Are these the same Flankers that Carlo Kopp on ATA is always talking about – quite a bogeyman to be afraid of, a 16 planes altogether?
The RAAF are probably not as concerned as Carlo…:rolleyes:
IIRC Carlo talk about advanced Flanker (Su-35 or 30MKM thing) not Indonesian one…..
I dont remember clearly in which article… its been a long time since I read carlo’s aricle 😀
My favorite shots… never seen shots of Tejas from these angles and instants.
ugh… why the paint is splotched here and there in the wing ? poor workmanship ? or they hand painting tamiya acrylic on tejas ? or the metal corroded so quckly ? :confused:
Korea, and Turkey defense industry development so far already show consistent government support so far. It’s Indonesia that I (as Indonesian) worried off, since the ‘murky’ Indonesian politics after this ‘democracy’ made long term Government support can be questionable. But for KF-X it won’t matter since Indonesia is only junior partner anyway.
Korea have enough technological based even to developed their own nuclear power plant. I believe building 4.5 gen aircraft is not something that really to far fetch.
Indonesia aircraft industry is much older than what most indonesian remember…in the late 1930s there is an aircraft maker in Indonesia already and if Abdurrahman Saleh not dead in late 40s we might have our air industry embrio much faster. LAPIP already there in 1950s-60s and its product even appear in Janes Aircraft at those time (the kunang/kumbang family)…then nurtanio out and habibie in we finally have a serious one. I hopes PTDI being its incarnation will survive…Hopes that govt will gave support like now. Most of indonesian re still nationalist and to develop strategic industry is good for election :diablo:
They already buy weapons for Flankers (that USD 56 mio deal). The practice of Min-Def in here, the budget and procurement or Hardware/platform and weapons/ammo conducted separately.
@rsetiawan, the deal for the first 2 MI-35 is not the same with USD 190+ for the first 4 flankers. I still try to find out the exact deal detail (rather difficult since it was conducted in Megawati era, and Min-Def accountability is less than presnt time). However from what I heard, it’s different.
really ? old Angkasa article said 192mn is package of 4xflanker plus 2x hind:confused:
also some source said T-50 will come without weapon capability (hence the ‘T’) it is pure trainer why I most against the purchase. …
You DO know that the Marines are technicaly part of the US Navy right? And that it was the Marines requirement for VSTOL that has really hurt the F-35 program?
even without vstol req. F-35 probably still hurt :diablo:
You sure the unit price was that low? If we look at the recent deal, at such a unit price less than half the deal is for the planes themselves. Any specifics to the package?
Also, Wiki has some stuff about the Indonesia flankers having no A2A weapons, this is bullcrap right?
yeah we buy flanker without any A2A weapon for about 10 years…
our govt is bullcrap! 😡
$192 million for 2x Su-27SK and 2x Su-30MKK – $48mil a pop
$355 million for 3x Su-27SKM and 3x Su-30MK2 – $59mil a pop
$473 million for 6x Su-30MK2 and loads of spares for the whole fleet
$56 million on A-A and A-G weaponsThe unit price of these is not exactly cheap. I suspect this has much to do with few things:
– unusually low amounts
– upon having been denied ex-USAF F-16C/D fighters, TNI-AU don’t have many options
– they buy the fighters on Russian debt
correction on the first
those 192 million including 2x Mi-35 Hind @ about $15mn each together with its equipment and sparepart (Ataka missile, S80 rocket and all)
government are really idiot buy purchasing small number of plane in a lot of batch they say it to save and control the budget actually they waste money as ordering and packaging price is soaring and each time there are new contract with all kind of whatsoever fee grr….
i am fanboy hear me roar!
For me, one good reason to opt for T-50 over Yak-130/M-346 is if your air force is operating FA-50 or TA-50s as well. FA-50 and TA-50s cost Indonesia only $25 million, they’re cheap for their role and for most air forces that need a single engined fighter, its good enough to do what they want.. simple interception and light attack and most defensive/peace time needs.. you don’t need to use a $80 million Flanker for that when a smaller aircraft can do the same. Save that money for expensive heavier aircrafts you need in a war!
.
this line exactly shows why T-50 overexpensive (Yeah ‘T’!) @ 25 million coz our TNI-AU got its Su-30MK @ 35 million, not 80.
and Yak-130 is much much cheaper than 25 million….still in the teen range
T-50 is moneywaste….
Yeah, but they couldn’t build an industry from scratch today anymore than Finland could. Sweden is in the game today because they were in the game 60 years ago (when the bar one had to clear for entry was a hell of a lot lower) and have enjoyed strong governmental support over the entire period.
That’s not to take anything away from Sweden’s achievement in still being in the game or to suggest that Korea/Turkey et al. can’t develop their own domestic industries to a high level, but there’s a reason why Sweden is an outlier.
heh…..
there is no reason why Sweden is an outlier….
governmental support…. which aerospace do not need strong gov’t support ? boeing ? well just look at recent USAF tanker stuff. and everyone knows pentagon is a blackhole sucking every money and pour it to the boeing/lockmart dimension. Airbus ? it have support of several gov’t of several state. Dassault ? when last time french purchased a non-dassault fighter ? Russia.. pretty well known all MiGs and Sukhois there
T-50 can have G tolerance from -3 to +8. It’s designed by Lockheed that like major US manufactures has design philosophy for long airframe life. It can’ be said it has inferior airframe/design than Yak 130/M-346.
I’m not going to venture which Inferior and Superior as Trainer since T-50 and Yak 130/M-346 designed from beginning on different set of Philosophy. However due remembered that more and more for Advanced training current AF demand LIFT capabilities.
T-50 clearly not for everyone liking as Advance trainer, however since the biggest game for LIFT/Advance Trainer market is USAF T-X, then which one be more suitable to USAF need ?
T-50 have relative advance and fighter specs radar, electronics, and avionics. That make it already wired and compatible with most USAF weapons inventory and sensors. If M-346 (I omit YAK 130 since it’s clearly close to impossible for that aircraft even be considered in USAF T-X), wants to match the T-50 avionics and radars, it will push up the M-346 prices than from present Euro 20 mio which is already in similar ball park with TA-50 (T-50 LIFT versions) of USD 25 mio. In short to match T-50 Avionics/Electronics, M-346 can become more costly to procured.
I agree that running cost (Fuel Cost) is perhaps the biggest factor for Basic Trainer considerations. But not for LIFT/Advance Trainers considerations, and certainly not if that AF is USAF. Better comparative performance with operational Fighters (F-16, F-22, and F-35 in case of USAF) can deemed more bigger factor then Fuel costs. Especially if fuel cost differences (on operational situation) is not really that big.
I can’t say what USAF final criteria for T-X is, but I still do believe for USAF T-X considering what USAF has on their Advance Training regime so far, T/TA-50 has bigger advantage to meet and outpaced what T-38 already provide for USAF for more than 40 years.
still T-50 too expensive without much useful feature… inefficient trainer indeed…. U huh… Yak-130 with its R-73 will be more useful than T-50 in secondary air combat role….the yak can mimic various flight model and very agile unlike T-50 which is just baby F-16 downsized and downspec for trainer with net result an expensive trainer…..
That’s what I heard from DI team in here after they being briefed by KAI team. I will not be surprised if KF-X final design will be some kind more stealthy twin engined FA-50.
And nothing wrong with that, since it will be sophisticated enough from 2020 + environment.
will the plane have internal bay or not ?
The sized of one nation economy sometimes is not relevant to how big or how advanced their military is or will be. Even now some Indonesian parliament members and NGO’s still questions the increased Military budget for 2 reasons:
1. They don’t see immediate external threat to Indonesia,
2. (This especially from foreign funded NGO’s), They afraid bigger military spending will only increased corruption from Indonesian Military brass.
even if there is we pretend not to avoid self fulfiling prophecy….the ‘there will be no war in the next ten years or so’ is the same mantra spelled every years ever since the beginning of Suharto era 😀
If some body is really rich they will not need debt to maintain standard of living.
.household debt is about culture and lifestyle, not wealth….and what is standard of living ? it is again about perception and lifestyle/culture preference. What is enough ?
So 2 years from first flight to Initial Operational Capability ? Someone needs to get their head checked if they feel that such a timeframe is possible for an almost 5th generation fighter.
Korean are rapid in develop anything….
Same for the KM-SAM with the korean 9M96E1 can it be adapted to a medium range missile?
I never know Korea buy S300 missle 😮
except it have a cloaking shield, able to hypercruise and entering hyperspace it is not a 6th gen figher 😡