The Indonesian Army

[Chino]

Singapore has had both 120 and 160 mm mortars. The 160 was retired long ago, the 120 remains in service to this day. Whether it is made by Soltam, Chino will surely be able to tell next time he's around.

The old days. No, we don't use any 160mm mortar anymore. It is muzzle loaded BTW, and at a Singaporean website the collective guestimate was that the barrel is lowered by way of hydraulics for reloading.

And those in SAF are "officially" the Tampella (or Patria Vammas) M58 160mm mortar (Finland).

However, Wiki and a couple of other sites including Janes's list SAF as a (former) user of the Soltam (Israel) 160mm mortar. Hard to say since I've never been near one and the Soltam is a copy of the Finnish M58.

Again, officially our towed 120mm mortar is apparently the Tampella (Finland). And again, some websites list our 120mm mortars as Soltams. Some say we operate both.

The towed 120mm in SAF is not like the one DavidDCM attached. It has wheels just like the 160mm shown here. The one pictured in DavidDCM's post is probably the one found inside the M113 Self-propelled Mortar. Or an infantry support coy asset. Though if so how the infantry move this beast without wheels is beyond me.

We have a new 120mm mortar (well, less than 10 yrs old) that is automated called the SRAM seen here mounted on a Spider Light Strike Vehicle.

...

Regarding towing vehicle, in SAF a 5-tonne truck was required to tow the 160mm mortar which weighed around 1.8 ton. The 5-tonne is a big powerful truck, about the size of a large bus. And since each 160mm bomb weighs over 30kg, 10 of them would be 300-over kg.

That's why I tend to agree that the 1.2 ton Oto howitzers being towed by a LR is probably just a marketing gimmick. On smooth asphalt road (or "metal" roads as we call them in army intel), sure. On a muddy track, most 4x4 wheeled vehicles can barely move themselves, much less towing something half its own weight.

 

[DavidDCM]

Chino, the mortar I pictured above has wheels in transport mode, but in firing position these wheels are removed.

 

[Chino]

Chino, the mortar I pictured above has wheels in transport mode, but in firing position these wheels are removed.

Aha! That answers many questions. Thanks.

During my service days as a full-time and then reservist (1983 - 1996), my reservist Infantry unit's Support Coy was still using the 81mm. The 120mm was still an Artillery asset so I am unfamiliar with it.

But the 120mm has now been "downgraded" to infantry support status. And infantry 81mm is being (or already) phased out. The problem with the 81mm was that in practice during my time it was a man-pack system.

I am not sure that losing the 81mm is necessarily a good thing because the 81 does have the advantage of being able to go where the foot soldier can go. And instead of calling on the comms for fire support, this thing can be sited next to the infantrymen and the mortarmen themselves can adjust fire without 3rd party instructions.

EDIT TO ADD: Actually, if you go to the Soltam website and download the 120mm mortar brochure, there's actually two types of mortars, one as you described with the wheeled trailer detached for firing, and the other one has the wheels as part of the mortar.

 

[STURM]

I am not sure that losing the 81mm is necessarily a good thing because the 81 does have the advantage of being able to go where the foot soldier can go.

Singaporean infantry battalions no longer have 81mm mortars?

As you mentioned the advantage of having 81mm's attached to infantry units is they can be man-packed and in most cases they represent the largest calibre weapon available to infantry battalions at an organic level. The only main drawback here I can think of is that in a high intensity situation the main concern would be ammo and the question of re-supply. Then again it probably depends on the circumstances, if the units in question were dismounted mechanised infantry units operating in close vicinity to their APC's, there would be less mortar re-supply problems than say units operating on foot in a jungle or mountainous region or in scenarios such as the Falklands where a lot of kit had to be carried in bergens.

Like many armies the Malaysian army organises it's 81mm's into mortar platoons, attached to the Support Company in the infantry battalions. At a lower level troops still use 60mm mortars for support and illumination. The latest 60mm round to be issued is the Ruag MAPAM anti-personnel round. The make-up of the infanry sections has recently evolved with some sections being issued 40mm AGLs and RPG-7's/C-90's.

 

[Chino]

Singaporean infantry battalions no longer have 81mm mortars? ...re-supply problems than say units operating on foot in a jungle or mountainous region or in scenarios such as the Falklands where a lot of kit had to be carried in bergens

I guess the answer is: aerial resupply.

RE: Brits in Falklands, they were stretched paper thin, coming halfway around the world with only the barest minimum assets with no time to allow for a gradual buildup. And yet they won. No wonder they are still the world's best.

If they did manpack their mortars on their yomps, could it have been the 51mm?

 

[STURM]

I guess the answer is: aerial resupply.?

That's assuming you have it when you need it

If they did manpack their mortars on their yomps, could it have been the 51mm?

No idea about the 51mm's but RO L16 81 mm's were used at the Falklands. As you know logistics was a major concern as everything was stucked at San Carlos and there was a shortage of helicopters. At Goose Green the Light Gun's actually had to stop firing because they ran out of rounds.

 

[Ananda]

PT. Pindad light mortar are 60 mm and 40mm 'silent mortar' (using simmilar shell with 40 mm AGL). This bassically what TNI-AD infantry used as their 'on-hand/portable' fire support, since the 81 mm and 120 mm mortar being used by artilery support team and not Infantry.

In short, Indo's Army choose to equip the Infantry with Mortar and not RPG's or light ATGW's, as standard fire support. From what I heard it's practically quite effective on junggle and hard terain ground fighting. Some arguments also say it's more effective then using RPG's or light ATGW's even on urban fighting.

Do you guys agree on that prespective ? Well it's cheaper than say Javelin, but not so with RPG's.

 

[STURM]

In short, Indo's Army choose to equip the Infantry with Mortar and not RPG's or light ATGW's, as standard fire support.

Are you saying infantry units or sections no longer have RPG's? And what is the 40mm 'silent mortar'? Does the TNI-AD have 120mm mortars?

Do you guys agree on that prespective ? Well it's cheaper than say Javelin, but not so with RPG's.

Both shoulder launched weapons and mortars are for different purposes, have different effective range's, and actually complement each other in the overall scheme of things. Like other armies, I would guess that 81mm mortars in Indonesian infantry units are attached to the Support Companies for indirect fire-support. 60mm mortars are normally operated at section or platoon level. I can think of several reasons why a combination of both mortars and shoulder launched weapons should be operated.

1. In a dense jungle enviroment, using mortars may be problematic and may not always be an option. Then again in a dense jungle enviroment shoulder launched weapons can only be used at short ranges. I have been in very dense/thick jungles where visibility is down to a few feet. Due to thick foilage even throwing grenades can be a problem.

2. Unlike the RPG and almost all disposable shoulder launched weapons however, mortars can lay smoke and illummination rounds. Or are there smoke and illummination RPG rounds? I know the Carl Gustav and Folgore have smoke and illummination rounds. Not sure about the LRAC which is used by Indonesia.

3. Shoulder launched weapons may be the only anti-armour capability for infantry units in the absence of ATGW's and armoured support.

Off-course it all depends on the threat faced but in my view shoulder launched weapons still have an important role to play in infantry sections. For FIBUA/MOUT operations, an RPG with a themobaric round would be very useful . Can't see why themobaric rounds for FIBUA/MOUT operations haven't been widely adopted by many armies.

 

[Ananda]

Are you saying infantry units or sections no longer have RPG's? And what is the 40mm 'silent mortar'? Does the TNI-AD have 120mm mortars?

Well so far that I know, RPG's already not a standard in the TNI Army Infantry unit for some time. I think RPG only been use occasionally. The 40 mm silent mortar basically a modification of 40 mm Granade launcer. So far that I know, it's using simmilar (modified) 40 mm shell but muzzle loaded. It's supposed to be light enough for personal used, whille 60 mm need couple of guys to operate, thus just like you say it's on platoon level.

Both shoulder launched weapons and mortars are for different purposes, have different effective range's, and actually complement each other in the overall scheme of things. Like other armies, I would guess that 81mm mortars in Indonesian infantry units are attached to the Support Companies for indirect fire-support. 60mm mortars are normally operated at section or platoon level. I can think of several reasons why a combination of both mortars and shoulder launched weapons should be operated.

Yes 81 mm on support companies or in here call artilery support unit. 120 mm also being used, however Pindad so far only produced up to 81 mm mortar. 120 mm now being modified to be put on Anoa's APC cabin.

I personally also wandering why TNI like mortar more than shoulder launch weapons. Except LRAC the Army Infantry unit as far as I know, presently not operating other shoulder launch weapons. However it's not a standard Infantry/Platoon level. 60 mm mortar and recently 40 mm personal mortar seems is the standard for Infantry/Platoon level.

Other personal/infantry units shoulder launch are not anti armour; Chinese QW-3 being used by Air Force special unit, whille SA-7 seems still equiped the Marines. Other anti armour and SAM missiles attach to vehicles.

 

[STURM]

\Except LRAC the Army Infantry unit as far as I know, presently not operating other shoulder launch weapons.

There was a photo in 'Militaryphotos' showing the Instalanza C-90 operated. Could be it was just for trials.

\whille SA-7 seems still equiped the Marines.

Are these actual SA-7 'Grails' acquired some time ago from the Soviet Union/Russia or SA-7's from a different country? Come to think of it, did Indonesia buy anything from the Soviet Union in the 1980's and when were the last batch of AK-47's ordered?

 

[Ananda]

There was a photo in 'Militaryphotos' showing the Instalanza C-90 operated. Could be it was just for trials.

Well so far, the Army only put LRAC as their manpads shoulder launch anti armour as replacement for M1 Bazooka. This happen on late 80's and 90's. I can't comment for other shoulder launch missiles, since the Army info that I gather so far, ahs not shown significant deployment of shoulder launch missiles other than LRAC.

However there are info on the Army looking and testing other shoulderlaunch missiles. However can't find confirmation. Thus so far I can only fouch for LARC. Just like I said before, all indication show that the Army Ground/Infantry units more equip with Mortar rahter than shoulder launch for Fire support on ground unit level.

Are these actual SA-7 'Grails' acquired some time ago from the Soviet Union/Russia or SA-7's from a different country? Come to think of it, did Indonesia buy anything from the Soviet Union in the 1980's and when were the last batch of AK-47's ordered?

Officially those comming from USSR by 60's. Although some report say that the Marine and Air Forces did have some business with Checkoslovakia until the 70's (the Air Force L-29 still fly untill late 70's-early 80's when they replaced by Hawk Mk 53). Whether that mean they still get some Warsaw Pact equipment from Checks besides spare part for L-29, that I still haven't got confirmation.

Anyway although SA-7 still in the Marines inventory, but I have huge doubt whether they still effective operationally. Like I said the break-up with USSR not come as sudden when Soeharto comming to power. But more in the early 70's when He already consolidated his power. His first foreign miniter (and later his Second Vice President) Adam Malik, was someone that's quite Friendly with USSR.

Note:
Just read some old articles (sorry from the 90's and no on-line versions) from old Indonesian Military magazines (called TSM, now already ceased to exist), that mentioned Kopassus equiped themselves (late 80's - early 90's) with Carl Gustav Recoilles Riffle (seems M3 variances), as their sholder launch anti armour weapons.

At that time as I mentioned before Kopassus procurement was conducted seperately from regullar Army/TNI-AD. Thus this's not made Carl Gustav M3 a standard in the TNI AD.

 

[DavidDCM]

The Indonesian Army plan to purchase 178 new fighting vehicles: 65 main battle tanks, 53 medium tanks and 60 (wheeled) gun carriers in the next three years. Exact models yet unknown.
So Indonesia is planning to join the growing club of Southeast Asian MBT owners. This would leave the chronically cash-strapped Philippines as the only major Southeast Asian nation without tanks (Brunei, East Timor, and possibly Laos are the other ones).

Additionally, 65 of the Indonesian AMX-13 are to be retrofitted with unspecified upgrades.

News item in Indonesian:
harian-global.com

Kavaleri Peroleh 178 Unit Kendaraan Tempur

Kaveleri TNI Angkatan Darat (AD) akan mendapatkan tambahan peralatan baru sebanyak 65 unit kendaraan tempur MBT, 53 unit kendaraan tempur Tank Medium dan 60 unit kendaraan tempur Panser Kanon Medium dalam kurun tahun 2011-2014.

Tambahan peralatan baru itu dalam rangka pemenuhan Satuan Kavaleri yang akan dibentuk maupun dalam rangka Rematerialisasi Alat utama Sistem Senjata satuan kavaleri pada satuan yang telah dibentuk serta melaksanakan Program retrofiting 65 unit kendaraan tempur Tank AMX-13.

Hal itu disampaikan Danpusenkav Kodiklat TNI Angkatan Darat Brigadir Jendral TNI Burhanudin Siagian dalam amanatnya yang dibacakan Waasintel Kasdam I/BB, pada acara syukuran HUT ke 61 Kavaleri tahun 2011 di lapangan apel Makoyon Kav 6/Serbu di Asam Kumbang Medan, Rabu Malam (9/2).

Hadir pada acara tersebut, Danyon Arhanudse 11/BS Letnan Kolonel Arh Sony Hendayana, Danyon Armed 2/105 Letkol Arm Surya Darma Damanik, Danyon Zipur 1/DD letkol Czi Ahmad Rijal Ramdhani SSos SH, Danyonif 100/Raider Letkol Inf Heri Susandi, Dandeninteldam I/BB Letkol Kav Hendi Suhendi SSos, para sesepuh Korps Kavaleri serta serta Ibu-ibu Ketua Persit Batalyon Kavaleri 6/Serbu dan tamu undangan lainnyaDalam amanatnya, Burhanudin Siagian menyampaikan, Pusenkav Kodiklat TNI AD telah melaksanakan Revisi Bujukbin Kavaleri. Semula satuan Kavaleri hanya berwenang melaksanakan pemeliharaan kendaraan tempur pada tingkat 0, sekarang ditingkatkan pada tingkat 2.

“Di samping itu Pusenkav dan jajarannya juga telah melaksanakan beberapa penataan pangkalan, dari uraian tersebut dapat kita tarik benang merah bahwa tantangan tugas ke depan yang semakin berat dan kompleks, akan dapat dijawab apabila prajurit Kavaleri memiliki jati diri yang tangguh, dan selalu meningkatkan kemampuannya serta memegang teguh nilai-nilai kejujuran dan nilai-nilai kebenaran.”

Sesuai dengan tema HUT Kavaleri ke 61 yakni Dengan semangat Jaya dimasa perang berguna dimasa damai, Korps Kavaleri bertekad meningkatkan profesionalisme prajurit dan memantapkan kemanunggalan TNI-Rakyat guna mendukung tugas pokok TNI Angkatan Darat.

 

[STURM]

This would leave the chronically cash-strapped Philippines as the only major Southeast Asian nation without tanks (Brunei, East Timor, and possibly Laos are the other ones).

Due to the absence of any land borders, plus it's operational requirements and the threat faced, it can be argued that the Philippines has a lesser need of MBT's than any of it's neighbours. Doesn't Laos have some T-54's/55's?

 

[DavidDCM]

Laos may have tanks, but I've never seen photos so I can't tell for sure. There's a Type 62 light tank in a Museum in Vientianne, but that's about it.

The Philippine military is not solely concerned with the Southern insurgency, they have to keep in mind their nationwide security screen. Indonesia as well isn't facing an immediate threat that would require main battle tanks. Nor are Singapore or Malaysia. Yet they all decided to invest in this capability.
Money is a huge issue for the Philippine military. While their neighboring countries regularly go on shopping sprees to constantly modernize their armed forces, all the Filipinos can do is scrape together all money available to keep their existing inventory running, at best hoping to retrofit some vehicles with a few basic upgrades.
I sometimes feel saddened to see what is becoming of the Philippines. 50 years ago, it was the most advanced country in Southeast Asia, basically. Today they have a GDP per capita that is behind Vietnam and even Cambodia and only slightly ahead of Laos. If they don't push forward with political and economic reforms very soon (and unfortunately it doesn't seem they do), in a few years the Philippines will be the backwater of Southeast Asia. I've been to the country and loved it's people, but they have huge problems.

 

[Ananda]

The Indonesian Army plan to purchase 178 new fighting vehicles: 65 main battle tanks, 53 medium tanks and 60 (wheeled) gun carriers in the next three years. Exact models yet unknown.
So Indonesia is planning to join the growing club of Southeast Asian MBT owners. This would leave the chronically cash-strapped Philippines as the only major Southeast Asian nation without tanks (Brunei, East Timor, and possibly Laos are the other ones).

Additionally, 65 of the Indonesian AMX-13 are to be retrofitted with unspecified upgrades.

That medium tanks, digesting from several sources including Pindad actually is IFV. Together with whelled gun carriers (Canon Panzer Pindad call it in here), those two projects is the next projects after Anoa's APC that Pindad aimed to have and build in this current administrations time.

MBT on the other hand will depend on the Pindad projects. That's why South Korean is the leading contenders, not because K1A1 is the best MBT for Indonesia (it's a good MBT but many sources say it's higher cost to procured and maintainances compared to T-90 for instances), but because so far Pindad talk with South Korea to help them technologically to build Panser Canon and IFV is the most advance compared to other potential sources.

T-90 also being talked as potential contenders for Indonesian MBT, however the talked for the other projects between Pindad and the Russian is not as advances as with South Korean. Seems the willingness of Support from ROK for Pindad is more clear than the Russian.

The current adminstrations and the parlements already make it clear that politicall support for military procurements will be given if the projects must be involved or tied in to projects done with Local Defense Industry.

Altough talk about MBT already come out since the time of Soeharto, however thsi time show more intense, since this time Indonesia is not the first Nation on SEA intruduces MBT. On the 80s South Korea already offerd their License M-60, whille in the 90's talked with the Germans for Leopard 1 was also comming (through Habibie connections). Both in the end result with more AMX 13 (instead M-60), and Scorpions light tanks (instead of Leo 1).

Officially because TNI-AD did not want MBT (at that time), other unofficially (and rumours on) since the Germans try to influences with Habibie connections (that time a very influlential minister already before become last Soeharto VP). whille the Brits goes direct to Soeharto's children. Hope with now the MBT's project is tied to Pindad other projects, those 'hanky-panky' will be much reduces.

Note:
Found some references from few years old article (sorry no online source) that stated then Army chief saying AMX 13 can still be used on present battle environment if the battle management awareness ofthe Tanks can be improved. Thus seems refer potential upgrade may be more to computerised fire control, night vission capabilities, net centric comm, whille the gun seems will be maintained

 

[STURM]

The Philippine military is not solely concerned with the Southern insurgency, they have to keep in mind their nationwide security screen.

I'm not saying that MBT's should not be operated at some time in the future by the PAF or that MBT's have no role to play in a counter insurgency conflict. The Philippines certainly has other concerns apart from counter insurgency but the fact remains that the threat posed by the MILF [peace talks recently held in K.L.] and the NPA is a major security challenge.Due to a lack of modern assets the PAF has difficulty in policing it's waters and airspace against foreign intrusion, and in protecting it's sea based natural resources, so logicly MBT's should be at the very bottom of the shopping list. What is the point is getting MBT's when with the exception of perhaps half a dozen vessels, that had previous owners, almost every vessel in the PN is on average 30-40 years old?

Getting dangerously off-topic here but perhaps the questions we should ask is:

1. Will MBT's will make a difference or contribute to a decisive victory over the MILF or the NPA, should open hostlities erupt?

2. Will MBT's deter armed groups like the ASG?

3. Will MBT's contribute to peace, security and nation building?

If the answers are yes, then maybe the PAF should get MBT's.

Indonesia as well isn't facing an immediate threat that would require main battle tanks.

With regards to Indonesia, though as you rightly mentioned it does not face an immediate threat, I see the purchase of MBT's as part of a natural progression towards transforming the TNI-AD, from that of a counter insurgency/internal security orientated army, towards one better equipped to dealing with external threats.

Nor are Singapore or Malaysia. Yet they all decided to invest in this capability. Money is a huge issue for the Philippine military.

A vital point we should consider is that unlike the Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia do not have a formal defence treaty with the U.S., that obligates the U.S. to come to their assistance in event of foreign aggression, and are not classified as non-NATO U.S. allies . Money is a major issue for the PAF, hence the need to invest in stuff that would contribute to dealing with current threats.

K1A1 is the best MBT for Indonesia (it's a good MBT but many sources say it's higher cost to procured and maintainances compared to T-90 for instances), but because so far Pindad talk with South Korea to help them technologically to build Panser Canon and IFV is the most advance compared to other potential sources.

Certainly a more expensive option than the T-90 but the K1/K2 has a superior armour protection level than the T-90. It also uses 120mm NATO compatible ammo which could be useful in times of conflict given the improvement in defence tries with the U.S. and Australia. A K1-A1 fitted with an A/C for the Malaysian MBT programme was offered and trialed in Malaysia during the mid-90's. Industry rumours had it that the main stumbling block then was securing U.S. export approval for it's FCS.

Due to Habbibie's close association/affinity with Germany I always assumed in the past that the TNI-AD would get the Leopard 1. I find it interesting though that South Korea had in the past offered the M-60. About 9 years ago Daweoo sent a KIFV to Indonesia for trials.

 

[DavidDCM]

Of course you are quite right, tanks is not and should not be a high priority project for the Philippines. They have more pressing issues, especially in other branches of their armed forces as you correctly mentioned. I never demanded them to buy tanks, it was more a "nice-to-know" kind of fact when I wrote that soon they will be the only major SEA nation without tanks. Also I do not know enough about the armour doctrine used by the Philippine army against the MILF to make any meaningful statement about the operational usefulness that tanks would have there.

 

[STURM]

Also I do not know enough about the armour doctrine used by the Philippine army against the MILF to make any meaningful statement about the operational usefulness that tanks would have there.

Doubt if anyone here knows about the PA's armour doctrine. Apologies if I appeared to be confrontational, it wasn't my intention. Of the original ASEAN members the Philippines may have been the first tank operator with it's ex-U.S. army Shermans and Stuarts. It later also operated a small number of M-41 Bulldogs.

Have you seen the video of the PA Simba in action at Lamitan?

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-TLAFDUE80&feature=related"]YouTube - Lamitan, Basilan (1)[/nomedia]


Getting back to topic it will be very interesting to see what MBT is eventually selected by the TNI-AD.

 

[DavidDCM]

Never mind, Sturm, I did not feel confronted nor do I hope that I appeared confrontational.

The Simba video is interesting, but not because of the Simbas. It's rather the lax civilian protection procedure that irritates me. Unleashing such a firestorm in the middle of a town with dozens of civilians, journalists and soldiers around and intermingling seems like a totally bad idea to me.

-----

I wonder where Indonesia is planning to station it's MBT's. They tend to put all of their new assets on Java first, but on the other hand, they announced last year to raise two new armour battalions on Kalimantan. But my guess goes to Java, possibly the Kostrad battalions, and the new Kalimantan battalions will get the old Kostrad vehicles (Scorpion 90).

 

[Ananda]

Certainly a more expensive option than the T-90 but the K1/K2 has a superior armour protection level than the T-90. It also uses 120mm NATO compatible ammo which could be useful in times of conflict given the improvement in defence tries with the U.S. and Australia. A K1-A1 fitted with an A/C for the Malaysian MBT programme was offered and trialed in Malaysia during the mid-90's. Industry rumours had it that the main stumbling block then was securing U.S. export approval for it's FCS.

Due to Habbibie's close association/affinity with Germany I always assumed in the past that the TNI-AD would get the Leopard 1. I find it interesting though that South Korea had in the past offered the M-60. About 9 years ago Daweoo sent a KIFV to Indonesia for trials.

Well I'm not going to open the T-90 vs Western Standard MBT (in which K1A1/K2 included), since many already talked in various Mill-Forum anyway , however just looking from perspective:
1. TNI if going to have MBT will be only in 40-60 Tanks, thus only a batalyon strength,
2. With that kind of number, T-90 in my oppinion with cheaper to procured and maintained and simplicity to operated will bemore suitable for learning curve of TNI-AD in operating MBT.

Leo 1 like I said is being pursued quite heavy by TNI-AD in the 90's, and I'm not surprise that many of the brass grudgingly has to accept Scorpions. Like I said, officialy they come out as they don't need MBT, theScorpions more fit with Indonesian need, but looking to whose the go between on Scorpions deal (which is SOeharto's childern company), then the 'hanky-panky' allegations can't be move away on public discusiions. Well after Soeharto's down, this's one of the deal (like Hawk 200) that the Armed Forces decided not to open, but they then 'scratch' soeharto's children cronies from future deal.

I wonder where Indonesia is planning to station it's MBT's. They tend to put all of their new assets on Java first, but on the other hand, they announced last year to raise two new armour battalions on Kalimantan. But my guess goes to Java, possibly the Kostrad battalions, and the new Kalimantan battalions will get the old Kostrad vehicles (Scorpion 90).

Same thing that I think will be done. New assets will be move to Java, and the new armour batallyons in Kalimantan used either Scorpio's or AMX 13.