Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Army & Security Forces
Forgot Password? Join Us! Its's free!

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures

Yuma_17_UH-1Y_4516-1.jpg

Yuma_17_F-35B_5220-1.jpg

Yuma_17_MV-22_1778-1.jpg

Yuma_17_PT-17_3864-1.jpg
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence







The Indonesian Army

This is a discussion on The Indonesian Army within the Army & Security Forces forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; https://youtu.be/Cl3IFwbJJG4 Got this frm you tube. Video on Indonesian Army exercises in Natuna. Seems the Army want to shown that ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 11 votes, 3.64 average.
Old November 8th, 2016   #721
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,489
Threads:
https://youtu.be/Cl3IFwbJJG4

Got this frm you tube. Video on Indonesian Army exercises in Natuna. Seems the Army want to shown that their Leopard 2 still can operate effectively in outer islands, even in area that traditionally not suited for 60+ton MBT.

Also the exercise shown Army ability to tranport batalion stregth to remote islands in border area, without the help frm the Navy..

Last edited by Ananda; November 21st, 2016 at 07:23 AM.
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 21st, 2016   #722
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,489
Threads:
https://youtu.be/SD5RF9uNC1A

More video frm Army Information Bureau on TNI-AD exercise in Natuna. The Army really shown it's capability to wage expedionary operation on large scale on outer islands.
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 23rd, 2017   #723
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,489
Threads:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=L76Vg_zwxyw

Video on further test on BTR-4M with Indonesian Marine. Like I post before, the result on the test will be important factor whether Indonesian Marines will pursue another order than current 1st batch of 5.

The price is replacement of the venerable BMP-50..The candidate is Ukraine BTR-4M or Russian BT-3F..
Previous test seems did not got good impression frm Indonesian Marines. Rumours says that the Ukraine team conducts few adjustmen, that the result on next sea trial (according to local online site Angkasa) perform better.

Still it's long way for definite decision on which one going to be the replacement for BMP-50.
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2017   #724
Defense Aficionado
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,196
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ananda View Post
Don't think they are planning to add that polish SHORAD system anymore.
Are you referring to the Groms fitted on the POPRADS mount?

Any idea as to why Korps Marinir operates 2 different types of MLRS - the
Czech RM-70 and the Chinese Type 90B 122 [recently delivered]?
STURM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 25th, 2017   #725
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,489
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by STURM View Post
Are you referring to the Groms fitted on the POPRADS mount?

Any idea as to why Korps Marinir operates 2 different types of MLRS - the
Czech RM-70 and the Chinese Type 90B 122 [recently delivered]?
Well, what mostly the reason to bought Chinese asset..Simply 'price'..both RM-70 and Type 90B frm what I gather already being trial with Locally made 122mm rockets. Thus the thinking..seems the munition will be using domestic build rockets anyway..then using 'cheaper' launcher frm China can be acceptable.

Besides both RM-70 and Type 90B derived frm same Russian 122 mm MLRS (Grad-21)...
Also the Pindad MoU to lincense build Tatra trucks seems not been follow through for some reason. The Chinese Type 90B used copy of Mercedes Benz 6x6 trucks which have large population in Indonesia. Perhaps that also being one of the consideration..

As the Polish Shorad..yes I'm reffering to Polish made Groms-POPRADS combo..
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 Weeks Ago   #726
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,489
Threads:
Sanca..Pindad version of Thales Bushmaster

Atached is image of Sanca, the Thales Austalia Bushmaster that being licensed by Pindad. This is called Sanca (Boa Snake).

Thales according media..also going to work with Pindad and LEN (State Owned Electronics Manufacturers) to build-implemented electronics data mgt/awareness Net-Worked based on Thales latest version concept C5i.

This will ve implemented first on Sanca, but will then implemented on all Pindad land products like Anoa 6x6 APC, Badak 90mm 6x6 Fire Suport, and Komodo 4x4 and other land based vehicle system currently in Pindad pipe line plan production.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg p1686813.jpg (60.8 KB, 19 views)
File Type: jpg 8fe384ff.jpg (130.6 KB, 19 views)
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 Weeks Ago   #727
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,489
Threads:
Pandur II Candidate for TNI-AD 8x8

Positif, Pandur FSV TNI AD Pakai Kubah CT-CV 105

Frm Angkasa online..
It's said that Indonesian Army will procured 1st batch of 4 Pandur II 8x8 made by Cheks (licensed frm Austria). The 1st batch consist of 2 canon version with Cockerill (CMI) CT-CV 105 mm, and 2 IFV version armed with 30mm gun.

This 1st batch clearly aim for testing just like the marines bought 1st batch of 5 BTR4-M from Ukraine for testing. The result of the test will determine whether further procurement will be pursue.

The Cockerill CT-CV 105 gun also selected for Turkish-Indonesian Medium Tank project. Thus CMI already in talk with Pindad for licensed production for turret and gun.

It's also being speculated whether the Pandur II Amphib version can be used by the Marines, since the Marines previous choices of 8x8 with BTR4-M did not fully satisfied them with the Amphib performances. Frm what I gather, The Marines did not satisfied when BTR4-M as being tested disembarked frm Navy's LPD in the mid sea..and it's performance during 10 km amphib state frm LPD to the beach.
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 Weeks Ago   #728
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Seattle
Posts: 12
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ananda View Post

Frm Angkasa online..
It's said that Indonesian Army will procured 1st batch of 4 Pandur II 8x8 made by Cheks (licensed frm Austria). The 1st batch consist of 2 canon version with Cockerill (CMI) CT-CV 105 mm, and 2 IFV version armed with 30mm gun.

This 1st batch clearly aim for testing just like the marines bought 1st batch of 5 BTR4-M from Ukraine for testing. The result of the test will determine whether further procurement will be pursue.

The Cockerill CT-CV 105 gun also selected for Turkish-Indonesian Medium Tank project. Thus CMI already in talk with Pindad for licensed production for turret and gun.

It's also being speculated whether the Pandur II Amphib version can be used by the Marines, since the Marines previous choices of 8x8 with BTR4-M did not fully satisfied them with the Amphib performances. Frm what I gather, The Marines did not satisfied when BTR4-M as being tested disembarked frm Navy's LPD in the mid sea..and it's performance during 10 km amphib state frm LPD to the beach.
Why does the army/marines need to buy in small quantity if the intent is to test whether or not the platform meets the requirements? I don't get it. Defence articles, for most countries, is a buyers' market. Any interested manufacturers should prove that their platform meet the potential buyer's requirements. The buyer can arrange for the test to be conducted, but the actual platforms should not be purchased outright. If I were to buy a car, I'd test drive the car first, at the seller's expense. Heck, aircraft procurement is done the same way ... why in the world that the Marines feel the need to spend some money first just to try? It's not making any procurement and logical sense.
r0m8470 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #729
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,489
Threads:
Their arguments (at least in BTR4-M), seems that they want to do the trial on their own term and supervision..not based on supplier trial or scope environment.

I see your point and agree on most point. However their logic on the trial based on their own supervision and environment seems have some merit. Their Idea seems that; "once I bought the vehicles on this small batch..I can do what I want, where I want, on condition that I want"..without the supplier intervention..

Well at least seems their logic run on this thinkin on buying with small batches first.
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #730
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 14,778
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ananda View Post
Their arguments (at least in BTR4-M), seems that they want to do the trial on their own term and supervision..not based on supplier trial or scope environment.

I see your point and agree on most point. However their logic on the trial based on their own supervision and environment seems have some merit. Their Idea seems that; "once I bought the vehicles on this small batch..I can do what I want, where I want, on condition that I want"..without the supplier intervention..

Well at least seems their logic run on this thinkin on buying with small batches first.
Given the reception the vehicle got in Iraq and Kazakhstan, it's a smart move to test it yourself independently. Add to it the fact that the Ukrainian Army initially rejected the type itself, and asked for an upgraded variant, only buying it once the war in the east broke out....
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #731
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,489
Threads:
On case of Pandur II frm Czechs..seems besides for trial..the small batch procurement also related with the Talk between Pindad and Pandur II producers (represented by Excalibur) on potential further batch being produced by Pindad with CKD assembly first from kits and under license production further..

This is at least being reported by Local media..what I don't understand is..Pindad being told already in talk with Czechs Excalibur for Pandur since 2015..however at Indodefence last year..they are also sign MoU with Indian Tata group for developing another 8x8 type based on Tata's Kestrel..

Is the Tata's deal is a back up plan if further production job on Pandur did not reach the deal Pindad wants ? Since it might be the explenation why they talk on possible joint production for 2 type of 8x8..

Well the Ukraine once reached Pindad for possible joint production or licence production of BTR4-M..but seems Pindad and the Army not really interested with BTR4-M..( lacked support frm Pindad and Army on BTR4-M perhaps another reason why the Marines trial on small batch first)..
Now as I understand, the Ukraine has reach agreement with Myanmar for licence production on BTR-4M..similar aggrement that Pindad back off before..
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #732
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Seattle
Posts: 12
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor View Post
Given the reception the vehicle got in Iraq and Kazakhstan, it's a smart move to test it yourself independently. Add to it the fact that the Ukrainian Army initially rejected the type itself, and asked for an upgraded variant, only buying it once the war in the east broke out....
I think that's backwards. The rejection from Ukrainian army is a leverage for the Indonesian Army to demand that the test be conducted using Army's own requirements at the seller's expense. If the seller is unwilling, then the Army should walk away. That's a clear sign that the manufacturers knows that their vehicle does not meet the requirement. If I were the seller, I'd do my damnedest to prove that there is nothing wrong with my product.

My guess is that there is a side business going on .... Cynical, I know.
r0m8470 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #733
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,489
Threads:
It is understandable to be cynical on Indonesian Armed Forces procurement..considering after decades of efforts to cut down middle man..the practices still there.

However on case of BTR4-M..I tend to believe the down payment on contract has been paid..and the down payment then being translate to the initial batch.
The Marines (not the Army), first contracted 55(or 54 depends on Media source) of BTR4-M. However when the Ukraine producer and their local middle man (Sales Agents) try to get further interest from the Army, the Army did not show interest to BTR4-M. This also add that their effort to bring Pindad as license producing did not meet Pindad interest (which from what I gather, Pindad seems indicated they have found defect on production process and design).

With the Army and Pindad not showing interest, plus the report they got frm Ukraine own Army reception, the Marines seems try to back down on the deal, but it seems they already paid initial down payment with the Agents. Thus they change that initial payment as payment for initial batch. As the test conditions for further batch of the rest 50. Mind you, this is my own interpretation based on what I gather frm Indonesian media and forums.

They want to test independently, seems also indicating they are not completely trust supplier test environment. Again it's not ideal, they should get the test conducted by them, at supplier expense. However if the payment conditions that I mentioned right, then it's still 'ideal' situation for them to have option and get away from the rest of contract (if the test result is not within their approval).

With the result of the test seems indicated that BTR4-M not meet the Marines criteria, then they will have option to back away on getting the rest 50 as initial contract intended. If there's hanky-panky on the wholle process, is probable related to initial contractual based with the Local Agents. This is not the most ideal, but in my opinion still 'ideal' option considering the situation.
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 Days Ago   #734
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 14,778
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ananda View Post
It is understandable to be cynical on Indonesian Armed Forces procurement..considering after decades of efforts to cut down middle man..the practices still there.

However on case of BTR4-M..I tend to believe the down payment on contract has been paid..and the down payment then being translate to the initial batch.
The Marines (not the Army), first contracted 55(or 54 depends on Media source) of BTR4-M. However when the Ukraine producer and their local middle man (Sales Agents) try to get further interest from the Army, the Army did not show interest to BTR4-M. This also add that their effort to bring Pindad as license producing did not meet Pindad interest (which from what I gather, Pindad seems indicated they have found defect on production process and design).

With the Army and Pindad not showing interest, plus the report they got frm Ukraine own Army reception, the Marines seems try to back down on the deal, but it seems they already paid initial down payment with the Agents. Thus they change that initial payment as payment for initial batch. As the test conditions for further batch of the rest 50. Mind you, this is my own interpretation based on what I gather frm Indonesian media and forums.

They want to test independently, seems also indicating they are not completely trust supplier test environment. Again it's not ideal, they should get the test conducted by them, at supplier expense. However if the payment conditions that I mentioned right, then it's still 'ideal' situation for them to have option and get away from the rest of contract (if the test result is not within their approval).

With the result of the test seems indicated that BTR4-M not meet the Marines criteria, then they will have option to back away on getting the rest 50 as initial contract intended. If there's hanky-panky on the wholle process, is probable related to initial contractual based with the Local Agents. This is not the most ideal, but in my opinion still 'ideal' option considering the situation.
This makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the explanation. So I take it there is still no move to standardize anything for the Indonesian military?
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 Days Ago   #735
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,489
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor View Post
This makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the explanation. So I take it there is still no move to standardize anything for the Indonesian military?
@Feanor..you have to differentiate for the case of Indonesia between 'Intention'..and 'Implementation'..
On Intention side..there are a lot off initiatives and regulations that "if" being used 'properly' it will moved to standardisation of equipment. However on Implementation side..there are going to faced a lot off obstacles (such as budgetary and Technological sides) that in the end can and potentially will open to various 'demand' and vested interest.

For one thing regulations and political climates push for local industry participation as much as possible on defense equipment procurement. When Technological and Budgetary not an issue then seems standardisation can happen quite smoothly.
Example in small armoury and munitions..Pindad already cover this..so Individual arms..granade launchers..mortar up to 81mm including munitions already stadardise using Pindad products.
Wheeled APC on 6x6 and 4x4..with Pindad already mastered it, then it's standardise with kind of Anoa 6x6, Komodo 4x4, or even Badak 6x6 90mm gun support armoured vehicles.

However when Technology aspects and Budgetary are issues (can be both or one of them)..then vested interest can play in..
Example on 8x8, tracked and Amphibious..Pindad or other local Automotive producers are not really mastered it yet..then which platform to be choosen can created various interest..The Marines perhaps since they are more familiars with East European (ex USSR-Warsaw Pact) products..then they tend try to get frm Eastern Europe sources.
While the Army is more Western minded products, they want to stick with Western originated design..thus that's why in 8x8 they seems go with Pandur II, which are build by Czechs..but originated by Austria..

At the same time Pindad wants to mastered 8x8..thus assides with try to made a deal with Pandur II Czechs producers Excalibur..but they also made a deal with Indian Tata for developing 8x8..thus creates conffusions for those who try to see this 8x8 procurements..which one going to be the Standard for Indonesian Armed Forces ?
The Marines in same time already shown bit dissapointment with BTR4-M in local media, indicating they want to try Russian Amphibious 8x8..
Still by regulations..whoever make manufacturing cooperation with Pindad..should become the standard products used by the Armed Forces..Pindad again in same time only talk to Excalibur and Tata for potential join manufacturing of 8x8..So where the Russian or other producers that the Marines wants their products..can come to this equation ?

Confused ?
Well it's still in land equipment..with Aerospace between what DI wants to cooperate in productions and vested interest from others in Air Force..it become more hotly debated..
DI has long cooperation with Airbus/EADS..thus DI have interest for using EADS products to stregthen their possition within Airbus/EADS production chain..
Reliance for Airbus/EADS products not bode well with some factions within the Armed Forces..especially the Air Force..
The AW-101 saga that I mentioned in Indonesian AF thread is one example where the interest of DI and EADS..conflicting with AF interest for other products..

That's why I also mentioned that it's not a done deal for SU-35 no matter how AF brass talk again and again in media, that they want have Su-35 or other Flankers family.
The thing is DI has no business relationship with Russian manufactures, but they have with EADS or US manufactures like Bells or LM at one time or another.
EADS try to get the deal for Typhoon, and LM for F-16V..and booth publicly offered join production agreement with DI..
DI it self not hide their Agenda that they want the deal goes to Typhoon, caused it will strengthen DI possition within AIRBUS group production chain..

The AF only wants Viper and Flankers..so they can standardise their Main Combat Aircraft in to 2 types..before (hopefully) KFX/IFX can come to their fleet after 2025..
This KFX/IFX deal also create another facet that benefitted LM..just like with ROK..they demand ROKAF to inducted F-35 in their fleet to support US permition for LM supporting KFX..LM and US also indicating Indonesia add LM products to their AF fleet to gain access for LM support in IFX.
This seems come with F-16V considering Indonesia did not have budget yet for F-35 eventough some in US already indicating Indonesia can be considered for F-35 some time in the future..

Like I said, there are Intentions to standardise..but to implemented that..well it's not as easy as it say..
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:53 PM.