again and again that any "alternatives" with promises of being "cheap" just couldn't imitate let alone replace what air arms can do.

Why aren't the air force big enough ? Who's to blame here?

That's why we need to invest. Harpoons must be standard on F-16s, AM-39 must be part of Rafale weapons package. We're brave enough to press for F-15ex, I'm sure we could press equally hard for the US to sell us QUICKSINK.

Air power is great but it is also expensive just like navy ships are expensive. If you just need to defend then land based anti-ship missiles work fine as an area denial strategy and are much cheaper to deploy in large numbers.
Ukraine sunk a Russian Cruiser a few months ago with just two modernized versions of soviet anti-ship missiles. Russian ships now stay far away from the Ukrainian coast because of the fear of Ukrainian anti-ship missiles.
Ukraine is a poor country with a very small airforce and no navy to speak of yet it has been able to keep the Russian navy at bay.

 

[Parry Brima]

We can use Flankers as well while we decided to extend its service. I suppose we still have those Kh-29/31/59 missiles.

With its combat range, we can even use it to attack those new military bases on artificial islands in Spratly.

 

[Parry Brima]

Btw, this is probably cheaper solution.

$250,000 price tag per USV that the website says includes a ground-based, autonomous control station, a transportation and storage system, and a data processing center.

source : https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraines-shadowy-kamikaze-drone-boats-officially-break-cover

 

[NEKO]

Air power is great but it is also expensive just like navy ships are expensive. If you just need to defend then land based anti-ship missiles work just fine as an area denial strategy and are much cheaper to deploy in large numbers.

Then you will need a lot of them to cover the whole Indonesian territory, while jet fighters can be deployed to conflict area in a short moment of notice, while Land based AShM can also be air transported to other islands but its not as fast.
And no its not expensive for maritime strike mission, because as far I know we bough a fighter mainly for A2A missions, A2G and maritime strike is just a bonus and we are not buying a whole squadron of fighter that is dedicated solely for maritime strike.
And ship can also perform other duties too.
You can have 1 squadron of fighter with bonus ability for maritime strike that can be deployed to conflict zone quickly vs you need to buy a lot of land based AShM to cover large part of Indonesia. In the end relying solely on land based AShM will cost a lot of money too.

 

[Synders]

Out of curiosity, how many exocet Rafale could actually equip???
Kinda confused since some source said 2 missiles, while other said only 1...
And how it compared to for example F-18E/F or Mig-29???