Indonesian Aero News

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
@Ananda, @Sandhi Yudha, @Toptob and @ChestnutTree from my point of view, the Indonesian Air Force needs it’s multi-role fighters to be able to carry anti-ship and anti-radiation missiles so as to carry out those missions — IMHO, Tranche 1 Eurofighter Typhoons are not suitable. Let me also say that the Kh-31 on the Su-27/30 can perform the anti-radiation mission for the TNI AU. My anti-ship focus for the TNI AU is premised on 2 points below.

1. While the US may not be willing to sell the AGM-88 HARM to your country, your F-16 pilots will still need to train to fly in a HARM profile (like the Malaysian F-18D pilots, who also do not have them). Even if the TNI AU do not have the weapon, they still need to understand the allied aircraft fight profiles to function in a coalition, when the need for support arises.
  • For the USN and US Marine pilots, in their anti-ship mission, they train to fire anti-radiation missiles, followed by anti-ship missiles to attack an enemy naval surface action group.
  • Without forcing the shutdown of enemy radars on their ships, air launched anti-ship missiles will have a hard time getting through (or just can’t get through) the PLA(N)’s air defence screen.
  • The USN and RAAF Growlers, in providing offensive EW support and in firing of HARM missiles, will play a key role in blinding the radar systems of an enemy naval surface action group.
  • The SU-30MKM Growlerski has been displayed at the Singapore Airshow with 4 x KH-31P Anti Radiation Missiles, 2x Vympel NPO R-77 missiles and a pair of KNIRTI SAP-518 advanced jamming pods, affording showgoers the opportunity to study the mighty “Flanker” up close. Of particular interest is the aircraft’s weapons loadout, including four examples of the rarely seen Kh-31P.
2. The scale of the problem is huge, if Indonesia’s notional enemy is the PLA(N). A PLA(N), carrier battle group is heavily armed, with about 304 cells for air defence missiles and their dominance of the electromagnetic spectrum over the airspace, in comparison to Indonesia capabilities in this area. The destroyers serving as escorts also carry numerous vertically-launched YJ-18 ASCMs, CJ-10 land attack cruise missiles, and the YJ-83 anti-ship missiles. The PLA(N)’s Yu-6 torpedo completed development in 2005 and is carried on their destroyers and frigates. At speeds of sixty-five knots, the Yu-6 is faster than the listed speeds of the Mk 48 Mod 6 ADCAP. The ships in a Chinese carrier battle group would typically consist of:
  • 1 aircraft carrier (with 26 or 32 J15s)
  • 1 Type 055, Renhai class cruiser with 112 air defence missiles
  • 2 Type 052D or 052DL Luyang III class destroyers with 64 air defence missiles on each destroyer
  • 2 Type 054A or 054A+ frigates, with 32 air defence missiles on each Jiangkai II frigate
  • a Type 901 support ship
 
Last edited:

Ananda

Well-Known Member
One of the arguments of those who supported Flankers in TNI-AU is KH-31P as example. They argue that Russia are more willing to provide different kind of Missile then US, and in fact they argue that US finally give Indonesia AIM-120 due to Russia already give R-77.

For me, I'm actually quite nuetral on Flankers as long as all that supports Flankers in Parliament and Administration are willing to open the true costs of integration of Russian asests on TNI mostly Western System and infrastructure.

1. How much the costs to build support infrastructure for Flankers and how much the costs on life time sustainment for them. They talk in Media of high cost of US and Euro assets, when those costs actually including sustainment and cost of Russian assets is not.
2. TNI wants to build network system, but with mostly Western based assets, how can the Russian one interconnected to that ? Is Russia willing to open their source code to TNI ?
3. Politicall standing for administration is to get involvement in local industry and tech Transfer minimum for local maintenance capabilities. Russia procurement so far not include any of those.

One of benefits from Russia compared to US or Euro for TNI case so far is their willingness to provide multiple Missile system with rather uncomplicated procedures.

TNI-AU already in their strategy (at least from what they give to media ) are looking for Multi-role capabilities. The MinDef actually with this multi years budget system also looking for life sustainment deal.
Again, logically F-16V supposed to be the choices, if we're only looking for TNI-AU needs without others consideration like local industry involvement.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
One of the arguments of those who supported Flankers in TNI-AU is KH-31P as example.
1. US was able to also buy this KH-31 missile directly from the Russians and used it as a target drone. The Kh-31P, with its high-altitude flight profile, can hit speeds of up Mach 3.5. The sea-skimming Kh-31A can still get up to Mach 2.5 — the system is very cheap and suitable as a target drone.

2. Love it when the Indians or Malaysians talk about the MKI or MKM Growlerski — because it has important limitations that make it not useful against China. Compared to the F-15SG, the Growlerski is so primitive — Singapore has increased the internal cooling capacity of the fighter (as compared to the F-15K) so that the self protection jamming, with frequency hopping and LPI, is integrated into the EW systems within the airframe. No pod is even needed in Singapore’s AESA equipped F-15SGs — giving Singapore dominance of the electromagnetic spectrum.
  • With the Russian pods, the Sukhoi is basically a transport aircraft, one of Indian scientists said.
  • The second issue is even worse. The IAF realised the SAP-518 pod hadn’t been properly interfacing with the indigenous on-board RWR, therefore killing pilots’ chances to exploit both systems fully.
  • Modern fighters like the F-16V or the F-15SG have a superior man-machine interface and LPI AESA radars. The MKI or MKM’s PESA Radar has more power but less simultaneous multi mode performance, less resolution, less jamming resistance and is more detectable. Interestingly, the Su-30MKM carries a missile approach warning sensor and laser warning sensor by Avitronics and has a Thales supplied the HUD, NAVFLIR and the Damocles targeting pod.
  • I think there is no need to explain further, why the Russian solutions in their man-machine interface on the MKI and MKM do not work well for both the Indians and Malaysians.
  • More importantly, Israel as masters of SEAD has no need for Growlers because they have a more elegant solution (that is different from the American approach), first implemented on the F-16I along with some other classified capability to provide a total SEAD solution.
They argue that Russia are more willing to provide different kind of Missile then US, and in fact they argue that US finally give Indonesia AIM-120 due to Russia already give R-77.
3. The Americans sold the AIM-120 to Singapore at about the same time the Malaysians bought the R-77.
  • The only difference was that the Americans wanted Singapore to store our missiles in Guam. But that silly American requirement was removed once Malaysia took delivery of their R-77.
  • The Malaysians won an argument with the Americans but lost the logistics war, with Singapore. Singaporeans were rolling over in laughter when Dr M forced their Air Force to buy both the Mig-29Ns and F-18Ds
For me, I'm actually quite nuetral on Flankers as long as all that supports Flankers in Parliament and Administration are willing to open the true costs of integration of Russian asests on TNI mostly Western System and infrastructure.
4. I love the Flanker at air shows and support more purchases of it in Malaysia or Indonesia — you already have it in your inventory.
(a) The Malaysians has to pay quite a bit to integrate East and West with the IFF systems for their air defence system. So the problem can be managed in $$ terms but to me the true cost is something else.​
(b) The TNI AU’s lack of dominance of the electromagnetic spectrum over the airspace can result in the death of all TNI AU fighter pilots, flying these wonderful Russian made aircraft (at BVR ranges), should shooting occur against China.​

5. I suspect that Indonesian Su-27/30s will not get to the merge, as PL-15 air-to-air missile of the PLA(N) comes with an AESA radar that can home on jam and is thought to have a range of about 200 km, even if the Indonesian fighters have Russian jamming pods installed. The PLA(N) are well briefed on the limits of Russian aircraft and missiles — that they also own and have developed tactics against. In air to air combat, or even against the PLA(N)’s destroyers, the TNI AU lacks control of the electromagnetic spectrum. More importantly, China has modified its Su-30MKK's fire control system to give it the capability to use China’s homegrown weapons, like the YJ-12 and YJ-18 anti-ship cruise missiles. As a Russian product, it originally can only carry the Russian-made KH-31 and KH-41 anti-ship missiles. These two missiles are too old, and their performance have long lagged behind that of China’s YJ-12.
1. How much the costs to build support infrastructure for Flankers and... life time sustainment for them. They talk in Media of high cost of US and Euro assets, when those costs actually including sustainment and cost of Russian assets is not.
6. To have the same life span, you will need 3 to 4 sets of Russian engines to match American platforms. European platforms, are not cheaper than American solutions.
2. TNI wants to build network system, but with mostly Western based assets, how can the Russian one interconnected to that ? Is Russia willing to open their source code to TNI ?

3. Politicall standing for administration is to get involvement in local industry and tech Transfer minimum for local maintenance capabilities. Russia procurement so far not include any of those.
7. Ah the usual internal politics with regard to geopolitics of alliances or partnerships over source codes. An Indian scientist associated with the Indian jamming pod project tells a familiar story: Russia’s unwillingness to share codes (or its insistence on an additional commercial understanding) that could have helped manage the interfacing issues between the SAP-518 pod and Indian RWR better and faster. India is pretty unhappy with the Russians too on this point. Likewise, Singapore is not immune from this as well.
One of benefits from Russia compared to US or Euro for TNI case so far is their willingness to provide multiple Missile system with rather uncomplicated procedures.
8. In 1995, McDonnell Douglas first received a contract to deliver modified Kh-31A missiles as part of a Foreign Comparative Test (FCT) to see if they could meet the Navy's requirement for a Supersonic Sea-Skimming Target (SSST). The American company subsequently worked with the Russian manufacturer, Zveda-Strela, to develop the MA-31. The SSST contract was not very successful.

9. Thanks to FCT, most of NATO understand why the KH-31P does not work against their radar systems.

10. That is what the Indians are trying to do as well with the craptastic KNIRTI SAP-518 advanced jamming pod. India is working on a High Band Jammer (HBJ) pod on an IAF Su-30MKI. India’s DARE has committed to seeing the pod become fully operational with the IAF’s Flanker fleet. Significantly, the HBJ pod will be indigenous. A DARE scientist explains that the HBJ pod currently has three major systems:

(a) the integrated EW suite;​
(b) the active array phased transmit-receive unit; and​
(c) the cooling system.​

While the first two are developed in-house, the complex cooling system is in process, with DARE sourcing an Israeli system for the moment.

TNI-AU already in their strategy (at least from what they give to media ) are looking for Multi-role capabilities. The MinDef actually with this multi years budget system also looking for life sustainment deal.
11. I also support this, as it makes sense.
Again, logically F-16V supposed to be the choices, if we're only looking for TNI-AU needs without others consideration like local industry involvement.
12. Certainly Singapore can continue to help develop and evolve the training syllabus for Indonesian F-16V Instructor pilots, if the TNI AU acquires the F-16V. Good luck.
 
Last edited:

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Boeing seems to think Israel and India can be the next customers for F-15 EX. Yes F-16V and F-15EX shares engine commonality, but Shornet is more economical to maintain and F-18F Blk 3 will also give performance that will not be much differed toward F-15EX.

Anyway back to TNI-AU case, both Boeing and Airbus can give DI incentives as part of their huge global value chain ecosystem. Thus on that side they can provide bigger business incentive toward DI. LM in my opinion will be less limited on providing business incentive toward DI compare to Boeing and Airbus. However it doesn't mean they can't provide something that can be attractive for DI business need.

One thing for sure LM has two products that has TNI-AU preference, C-130 J and F-16V. Just as I posted before, TNI-AU needs and preference are not the only ones factor that give final say on procurement decision, but it still give significant factor.



I will not say hanky panky already gone from Indonesia procurement. Corrupt influence is hard to get rid off, especially with politicians. Heck, even in DC the Defense Industry still relied on their Politicall lobby.
However big items like Fighters procurement is more in spot lights, thus even buying your way to politicall circle will not guaranteed. If it is, Rosoboron already secured Su-35 deal couple years ago. Now the trick is to get enough PR work with involvement toward local industry.
WRT to performance between the SH and F-15EX, the block 3 SH does close the gap somewhat on range but not so much on other kinematic features. That being said, how much more is a client willing to pay for the kinematic advantage? I would think the price difference isn’t all that much but as Boeing is selling both, the company could tailor the price to move the jet suits their need at the moment.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
@Ananda, @Sandhi Yudha, @Toptob and @ChestnutTree from my point of view, the Indonesian Air Force needs it’s multi-role fighters to be able to carry anti-ship and anti-radiation missiles so as to carry out those missions — IMHO, Tranche 1 Eurofighter Typhoons are not suitable. Let me also say that the Kh-31 on the Su-27/30 can perform the anti-radiation mission for the TNI AU. My anti-ship focus for the TNI AU is premised on 2 points below.

1. While the US may not be willing to sell the AGM-88 HARM to your country, your F-16 pilots will still need to train to fly in a HARM profile (like the Malaysian F-18D pilots, who also do not have them). Even if the TNI AU do not have the weapon, they still need to understand the allied aircraft fight profiles to function in a coalition, when the need for support arises.
  • For the USN and US Marine pilots, in their anti-ship mission, they train to fire anti-radiation missiles, followed by anti-ship missiles to attack an enemy naval surface action group.
  • Without forcing the shutdown of enemy radars on their ships, air launched anti-ship missiles will have a hard time getting through (or just can’t get through) the PLA(N)’s air defence screen.
  • The USN and RAAF Growlers, in providing offensive EW support and in firing of HARM missiles, will play a key role in blinding the radar systems of an enemy naval surface action group.
  • The SU-30MKM Growlerski has been displayed at the Singapore Airshow with 4 x KH-31P Anti Radiation Missiles, 2x Vympel NPO R-77 missiles and a pair of KNIRTI SAP-518 advanced jamming pods, affording showgoers the opportunity to study the mighty “Flanker” up close. Of particular interest is the aircraft’s weapons loadout, including four examples of the rarely seen Kh-31P.
2. The scale of the problem is huge, if Indonesia’s notional enemy is the PLA(N). A PLA(N), carrier battle group is heavily armed, with about 304 cells for air defence missiles and their dominance of the electromagnetic spectrum over the airspace, in comparison to Indonesia capabilities in this area. The destroyers serving as escorts also carry numerous vertically-launched YJ-18 ASCMs, CJ-10 land attack cruise missiles, and the YJ-83 anti-ship missiles. The PLA(N)’s Yu-6 torpedo completed development in 2005 and is carried on their destroyers and frigates. At speeds of sixty-five knots, the Yu-6 is faster than the listed speeds of the Mk 48 Mod 6 ADCAP. The ships in a Chinese carrier battle group would typically consist of:
  • 1 aircraft carrier (with 26 or 32 J15s)
  • 1 Type 055, Renhai class cruiser with 112 air defence missiles
  • 2 Type 052D or 052DL Luyang III class destroyers with 64 air defence missiles on each destroyer
  • 2 Type 054A or 054A+ frigates, with 32 air defence missiles on each Jiangkai II frigate
  • a Type 901 support ship
If the US is unwilling to offer Indonesia advanced missiles like the AGM-88, AGM-84L Harpoon Block II and AGM-84H/K, then Indonesia has no other choice than order the Kh-31A/P and 3M54AE/3M14AE and its platform, the Su-35.
Europe does offer a small amount of similar systems: the only air-launched anti-ship and land-attack missiles are the AM-39 (only anti-ship) with a range of 50-70 km and the RBS-15F ER with a range of 200 km, but both are subsonic.

Besides that the Saab JAS 39 can handle less payload, has less pylons/hardpoints and less range than the Su-35.


Edit:
Sorry, i forgot the existence of the Marta ER, a subsonic anti-ship missile with a range of around 100 km, which can be used on the EF2000!
Btw, the subsonic Joint Strike Missile is still in development as far as i know.
 
Last edited:

swerve

Super Moderator
There are European air-launched land attack missiles & stand-off weapons, in addition to anti-ship missiles: Storm Shadow/Scalp (UK/France), Taurus KEPD-350 (Germany/Sweden), ASMPA (French, supersonic, currently nuclear-only), Brimstone (short range), Spear (not yet in service), as well as products not yet ordered, such as Smartglider (family of glide bombs offered by MBDA) . . .

BTW, the JSM is an air-launched development of the Kongsberg (Norwegian) NSM anti-ship/land-attack missile.
 

JohnJT

Member
Sorry, i forgot the existence of the Marta ER, a subsonic anti-ship missile with a range of around 100 km, which can be used on the EF2000!
According to MBDA the Marte ER has a range of "Well beyond 100km".

If Indonesia does buy Austria's Typhoons, equipping them with sidewinder, AMRAAM and Marte ER missiles would give them a good anti-air and anti-ship capability. Those two capabilities shouldn't require too much upgrade expense, but it's only 15 aircraft and I don't know how expensive it's going to be to support such a small number long term.
 
Last edited:

Ananda

Well-Known Member
This's Eurofighters potential procurement gaining momentum. Seems one of the reasons is MinDef keep quiet on this. Thus for Indonesian media means there's something happened. Prabowo's politicall allies in Parliament already talk that Parabowo's already hold up to USD 3.5 bio contract from previous term MinDef.

Thus Prabowo's now looking for all other option. Seems local media still fixiate on this ex Austria Eurofighters as separate deal. Even some of media defense analyst put negative point on this as they're looking on this as separate deals.
However some local forumers already got the idea that this's part of overall Airbus packages offering.

I have post in previous page the Airbus offer in 2015 for the similar deal that Brazil got from SAAB for Gripen NG. Besides the offer for license production and build final assembly in DI just like SAAB give Embrear for Gripen, the deal also on development of Avionics and Sensors including software access.

Some people in here (Indonesia) seems conviently forgot that DI long term partner are CASA and MBB that all part of Airbus now. They are the first partner from the time of IPTN conception in late 70's (as Nurtanio that time). The Spain is one of partner that push hard for Eurofighters deal with DI. They know their loosing out with Su-35 before, but they also know they're now have another chance as Su-35 deals is part of contracts (heard from source in Ministry of Finance) that being hold and rereviewed by current MinDef.

Spain is also doing upgrade of Blk1, in fact the only Blk 1 users that doing it. Spain is also the one that pushing hard on Avionics and software Tech Transfer. In fact they're also talk that those Avionics can also be used by Indonesia if Indonesia still want to develop their own version of KFX (@Ahmad favorite IFX).

Software development is always the tricky parts on Modern Fighter development, even Korea being talk by local media and forums didn't want to give Indonesia full access toward their Avionics software being developed for KFX.

What if the previous offer by Airbus and Spain still in the table and part of packages their offering. What if They offer Indonesian MinDef the similar packages and access that Spain doing on Blk 1 upgrade, doing it in DI facilities and offering what Indonesia still lack most, Avionics and Software development access.

If that's part the offer, then the politicall temptation to go with Eurofighters will big. For Indonesian Administration means they can talk to public that they're increasingly local defense industry capabilities and tech access.

Airbus also known for some time already offering Garuda MRO subsidiary (GMF) on the some part of conversion Job for MRTT if Indonesia choose Airbus for the Tankers. Garuda already talk that they will let go some A330 CEO when they're converting to A330 NEO. Thus using 2-4 ex Garuda A330 and use them for MRTT with part of the job being done by GMF is also will be politically tempting.

That's what I say all along, never underestimate Airbus and even Bell connection in Indonesian Aero Procurement.
Will what I wrote is part of the overall packages, well I don't know..but for me is probable since Airbus has offered that before.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
After all those years without result, but with failures, hesitations and cancellations......there is one thing they should do: make a decision!
Continue with the Su-35 and F-16V? Just do it or not.
Continue with the KFX? Go for it, and thus pay to KAI!

But if Aeritalia/BAe/CASA/MBB (Airbus!) offer such a wonderful EF2000 + A330 MRTT package full of ToT and workshare....then the best thing is to cancel all other programs definitively!
Well, maybe just one squadron of TA-50 for the SkU14's F-5 replacemement, because thats urgent. Or one squadron of F-16V in case the US is willing to offer a nice package with TOT and advanced missiles.
 

Ananda

Well-Known Member
Yes.. that's the most important thing..make the decision. This drama for AF is just getting too long. Not only F-5 replacement, but all the drama for Transport (C-130J or something heavier), the replacement for 737 MPA, the Tankers replacement, the decision on AEW, and whether we want to continue with KFX or not.

Just put all those speculation to seen whether Prabowo's have ability to take decisive decision..or just like his predecessor that the decision circle around without anything definite.

"Sandhi Yudha, post: 365206, member: 12580"]
But if Aeritalia/BAe/CASA/MBB (Airbus!) offer such a wonderful EF2000 + A330 MRTT package full of ToT and workshare....then the best thing is to cancel all other programs definitively!
On that, I'm quite sure they already offered that. Since practically this is what they offer in 2015 plus MRTT. From reading some media including the Euro ones at that time, the package quite good. However I believe that time Rosoboron got the deal more on the price and trade barter deal that definitely quite interesting for some companies and Politicall circle that support them.

Question right now, is again which decision that meet the budget, provide local industry involvement and at the same time satisfied Political support needed.
If not..it's just another drama that circle round and round...;)
 
Last edited:

swerve

Super Moderator
According to MBDA the Marte ER has a range of "Well beyond 100km".

If Indonesia does buy Austria's Typhoons, equipping them with sidewinder, AMRAAM and Marte ER missiles would give them a good anti-air and anti-ship capability. Those two capabilities shouldn't require too much upgrade expense, but it's only 15 aircraft and I don't know how expensive it's going to be to support such a small number long term.
There may be opportunities to buy secondhand RAF & Luftwaffe Tranche 1 Typhoons later.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
After all those years without result, but with failures, hesitations and cancellations......there is one thing they should do: make a decision!
Continue with the Su-35 and F-16V? Just do it or not.
Continue with the KFX? Go for it, and thus pay to KAI!

But if Aeritalia/BAe/CASA/MBB (Airbus!) offer such a wonderful EF2000 + A330 MRTT package full of ToT and workshare....then the best thing is to cancel all other programs definitively!
Well, maybe just one squadron of TA-50 for the SkU14's F-5 replacemement, because thats urgent. Or one squadron of F-16V in case the US is willing to offer a nice package with TOT and advanced missiles.
Yeah. Make a decision! Preferably the right one, but most of the possible decisions look preferable to not making one.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
There may be opportunities to buy secondhand RAF & Luftwaffe Tranche 1 Typhoons later.
A mix of old and new does make sense, if they are upgraded to the same level and more than 42 Eurofighter Typhoons are acquired in 2 to 3 tranches.

Meteor + Euroradar Captor E combination on the superb Eurofighter Typhoon airframe is hard to beat. These are very long range BVR spear throwers that out turn any Chinese fighter in a WVR fight.
Yes.. that's the most important thing..make the decision. This drama for AF is just getting too long. Not only F-5 replacement, but all the drama for Transport (C-130J or something heavier), the replacement for 737 MPA, the Tankers replacement, the decision on AEW, and whether we want to continue with KFX or not.

Just put all those speculation to seen whether Prabowo's have ability to take decisive decision..or just like his predecessor that the decision circle around without anything definite.
TNI AU needs a decision and go with it. Jokowi may be popular with the masses but I still see his administration, as a joke on foreign affairs and defence policy matters, compared to SBY.

I do like him and he is not corrupt. That I appreciate but so many of his ministers, like Prabowo, are full of sh*t. But that has always been the case, with depth of bench at ministerial levels.
Yeah. Make a decision! Preferably the right one, but most of the possible decisions look preferable to not making one.
Yes.
 
Last edited:

Ahmad

Active Member
After all those years without result, but with failures, hesitations and cancellations......there is one thing they should do: make a decision!
Continue with the Su-35 and F-16V? Just do it or not.
Continue with the KFX? Go for it, and thus pay to KAI!

But if Aeritalia/BAe/CASA/MBB (Airbus!) offer such a wonderful EF2000 + A330 MRTT package full of ToT and workshare....then the best thing is to cancel all other programs definitively!
Well, maybe just one squadron of TA-50 for the SkU14's F-5 replacemement, because thats urgent. Or one squadron of F-16V in case the US is willing to offer a nice package with TOT and advanced missiles.
Making airframe component, assembling, and weapon integration have become a routine activity for PTDI. In term of design, we have developed several planes and already has 10 years design experience with South Korea in KFX/IFX program, so relatively in airframe industry we have done a lot. If there is TOT and work share, it should be in subsystem like avionics (radar, IRST, cockpit, software, and so on) or even engine.
 
Last edited:

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
A survey of AirPower developments to inform the TNI AU’s proposed aquistion of a new fighter type

1. In theory, Australia, Singapore and Indonesia need to work together it to stand a chance against the new hegemonic power that has appeared in the post COVID-19 world. But given current Indonesian attitude to regional cooperation, I am not sure if this cooperation can ever occur.

2. Let me survey some AirPower developments in Australia and Singapore to inform this TNI AU discussion on a proposed new platform acquisition — the Eurofighter Typhoon (and my preference is to see Tranche 4 capabilities installed).
(i) The RAAF with its E-7A as battle manager, MC-55As and Growlers has formidable capabilities to dominate the electromagnetic spectrum. They are also well advanced in their fleet renewal plan with the F-35A to hit IOC in Dec 2020.​
(ii) By 2026, Singapore will make a start on operating 4 F-35Bs (with an option for 8 more). The RSAF as plans to slowly phase out, what I speculate to be between 24 to 36 of our F-16s by the late 2030s (to be replaced by F-35Bs, many of which will be based in the US). News appeared yesterday that Singapore’s 12 F-16s at Luke Airbase will be moving to another location.​
(iii) By late 2030s, Singapore’s F-35Bs will operate forward in hostile airspace using its VLO characteristics to survive, while passing detailed targeting information back to the G550 AEW who as a battlespace manager will cue the fleet of 40 F-15SGs to fire their air-to-air and air-to-surface missiles at maximum range. This approach maximises the qualities of the different aircraft involved.​
But if Aeritalia/BAe/CASA/MBB (Airbus!) offer such a wonderful EF2000 + A330 MRTT package full of ToT and workshare....then the best thing is to cancel all other programs definitively!
Well, maybe just one squadron of TA-50 for the SkU14's F-5 replacemement, because thats urgent.
3. By the way, I have always been a fan of the Eurofighter Typhoon — really hope to see it at regional airshows in TNI AU colours.

4. TOT matters and will affect the sustainment of the selected platform. I would strongly prefer the Eurofighter Typhoon over any F-16V purchase. My preference is informed by the following facts:
(i) Singapore’s F-16s will eventually be retired in favour of 24 to 36 F-35Bs in the late 2030s. I see the RSAF’s F-16 fleet, first acquired in Feb 1988, as no longer regionally competitive in 2049.​
(ii) Starting in 2026, Singapore’s 12 F-16s will operate along side its first four lot 15 (Block 4) F-35Bs, in a US base location to be selected. Singapore has an option for 8 more F-35Bs, which will be exercised if testing and/or technical discussions are satisfactory to DSTA as acquisition program manager. But the F-35Bs’ data links still need work to talk to our G550AEWs and money is going to be spent. This is why the defence minister talks about the need to do testing on the F-35Bs and these distributed lethality issues can easily take until 2028 to 2030 to resolve at an initial level with different IOC and FOC gates. These nagging issues can’t be simply resolved in 1 to 2 years. With distributed lethality FOC taking place in the late 2030s, at the earliest, I suspect (and really to early to predict in 2020).​

(iii) The UK’s Eurofighter Typhoons will continue to operate alongside their F-35Bs as part of their AirPower fleet renewal plans well into the 2040s.​
(iv) Eurofighter Typhoons in production for Kuwait and Qatar are considered the most advanced. They will be equipped with the AESA Captor-E radar, produced by the Euroradar consortium, that is being tested in Germany aboard the Instrumented Production Aircraft (IPA)-8 and also tested aboard IPA-5 from Warton. Another sensor that will be tested in Warton in support of this purchase is the Lockheed Martin Sniper targeting pod. Deliveries of the 28 Kuwait aircraft start in 4Q 2020, while the 24 Qatar jets will be delivered from 2022.​
(v) The first Qatari students have started their training in the UK, with 65 students taking English language training at the RAF Cosford base in 2019. The first of these students will eventually join the RAF and Qatar Amiri Air Force Typhoon Joint Squadron.​
(vi) If the TNI AU is really interested in this platform, Indonesia’s ministry of defence will need to place an order (with contracts signed) by 2022 to take first deliver of new aircraft by 2028 — as there is a production queue (behind Kuwait and Qatar orders).​
(vii) The TNI AU is not on the way to being a regionally competitive air force until it has AWACS and tankers in service. Until then, Indonesia will need support from all its allies and partners that the country can summon, to be competitive against the PLA(N).​
5. Plus it would be good for TNI AU, RAAF and RSAF to operate the same tanker. So that if any of our airbases are bombed or if the aircraft suffers battle damage, we can divert the A330MRTTs to each other’s bases — esp RAAF Butterworth and TNI AU’s Natuna Besar which have limited air defence coverage with SAMs.
 
Last edited:
Is there any guarantee that the purchasing the Eurofighters would mean cancelling the planned F-16V procurement? I am under the impression that purchasing either the Rafale or the Eurofighter would mean taking money from the F-5 replacement budget, as the F-16V is supposed to be from a different budget under a Hawk replacement program. @Ananda can you shed some light on this?

You can argue that establishing the necessary support network/infrastructure would take a lot more than what the F-5 budget can provide, but I'd argue you can theoretically afford it if they decide to retire the Flankers after their first life-cycle ends in the mid 2020's (for the 2003 batch) and 2030's (for the 2006 batch). Wouldn't really be too much of bad thing apart from the obvious AirPower generation issue considering how much they spend on them in order to keep them flying.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Then again, when we look at the composition of the TNI-AU it looks like what is procured is dictated more than which politician is bribed at that time than any strategic consideration...
1. Agreed. The Indonesians have a little of everything and not enough of anything to build proficiency in air warfare. Once I start explaining a little on the RSAF’s fighter roles, it is clear that Singapore does not have enough fighters.
I read somewhere that the F-15X series aircraft would come to well over a 100 million dollars. F-15's are also more expensive to operate and maintain than most aircraft. Which is fine, because the F-15 was never designed to be an economical platform.
2. Supported by 6 A330MRTTs, the 2 F-15SG squadrons, comprising of 40 fighters, is Singapore’s tip of the spear and they are tasked for air superiority, battlefield air interdiction, CAS for our special forces, and long range combat ISR (with a secondary maritime strike capability).
  • They are not the force of choice to attack enemy naval ships for the RSAF. They are currently too heavily tasked for their primary mission — which includes their role in DCA (to protect RSAF’s G550AEWs and A330MRTTs) and in OCA, via killing enemy AWACS, MPAs and other sensors.
  • Their role is to make the enemy blind and extend our sensor reach in competitive airspace.
3. By way of geo-political background, Japan and Singapore are protectors of maritime trade, with a strong desire to project air power to support our respective navies.

(i) Japan’s specialist anti-shipping squadron is the F-2 (similar in role to Singapore’s harpoon armed F-16Ds). This is very time intensive from a mission planning perspective and they need to be escorted.​
(ii) One of Singapore’s three F-16 squadrons, comprising of 60 fighters, have the both the SEAD and the anti-shipping mission — this includes the employment of loitering munitions and use of escort jammers to protect its organic strike package.​
But so far the F-15X is still a paper product
4. As others have noted, the first 2 are in production — its a Congress mandated program to keep the F-15 line open. TNI AU should not consider them; especially if they are really interested in properly upgraded Eurofighter Typhoons (and not the Tranche 1 lemons).
while the Super Hornet is a fully operational (combat proven) platform with a lot of development behind it.
5. Any air force that is interested in this platform, should also acquire the Growler — as per the RAAF or the latest German plans — which I am sure you are more familiar than me.
 
Last edited:
Truth be told, I heavily speculate there is an internal bidding war going on behind the scenes at the Ministry of Defense. In my opinion, as a result of the closed doors culture of the Indonesian political system, there is no guarantee that the TNI AU are heavily interested into upgraded Eurofighters, much as there is no guarantee that they are interested in 2 Sq. worth of Rafales, Super Bugs, or Advanced Eagles until you either see a DSCA report or a news of a signed contract.

If anything, what I can assume is happening currently is similar to what was happening in the lead up to the Osprey DSCA report; In that the primes are currently involved in a behind-the-scenes restarted bidding process to replace the currently unavailable (and likely cancelled) Su-35. With the Ministry of Defense pitting them together to see who can give them the best (official and unoffical) kickbacks.

The fact that the Ministry of Defense does not publish their procurement programs transparently results in things such as small leaks to be blown out of proportion by Indonesian media in order to generate clicks. This in turn, allows political figures to use these events as political weapons against their opponents to further their own agendas; Indonesian Defense being caught in the middle.
 
Last edited:

Ananda

Well-Known Member
am under the impression that purchasing either the Rafale or the Eurofighter would mean taking money from the F-5 replacement budget, as the F-16V is supposed to be from a different budget under a Hawk replacement program
Honestly right know, I'm just watching those Politicall parasites in Parliament (and their supporter) up in arms on this potential EF deals..It's fun..;)
Seems from what I heard from my friends in Ministry of Finance and Bapenas, they all agree that the budget that going to be use for this EF deal is more likely the budget that being set for Su-35. That's why those who supported Su-35 in Parliament and also including some 'analyst' are up in arms condemning this potential EF deals.

The Russian know that Indonesian AF need new aircraft ASAP. The Sq 14 already due this politicall wrangling is without Fighters for four years more already. They're seems willing to provide Su-35 from their own production batch to TNI-AU.
The clues to what potential involves in this EF deal is already there. One of Parliament member from defense procurement committee already talk that if this deal include the Tech Transfer (for upgrade) and being done in DI, then it's still make the requirements in State Law. He's also saying that the Procurement prices it self will be very low. He's from defense committee, so probably he already knows something on the nature of the deal.

So, seems the choices is for the budget of USD 1.2 bio either can be use for 11 brand new Su-35 or 15 ex Austria Eurofighters with upgrade package conducted in DI with Airbus supervision. Probably it's similar to the Spanish Blk 1 package.

Is it possible ? Well probably, since Austrian seems really wants to get ride of those Eurofighters, and Airbus try to resolve it.
If Austrian agree and Airbus also will provide the Upgrade packages in the ball park budget, then it's something that MinDef can sell to the public. Prabowo's season politician, and like I said in my previous post, he will not do this kind of deal unless Jokowi's already give his blessing. And Jokowi is not going to approve this deal unless he sees some benefits to DI as this his politicall standing.

As what will happen with F-16V ? Well anything can happen. This administration can still go with the whole Airbus 2015 offer if they ditch Su-35. Thus potential some 2-3 sq of Eurofighters build in DI as Airbus offer in 2015 can happen.
However if that happen which other Fighter project which will be sacrifice ? Well it can either F-16V or KFX. One of them I'm quite certain will be sacrifice, as no way Indonesia can afford Airbus offer for License Production of Eurofighters without sacrificing either one of F-16V or KFX.

Again this kind of scenario choices will only happen if this administration take that 2015 Airbus offer for License Production of Eurofighters with DI.
At the meantime as you have put, this politicall wrangling since Jokowi's first term already cost TNI AU operational capabilities. They just need to make choices whether Su-35, Eurofighters, or even Rafale. But they need to make choices quickly, and this is Prabowo's test.
 
I personally don't see the TNI AU being quiet if the F-16V gets slashed. Coming from the people I used to work with, they seem particularly adamant about procuring more F-16's for AirPower generation. It would be particularly interesting to see if they will be able to pull off something similar to what happened with the A400M. Maybe they would somehow conjure a separate budget for Eurofighters under Kohudnas?

Either way, the saga continues!
 
Top