thobbesBelow are links to the reports I am using. Both contain appendices on the methods and models employed.
PwC – The World in 2050 (Jan 2013)
GS – The BRICs 10 Years On (Dec 2011)The following table is from the GS report and shows the kinds of growth rates being envisioned in these projections, which is both useful for our discussion, and as a corrective to those who think that these kinds of projections involve extending current growth rates indefinitely into the future!
[ATTACH=CONFIG]217513[/ATTACH]
It;ll be interesting to see Indian projections are met. Large illiteracy rate, extreme levels of bureaucracy (e.g. intra-state customs – like paying customs duties to go from California to Nevada). vast cultural diversity and lack of infrastructure are some large problems in India.
thobbesIndonesia is in denial about the killings (just like Turkey is about Armenian genocide).
In Indonesia in 2009 there was an order to burn text books that talk about the massacres:
http://www.smh.com.au/world/indonesia-unwilling-to-tackle-legacy-of-massacres-20090612-c63h.html
If yourt burning books, then what’s being done with graves that come unmasked?
Anyhow Indonesia admits to killing at least 80,000 people as part of some great patriotic rebellion. Also the killings were not done as part of some mechanical slaughter system ala Germany or Cambodia or USSR but rather a lot more scattered and “personal” in approach (much like elements of Chinese Cultural Revolution).
As for open country, open in name only.
thobbesRegarding Pakistan, 2025 plan was cancelled, J-10 procurement is scrapped/postponed, additional 18 x F-16C/D is scrapped/postponned and JF-17 induction has slowed down (still no news on 3rd squadron which was meant to be stood up in March 2013 and then June 2013).
Given there’s still 6 squadrons equipped with Mirage III/V, I don’t see them being retired any time soon unless PAF wants a massive capability drop. PAF has 18 fighter squadrons including several OCUs:
3 with F-16A/B/C/D
2 with JF-17 (probably all 50 JF-17 Block I aircraft are supporting these 2 squadrons).
6 with Mirage III/V
7 with F-7P/PG
6 squadrons is about 108 aircraft plus attrition/maintenance reserve. Pakistan certainly won’t have 108+ aircraft delivered between now and 2015.
Currently Mirage III/V is more capable than F-7 fleet, especially in strike, recce and anti shipping.
thobbesI had read that Russians got good engine performance by compromising on life span of engines.
Has this changed since?
I’ve always wondered about Flankers and Fulcrums in prolonged combat – intensive usage chews up engine life. Does that mean after a couple of months, you have squadrons of grounded aircraft?
Old Soviet tactical model was based on attrition – a MiG-21 was not expected to last long in combat hence no need for long engine life. They applied same rulings to tanks and other equipment.
thobbesThat sounds gut wrenching!
thobbesThe vast majority of Iraqi SAMs in 1991 were obsolete SA-2/-3s which were generally inneffective against allied aircraft. Rolands were relatively rare. Even your link points out that following deficiencies of system:
KARI was rapidly overwhelmed by Coalition air operations during the 1990-91 Gulf War for several reasons. First, KARI was very hierarchical, so that when the SOCs or ADOC were destroyed, the IOCs were unable to operate effectively. Also, much of the communications, data processing, and software for the integrated air defenses (IADs) were not up to the task of successfully defeating a modern, Western air campaign.
500 aircraft in inventory – whoopee do when vast majority of them are obsolete MiG-21/-23/F-7 or ground attack orientated Su-22/-25/MiG-23BN. Even MiG-29s were monkey model export models.
As for 49 divisions – again whoopee do when most of them were of poor quality in terms of training, readiness and morale, and a lot were equipped with outdated equipment.
That’s a third world army.
North Korea has a huge military too – just cause it’s huge doesn’t make it effective or much of a threat.
thobbesYour equivalence between isolated incidents of PKI violence, and the systematic mass torture and genocide of up to a million people is absurd. And the PKI never lost Sukarno — he attempted to shield them for the two years 1965-1967 that he was nominally still President, but his support was largely ineffective as the Army controlled the media and foreign powers (including Australia) cooperated in re-broadcasting Army and NU propaganda exhorting the slaughter of communists.
Wasn’t the Indonesian killings in 1965-66 one of the big genocides of 20th century – at least 500,000 a million people were killed and some numbers point as high as 1 million. Oh and then they slaughtered 250,000 people in East Timor using US and Australian supplied weapons.
And this an American/Australian ally.
Good work protecting freedom and human rights from those vile Communists.
thobbesSEATO being dissolved due it lost it’s importance, not because it’s a failure.
SEATO was a failure.
If the purpose was deterring Indonesia, why didn’t Brunei, Malaysia or Singapore join? Furthermore when it was created in 1954, Indonesia was not some major power house/threat and was still nominally a democracy. Sukarno only became a dictator from 1956-57 (martial law declared in 1957).
Most of the SEATO partner countries were non-SE Asian and it attracted no interest from Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei – all of which were in South East Asia, all of which were Western allied and all of which faced Communist threats. Laos and Vietnam were unable to join.
By the time SEATO was abolished in 1976, you had the Communists take over most of Indochina.
Yet still no interest from most SE Asian states and furthermore you also had Pakistan withdraw its membership by 1972.
So in 1976 SEATO’s main members were European or European dominated (USA, UK, France, Australia, New Zealand) and 2 token SE Asian members (Philippines and Thailand).
So much for regional relevance.
Philippines just want to rebuild it’s long neglected Air Force. Nothing wrong with that. It won’t be able to counter China, but it will be a significant step in rebuilding their own self esteem.
If I was living in Philippines I’d sooner want poverty alleviated or the threat of being gunned down by Abu Sayaf Islamists rather than a dozen planes to fly about over Manila at Presidential parades.
And just on that if Australia was in the same boat, I’d gladly scrap all those F/A-18s to improve living standards or provide resources for combating widespread terrorism.
thobbesI said the 12 F/A-50 alone are not a deterrence by themselves. Yet, combined with further equipment and a strong Alliance are……….As for the Terrorists Problems in the Phillippines. Things have improved. Nonetheless, the point is not to deter the former but the latter. (i.e. China)
As stated 100 F-16s won’t deter China if China wants to get aggressive.
BTW, are you stating things will never change for the better in the Philippines???
It’s all about a US lead Alliance. Nonetheless, an Attack on one is an Attack on all…..
No it’s not. There is currently no active treaty that binds everyone to collective defence like NATO. The Asian version was South East Asia Treaty Organisation (US, Australia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, Thailand, France and UK) and it was dissolved in 1977 as it was a complete failure.
BTW, are you stating things will never change for the better in the Philippines???
Because corruption, poverty and terrorism are still major problems (all couple with fast growth rates) . In 1991 percentage of Filipinos living below poverty line was 33%. Now it’s 28% which is same as Haiti. Other countries such as China and Indonesia have moved far more forward in eliminating abject poverty.
Historically Philippines has been stagnant at best due to a wide variety of factors. The country is such a basket case that it has been described as a Latin American Island in Asia.
That would be a bad miscalculation on China’s part if true. Yet, I doubt China would make such a mistake
We’re discussing East Asian responses to a potential Chinese uber aggressive act on Spratleys.
My point was two fold. One the Philippines must shoulder as much as possible of it’s own defense. Two its has to show its willingness to defend itself. Regardless, of anyone else……
In real life, countries don’t care about pointless symbolism when it comes to defence. Britain didn’t go to defend Belgium because it brought a handful of Hurricanes and Battles.
Countries go to war over national interest which has nothing to do with fighter planes, tanks or warships.
Your wrong in my opinion………..(as they could be next)
Planting a flag on some chunk of Spratley rock is not the same as attacking Japan, South Korea or driving some tank divisions down through SE Asia to try to take over Australia.
Way to many scenario to speculate……….most would likely involve the US. Yet, some may not???
They probably all involve the USA with at least behind the doors type involvement. Do you really think US is going to let such an important issue slide?
True but the Philippines need the resources to do that. Which, it hardly can if China (for example) would steal them……….(i.e. Spratly)
Do you know that Spratleys dispute also involves Malaysia, Vietnam, Taiwan and Brunei? Other than Brunei, the others have been involved in various occupying activities as well.
In fact Philippino claim is based on that of res nullius (i.e. no one owned them previously) compared to Malaysia and Brunei who site geographical factors and Taiwan/China/Vietnam who use historical precedence.
So evil Chinese are stealing rocks that poor Filipinos say are theirs just because they are. Even the daft Argie claim to Falklands has more legs to stand on.
I think we are getting a little off the subject here………..
Sure but it’s fun and in this instance acquisition of fighter planes is a little bit more complex in terms of issues involved then you’re run of the mill procurement.
thobbesIt’s all about deterrence and the willingness of the Philippines to show they have the resources to defend there Territory.
a.) As you state 12 F/A-50 is not deterrence,
b.) Phillippines proves it’s unable to defend itself by being unable to stop insurgencies or rampant criminal activities (e.g. dozen of journalists massacred by forces loyal to a corrupt politician).
Also, as long as you bring it up. I don’t think 12 F/A-50 would stop China. From purely a military point of view that is.
I don’t think it’s a case of “thinking 12 F/A-50 is not adequate deterrence.” It’s a fact as obvious as day that 12 light fighter planes, some UH-1s and a few WWII era minesweepers aren’t going to deter the Chinese.
Yet, those combined with additional Military Hardware plus closer ties with a number of neighboring Countries (Australia, Japan, South Korea, etc. etc. plus the US) Will signal China that any miscalculation will have a price.
I don’t think that China would care about Phillippines being chummy with Australia or Korea or Japan. None of those countries would shed blood with China over a Filipino territorial dispute over Spratleys.
The only ones the Chinese care about is the USA. It’s also the only ones the Japanese, Koreans, Australians or indeed Filipinos care about in terms of providing deterrence against China.
True but the countries you listed aren’t responsible for the Defense of the Philippines.
Never said they were responsible for Philippines defence. Only the US is, due to vested national interest and to some less degree historical ties.
They must at least shoulder what they can. If, they want to gain the support of other countries.
Phillipines could spend every penny of their GDP on military hardware and other countries still won’t bleed for them over a territorial dispute over the Spratleys (i.e “We’ll risk having Tokyo/Seoul/Sydney turned into glass carparks so Philippines can get their slice of the Spratley pie”).
The only way these countries come into bat against China is if Uncle Sam decides they should bleed – just like Australia and South Korea bled for US interests in Vietnam.
I totally agree Philippines should be able to provide some sort of nominal defence – however they need to get their house in order.
Irritating the Chinese with T/A-50 LIFTS doesn’t help the average Filipino living in poverty or living in fear of attack from Islamist rebels.
thobbesSpratleys are disputed regardless. There’s a game of tit-for-tat occupations, buildings, cat-and-mouse naval maneovures etc etc all taking place for decades now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spratly_Islands_dispute
Our friends the Chinese are a smart lot and don’t send PLAN warships anymore to enforce their claim. Rather they use customs cutters.
Sending an F/A-50 to sink a customs cutter/police ship would allow Chinese to up the ante on their claim.
And do you really think 12 F/A-50 or even 100 F-16C/D is going to stop China if it decides to actually take Spratleys over?
In addition most wars occur when a country perceives a neighboring country as weak
Erm Philippines is extremely weak and has been so for decades!?!?
Contrary to what aviation buffs like to think, the true defence of any small nation lies in how much big powers has vested national interest in the future of that country and not how many MiG/Su/F-XX they’ve brought.
And Uncle Sam has a big vested interest in defence of Philippines as it’s part of a larger China containment policy and overall Asian engagement policies just as it did in the past (ever hear of Subic Bay USN Base and Clark AFB?).
The true defence of Philippines is handled/guaranteed by USAF, USMC, USN and US Army, just like true defence of Japan, South Korea, US aligned SE Asian countries, maybe Taiwan, Australia and most of Europe is guaranteed by US military.
thobbesWell, even 12 small fighters would be a vast improvement! Let’s hope the deal goes thru….
Philippines has a lot greater needs than 12 light fighters. Insurgencies, poverty, corruption etc all result in country that struggles even in the best of times in an age where Asia is ascendant.
Funds for 12 F/A-50s would be better spent on lifting the living standards of 28% of all Philippinos living below the poverty line.
thobbesReally, I am surprised South Korea hasn’t won more sales for the T-50 – F/A-50 by now??? Besides the Philippines I think it would be a good choice for a country like Mexico!
16 have sold to Indonesia to replace Hawk Mk 53.
Mexico – operates 10 F-5s and doesn’t care at all about fighter capability. Bulk of it’s fleet is counter insurgency – armed PC-7, UH-60s, light aircraft for recce etc.
T-50 has lost Singaporean and Israeli competitions for LIFT.
UAE was supposedly interested but don’t seem to have gone anywhere with their LIFT requirement.
Don’t see many other customers, due to little requirement for supersonic LIFT and US content export restrictions.
thobbesThe F/A-50’s are brand new and highly capable machines. Plus, the Philippines are likely trying to build a stronger relationship with South Korea. Yet, I think you could make a case for 2-3 Squadrons of secondhand Gripens. As just 12 F/A-50’s could be taken out with a single shot! Of course maybe the PAF can come up with further resources to purchase more down the road?
They’ve not yet purchased the first batch of 12.
Apparently the contract was still being negotiated in January, and was expected to take 6 months. This means we should expect a formal contract between now and July.
Main roles mentioned were: “primarily for training, interdiction and disaster response”.
Latest news I’ve found on T/A-50 purchase is:
http://www.philstar.com/opinion/2013/05/29/947556/editorial-military-upgrade
Apparently T/A-50 purchase is being finalised
Defence Department scandalised by corruption in procurement processes.
Apparently only 16 UH-1H’s are mission ready. A total of 67 required.
Plans to buy “new” UH-1s have been delayed.
thobbesIt’s not just about airframe hours. It’s also about airframe conditions and how well they were looked after, what environment they operated from (e.g. near sea = salt corrosion) or what sort of flying was done with them. Even how they’re stored is important.
Also given Ecuadorian Mirage F1s are over 30 years old, served in a tropical environment near the sea, and that they were probably flown to their very last hours, means they probably require an extensive overhaul or even rebuild.
Also Ecuador replaced Mirage F1 with ex-Venezuelan Mirage 50 as a stop gap so they must be in relatively bad shape. The Mirage 50s themselves were replaced by ex-SAAF Cheetah.
Anyone know the status of undelivered Iraqi Mirage F1BQ/EQs?
Sign In
