M-MRCA utk TUDM

yaminz

T-50 tok training, A-50 to attack...

escortburuk

Namesake dia pun T-50 (Trainer) yg lebih sesuai dijadikan pesawat LIFT utk TUDM, tetapi bukan M-MRCA. Nak ganti Hawk 108 rasanya sesuai laa

yaminz

Sokong...

belacan79

Kalo nak beli T50, lebih baik kiter beli hawk.  Tak susah dari segi logistik. Dah banyak sangat type. Korea T50, British hawk, Italy amerchi, Rusia Mig dan sukhoi, Us F18,e tc. Sistem dari France, South afrika, Rusia, US, Britain, Korea, India, etc. Pening kepala tengok. Reali look like Zoo.

RainbowSix

Saya rasa RMAF kena mengemaskini keperluan aset. Jangan biar banyak sgt jenis pesawat. Mig-29 tu saya tak berbaloi utk diupgrade, bolehjual utk dapatkan SU-30MKM. F/A-18D tu pun boleh dijual utk dapatkan Superhornet.

Bab, MRCA ni saya rasa jika serius, Hawk 208 perlu dijual. Supaya memberi ruangan utk pesawat baru. Pelanggan ada utk Hawk ni, Indonesia mesti perlukan. Selepas tu baru fikir kalau hendak Gripen.

Yg lain LIFT dan basic je trainer oklah. Terlalu banyak sgt jenis membawa masalah.

johngage

Originally posted by yaminz at 26-2-2008 11:26 AM
T-50 tok training, A-50 to attack...

Kalau ikut artikel ini, satu lagi nama utk A-50 Golden Eagle, ialah T-50 LIFT.

http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/types/korea/kai/t-50/T-50.htm

yaminz

Betul tue, sng tok maintenance... Kalo byk jenis pesawat, pening dbuat nanti...

johngage

Originally posted by escortburuk at 26-2-2008 04:47 PM
Namesake dia pun T-50 (Trainer) yg lebih sesuai dijadikan pesawat LIFT utk TUDM, tetapi bukan M-MRCA. Nak ganti Hawk 108 rasanya sesuai laa

Memang betul. Tetapi pilihan say berasas peruntukan terhad yang dibagi ke TUDM. Kalau nak satu lagi MRCA, tambah lagi SU-30MKM. Yang lain, seperti Gripen dan F/A-18E/F harga lebih mahal dari SU-30MKM. Terasa takut nak tambah lagi MiG-29 kerana isu kualiti control kilang MiG. Cuba tengok artikel ini:

http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/ext.php?ref=http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080218/99490063.html

Algeria airforce menghantar balik Mig-29 mereka berasaskan kualiti yang tidak memuaskan.

Jadi berasas peruntukan yang terhad, dari pendapat saya ambil saja A-50/T-50 LIFT dalam kuantiti yang banyak sebagai Point defence fighter kita (utk mengawal airbase kita), Jual Mig dan Hawk, dan guna SU-30MKM sebagai air superiority fighter utama kita.

yaminz

Baik refer A-50, ssuai tok interceptor... T-50 tok training... Tp bdsrkan doctrine TUDM skrg, maybe diorg refer tok twin engine n MRCA...

yaminz

Tp rasa nyer A/T-50 bole djadikan MRCA just like Grippen... Just my thought

belacan79

Good idia johngage. Setuju    Pada masa yang sama, we hav to always check Rusia wepon and sistem. Depa pun tak leh percaya sangat. Qualiti kontrol is main isu with Rusia wepon and sistem.

johngage

Originally posted by yaminz at 27-2-2008 01:47 AM
Tp rasa nyer A/T-50 bole djadikan MRCA just like Grippen... Just my thought

Yaminz, saya sebenarnya tak nampak kenapa A-50 ni tak boleh dijadikan lebih hebat dari Gripen. Potensi dia memang banyak.

Cuba ikut link ini:

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=29510

1) Thrust to weight ratio dia lebih dari Gripen, Rate of climb dia lebih dari Gripen.

2) HARGA ! Gripen  $56 juta AS !!! A-50 $20-22 juta AS.

3) Potensi utk upgrade banyak. TUDM boleh beli T-50 sebagai trainer. Dan bila preuntukan ada T-50 itu boleh diupgrade kpd standard A-50. Jadi jimat duit pun banyak.

4) Potensi untuk integrasi senjata:

MICA, R-Darter, AMRAAM.

Tetapi masalah besar yang saya nampak ialah ialah kos untuk integrasi semua senjata ni banyak sangat. Satu lagi masalah, banyak teknologi A-50, teknologi AS. Jadi kalau nak minta kebenaran nak modify...pening kepala

supergripen

i voted for the Gripen,OBVIOUSLY..

its the best choice for our MMRCA requirement as the Gripen offers the most space for future developments/upgrades and technology-wise,it beats the J10/17 and the Mig-35 by a country mile.its waaaay ahead in terms of technology and offers the best integration when we eventually get our Erieye.

the Gripen(known as the Gripen E or SuperGripen) is slated for an engine upgrade where Saab has signed up GE with its F414,an airframe stretch and/or CFTs,an AESA radar and countless other improvements.combined with the Erieye,datalink and in combination with our Su-30MKMs,well,u get the picture.

the Gripen is able to replace the crappy Mig-29Ns,the 'neither here nor there' Hawk200s and the F-5E/F in RMAF service.the F/A-18Ds should also be traded or sold,leaving us with 2 sqns of HMRCA and 2 sqns of MMRCA.sound like a plan.... easier aid than done tho.

but again,my vote goes to the Gripen..or rather,the SuperGripen.

johngage

Originally posted by supergripen at 27-2-2008 02:38 AM
i voted for the Gripen,OBVIOUSLY..

its the best choice for our MMRCA requirement as the Gripen offers the most space for future developments/upgrades and technology-wise,it beats the J10/17 a ...

I think Supergripen has made a fantastic point. The next MRCA should be able to integrate easily with our planned AWACS. Btw the SuperGripens (Batch 3) looks fantastic !

windof

well said bro, 2 sqdns of HMRCA n 2 of MMRCA will definitely lift up the standard and potential of our airforce to a very well respected one.

johngage

If we look at our neighbours in the region, within 10-15 years I expect Singapore to buy more F-15SG's and possibly the F-35. Thailand is already planning to get the Gripen and the Saab AEW. I expect them to buy more Gripen's. Vietnam's economic boom will also mean more SU-30MK2's in the future. Whatever purchase we choose, I would suggest that we select platforms which have the potential for extensive future upgrades. The Gripen Batch III is one choice. The other is the F/A-18E/F Block III, or the SU-30MKM. What's important is to avoid selecting an aircraft that will be outdated in just a few years time.

supergripen

well said..the key word here is future development potential.plus we also need a platform that has as small an RCS as possible.the imminent arrival of stealth fighters in the region will render larger fighters(Su-30MKM included)almost too vulnerable.imagine an environment where stealth fighters operate,with heavy jamming and counter jamming..the huge Sukhoi will be at a disadvantage and will be 'seen' much earlier thus becoming a sitting duck to these stealth fighters.

the Gripen is rather small..even tho stealth is not in the design brief,introducing/incorperating stealth features into a smaller sized fighter is obviously much easier and with a higher success rate possible.combine that with future advanced missiles and munitions that will be made available to the Gripen,i think we have qorselves a clear winner.

another thing that we all are missing.. IMHO,the way of the future involves UCAVs.BAe and Saab are deep into this technology and perhaps we can join the programme through the Gripen purchase thus bringing us into the fold in UCAV developments.a quick Google will show that in the future,a single Gripen will be able to control 4 UCAVs in an attack element that will be very potent indeed.its a scenario that i think is unbeatable strategically and is indeed that way of the future.

the future IS stealth and unmanned.. start now and maybe we won't be left behind again.

supergripen

in fact,i would go further and say that with current regional ORBAT,a sqn of 24 H-MRCA and 3 sqns of 54 M-MRCA would suffice.

but like i said earlier,easier said than done.for one,our misplaced affection for two-engined jets against single engined ones must be overcome.we must look forward.

plus,don't forget the Erieye..the Gripen must come with Erieye.

yaminz

Don't forget too, Erieye also can integrated with other aircraft...

RainbowSix

For US$76 million (wikipedia) a piece, the Gripen is a bit steep for a light/2nd tier aircraft. Secondly, its does not offer anything more than the SU-30MKM. Stealth upgrades are available even for the Sukhoi.

JAS 39 Gryphoon      - US$76 mil,     loaded weight -  8,000 kg       Single engine
T-50                          - US$23mil,      loaded weight -  6,500kg*      Single engine
F-16E/F                     - US$26mil,      loaded weight  - 12,000kg      Single engine
F/A-18F Superhornet - US$56 mil,     loaded weight - 21,000 kg      Twin engine
Eurofighter Typhoon - US$123 mil,   loaded weight - 15,000 kg      Twin engine
Rafale C                     - US$66mil,      loaded weight - 14,000 kg*    Twin engine

The Gripen is steep and too light weight. Single engine jets are less performing types.

* estimated

[ Last edited by  RainbowSix at 27-2-2008 11:06 PM ]