anandaAttache a picture from several picturse that already circulated in media on the conditions on aft section of Air Asia QZ8501. The Navy divers told media the conditions of the tail is semi vertical in the sea bed. The underwater current are strong, which made them so far has not able to find any bodies.
There are some speculations, increasingly it might be likely majority of the bodies can not be found, due the strong underwater current. Some speculations point out with the conditions of the current, it might be some of the bodies trap in the sea bed. Conditions of the tail, which the divers said one third of the aft section of the plane is already disintegrated also provided challanged for them on finding the black box. So far no signal has been detected.
anandaIndonesian SAR agency Chief has confirmed the suspected debris/wreckage comes from AirAsia QZ8501. They also have found bodies.
anandaAttach is the search area and assets that are part of search operation so far. For the third days (today), they already enlarge the search area to 13 zone including inland Kalimantan (Indonesian Borneo).
From detik on line, sorry in Indonesian. Basically the Indonesian AF spot wreckage which some of them like plane undercarriage. Further identification being conducted by SAR nd Naval team that presently move to the spot.
anandaDon’t forget justification of F-35B for naval usage. Asside on USN LHD (which the marines F-35B embarked) and Britain QE class, there are minicarriers users that already confirmed their interest (Italy and Spain), or not offcially put interested but already conducted study in there (ROK, Japan, and Australia), and potential user for Mini Carrier or Secondary emergency runways (Singapore)…Those interest already shown justification for F-35B thus STVOL still relevent.
anandaWhat is the procurement timeline, the proposed dates of induction for the F-5 replacement? is the Gripen C/D being offered or the Gripen E?
The need for F-5 replacement has been asked by TNI-AU 3 years ago. Initially it was thought the additional F-16 sq (from Refurbished and Modified ex USANG F-16) will be the replacement for the F-5. Turned out the additional F-16 sq become new sq, thus not replacing F-5. Thus this year the previous administration has agree for completely new program as F-5 replacement. They asked the replecement can be ready two years after contract being signed (at least that what their official request).
However, if they want involvement of DI in the replacement program, then 2 years seems will not be meet, considering DI has also need to prepared fast jet manufacturing line (if the involvement means under license manufacturing activities). SAAB offered in recent Indodefence is for Grippen NG. So the time line will depend on what kind of DI involvement being required by the New Administration.
That’s why I said if I’m betting man, F-16 can come out as the winner. I said that, since the budgetary plan for DI fast jet manufacturing facilities being allocated for KFX/IFX program, which development stages commecing after 2020. If SAAB or Eurofighter being chooses, that’s mean potentially moving ahead for DI Fast Jet manufacturing facilities, which means additional budget that’s not being planned before. While LM seems inclined that by choosing additional F-16 for F-5 replacement (and potentially also for Hawk 200 later on), LM will help DI to prepared F-16 maintanence facilities, and later on help DI setting up manufacturing facilities for KFX/IFX (in which LM seems most likely become the Tech Partner in the program).
For me, LM offered seems will be more in line with the budget and preparation process and time line for KFX/IFX later on. Besides, F-16 more likely be able to delivered faster than Gripen NG or Euro-Typhon. Then again looking to SAAB confidence, well anything can happen.
anandaKFX/IFX program now being used by both SAAB and Eurofighter to further their campaign. With the program design most likely will be used GE-414 or EJ200 class engine, both SAAB and Eurofighter banked on commonality card on campaigning their respective fighters. For me, I see more and more (based on ROK media and forums) the likelihood of 414 being chosen for KFX. With smaller amounts, I don’t think Indonesian version will used different engine with KFX.
This seems will add more points for SAAB, apart from operational cost and procurement budget compared to Eurofighter. Still LM which more likely come out as Tech partner for KFX/IFX program can come out with another card to further F-16 inventory in Indonesian AF. If I’m betting man, despite SAAB and Eurofighter strong campaign in Indodefence recently, I still see more F-16 come out as F-5 and latter on Hawk 200 replacement. Then again, seems SAAB increasingly gaining confidence for Gripen for TNI-AU.
anandaDouble Post
anandahttp://m.antaranews.com/berita/462796/tiga-besar-
From Antara News Agency, on 3 top contender for TNI-AU F-5 replacement, sorry in Indonesian. Basically the Armed Forces Chief, stated that SU-35, F-16 Block 52+, and Gripen as top contender. SU-35 and SAAB Gripen represented in big ways on recent Indodefence, and so does Euro Typhoon that was not mentioned by TNI’s Chief as one of top contender. Still they come in big way also in Indodefence, seems counting much on Airbus Military strong relationship with DI/IAe as sole aircraft manufacture in Indonesia.
Still TNI Chief emphasizes the political considerations as part of chosing the winner. From all contender, SAAB Gripen increasingly got more and more attention in locam media and forums. Some sources also increasingly indicating that the replacement for F-5 will be strong contender for Hawk 200 replacement later on. Low cost operationally and strong willingness by SAAB to open join production with DI, increasingly got attention. Euro Typhoon counter it with statement that they as group already having proven record on join production with DI, while Sukhoi and LM still not indicating they will gave as extensive tech transfer as SAAB and Eurofighter indicating. Still US and Russia seems banking on political and the fact their plane already in the Inventory, thus provide improvement on logistics and parts (thus) operational capabilities as their cards.
anandaThe difference should mostly be N-001VE vs N-001VEP, shouldn’t it?
I believe the difference of VE and VEP is big part of it. TNI-AU, officially little bit tight lips concerning their Flanker capabilities. Like the photo below, only recently they admit excistance of KH-31 on their inventory, just like other Flanker missiles. They are more open on what their F-16 capabilities including the electronics upgraded those newly upgrade ex USAF F-16 got.
The best sum up that I can get from TNI-AU sources, is that their MK2 and SKM have more maritime strike capabilities and better BVR targeting. So yes VEP is one of the big difference I believe between MK and MK2 in the inventory, however more electronics and sensors upgrade the MK2 have than the MK, beside that. Some sources (unofficial though) stated that the cost for those 4 SK and MK upgrades to SKM and MK2 standard can reached up to USD 70-80 mio. Thus I believe if that right, it shows more than just VE to VEP differences occurred between MK and MK2 in TNI-AU.
anandaNo no, this is not what I meant. Of course I am aware that TNI-AU Su-30s are standard KnAAPO layout, just like Vietnam, Venezuela or Uganda use, completely different from Indian MKI or Algerian MKA. I just want to know the differences between the first two TNI-AU examples of MKK type and the remaining MK2s.
That’s what I posted before. The differences is mostly in avionics, sensors, and electronics. For example, TNI-AU already mentioned upgraded for SK to SKM or MK to MK2 will improved the avionics, the layout of cockpit (more glass cockpit in MK2 for example). Local forum quoted some talk with AF personal (unofficially), that MK2 have better air to ground and maritime strike ability.
anandaThanks ananda. What are the differences in equipment of your Su-30MK(K)s (TS-3001-02) and Su-30MK2s (TS-3003-11)?
I believe it’s more in avionics and electronics. Both version still used standard KnAAPO make up for MK and MK2. From what I gather, unlike Malaysian MKM or Indian MKI the TNI-AU MK2 still relied much on Rusian system. Some local sources citing possibility on putting Western IFF system in the Flanker to be compatible with system in F-16 and Hawk 200. However nothing official on this.
anandaWell Just additional info of current TNI-AU Fighter Orbat:
1 sq Flanker (Hybrid Su-27 SK/SKM and Su-30 MK/MK2)
2 sq F-16 (10 F-16 block 15 OCU and 24 F-16 block 32 upgraded with Block 52 avionics, the Block 15 reportedly will be upgrade to same standard)
2 sq Hawk (Hybrid of Hawk 209 and Hawk 109)
1 sq of Super Tucano as COIN
1 sq of T/TA-50 as LIFT
1 sq of F-5 as Interceptor
Plus 1 sq of Grob as Basic Trainer and 1 sq of KT-1B as Intermediate Trainer.
Hawk 200 is interesting inventory with TNI-AU, it was bought much overpriced during Soeharto regime (reportedly 1 Hawk 200 procured with similar costs as F-16 or F-18 C/D). Thus it’s not a popular fighter during next administration, however proved to be reliable back bone for TNI-AU due to their low operational cost and ease of maintanance. However so far TNI-AU seems did not plan any upgared to their Hawk fleet. The report only shown that TNI-AU made new deal with BAe for further parts suppport and maintanance. This indicated that Those Hawk Sq will be the next fighter to be phased out after F-5. Off course the time frame will still be in +/- 2020.
For that any deal on F-5 replacement can also look for potential Hawk 200 replacement. I speculated that’s what interest SAAB, to make considerable campaign and marketing effort for Gripen NG. SAAB will be significantly presence during next month Indodefence. Bundling F-5 and Hawk 200 replacement program as one continues multi year procurement deal, will be logical and economically atractive. However again in Indonesia, what is the most logical will not always be the winer.
anandaIt’s not so bad. Finally they end up with a fairly consistent force of 5 Su-27SKM single-seaters (TS-2701-2705) and 11 corresponding Su-30MK2 twin-seaters (TS-3001-3011).TS-2701 and TS-2702 need an upgrade from SK to SKM, though.
The 2 Su-27 SK and 2 Su-30 MK bought by Megawati administration. It’s just a move by Megawati administration (that’s not really friendly with US at that time), Indonesia can have other sources for the AF. When SBY Adminstration continue the Flanker projects, Indonesia have better conditions economically, thus more determined procurement process can occured.
The Su-27 is procured because the deteriorating conditions of F-16 Block 15 OCU. The AF actually prefered Su-30. By the time of 2nd batch of procurement occured (for 3 Su-27 SKM and 3 Su-30 Mk2), relationship with US is much improved that the US gave signal of more F-16 can be procured. With that, the 3rd batch of Flanker procuremen then can be switch for wholle Su-30 Mk2 (6 fighters).
Well it’s just brief history why Indonesia Flanker sq end up with Hybrid Su-27 and Su-30. Conflicting report on whether the 1st Batch 2 Su-27 SK and 2 Su-30 MK already has contract for SKM and Mk2 upgrade. Some sources that I got indicated the 1st Batch Flanker upgrade together with the Upgared projected for 10 F-16 Blok 15 OCU will be conducted by current Jokowi Administration.
SU-35 have strong wish list support as F-5 replacement, but frankly speaking unless significant changes for AF budget portion (since Jokowi officially said that during his administration he’s more inclide to continue upgrade the Navy) then more F-16 or even Gripen has better chances.
For me is alsodue to some comment from TNI-AU, that although they like the Flanker, but the operational cost of Flanker in their Inventory is more than twice of F-16. That’s why I have heard on several occasion, TNI-AU like the Flanker but they Love their F-16.
Gripen can have chances if SAAB can offered better cooperation deal for DI/IAe, which incidently DI (due to their close relationship with EADS) unoffically in Media supporting Typhoon. However SAAB due made increasingly strong campaign for SAAB. THey already campaign Gripen NG as the right choice with issue that touch TNI-AU nerve, lower operating cost and acceptable patrol range.
Will see on this. Indonesia procurement is always highly Political consideration. Jokowi comes from Megawati Party which basically less friendly to US, but his VP JK, is also ex SBY VP and considered quite friendly with US. Somehow I still got feeling that more F-16 will got the deal for F-5 replacement.
anandaIn other news: Ukraine returns to the idea of Swedish JAS-39 licence production
http://info-news.eu/ukraine-returns-to-the-idea-of-swedish-jas-39-licence-production/
Thoughts on this?..
With what Money ?? Big Talk for a country that can’not even pay their gas bill properly..Besides..do Thet still have infrstructure to do it..?? Aren’t those Infrastructure rotten somewhere…with no money to upgrade it ??
anandaTwo interesting images I found related to the KC-390 … the first an older CG showing something like a Litening-pod under forward fuselage … is this indeed possible ? … and second a nice comparison.
The costing comparison for IL-76, AN-178, and MTA, I believe is not really ‘apple to apple’ with other mostly western origin transport. Many example already from users, that the procurement costs of Russian origin Aircraft has to be added other elements, simply because different cost structure in the Proposal dan Cost structure on Western suppliers proposal.
Sign In
