PDA

View Full Version : Philippine Military Finalizing Plan To Acquire 1 Squadron Of F-16 Fighter Jets



trikora88
02-16-2012, 10:27 PM
Thursday, 16 February 2012 20:28 Zaff Solmerin / Correspondent


A RANKING military officer said the Armed Forces high command is already discussing the details on the procurement of one squadron of F-16 “Fighting Falcon” jet fighters from the US.

Maj. Gen. Roy Deveraturda, Armed Forces deputy chief of staff for plans and programs (J-5) said although the acquisition of jet fighters was not included in the first batch of approved big-ticket items the project is now being discussed thoroughly.

“Since we decommissioned our [fighter] jets in 1995 there had been a long gap. So we need [jet] fighter capability. We’re proposing the procurement of at least one squadron. We are talking here of 14 to 24 F-16s,” Deveraturda said.

Earlier, reports said the Department of the Foreign Affairs (DFA) had already started negotiations with the US government for the acquisition of F-16.


Full article: http://businessmirror.com.ph/home/nation/23378-military-finalizing-plan-to-acquire-1-squadron-of-f-16-fighter-jets

junglejim
02-16-2012, 10:33 PM
I wonder though, how far this will go... so far there is no LIFT in the country to help the pilots jump into the F16. Infrastructure wise I am not even sure if we are ready for them though there were upgrades made on some of our bases. Interesting if my friends were right they are looking at T-38 as a LIFT.

So good luck with it, wonder though if this would mean that the AMX will be seen as an OV-10 replacement?

Token White Guy
02-16-2012, 10:38 PM
I wonder though, how far this will go... so far there is no LIFT in the country to help the pilots jump into the F16. Infrastructure wise I am not even sure if we are ready for them though there were upgrades made on some of our bases. Interesting if my friends were right they are looking at T-38 as a LIFT.

So good luck with it, wonder though if this would mean that the AMX will be seen as an OV-10 replacement? You think PAF pilots would be trained in the US for the time being?

And this thread below is interesting. Maybe Philippines will get the V model.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?208898-Lockheed-Martin’s-Fighting-Falcon-Evolves-With-New-F-16V

ZeroZen
02-16-2012, 10:43 PM
F-16V will be affordable if US gives them a foreign aid since it is a Major Non-NATO Ally and also a Mutual Defense Treaty.

junglejim
02-16-2012, 10:47 PM
You think PAF pilots would be trained in the US for the time being?

And this thread below is interesting. Maybe Philippines will get the V model.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?208898-Lockheed-Martin’s-Fighting-Falcon-Evolves-With-New-F-16V (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?208898-Lockheed-Martin%E2%80%99s-Fighting-Falcon-Evolves-With-New-F-16V)

The training in the US will definitely have to happen, since there is no infrastructure in the country right now to help with the transition as well as maintain the aircraft. So the trainings will be from the airmen that would maintain those birds all the way to the Pilots. When the F-5's were retired the skilled airmen who did depot level maintenance for those aircraft were scattered to different units or left to work for the civilian industry. One of those issues that happened way too fast for the Air Force to consider the impact for the long term.

As for the V model, I doubt. We need those planes as fast as possible and we need them now. As it is those S.211's are doing triple duty for the country (territorial patrol, CAS, and training) thats why most of the pilots of those planes are tagged as "test pilots" by the Italians. My friend got a tour on those V models and equipments, he liked the 3D sound on the helmets so when Missile lock warning also gives you an indicitor of the direction it is coming from.

Ought Six
02-16-2012, 10:49 PM
I think it would make much more sense for them to start with T-50s, then add F-16s or whatever a few years later if they can afford it.

Elbs
02-16-2012, 10:56 PM
I think it would make much more sense for them to start with T-50s, then add F-16s or whatever a few years later if they can afford it.

New build T-50s vs. bargain Vipers courtesy of Uncle Sam. Gee, I wonder which one they'll go for...

junglejim
02-16-2012, 11:00 PM
I think it would make much more sense for them to start with T-50s, then add F-16s or whatever a few years later if they can afford it.

The Air Force agree's with you hence there was no plans for the F-16 to be bought this early, what was in the piepline was the LIFT, then the MRF down the road. I feel they have to bump it up since the President asked for it to be pushed and the flyboys probably realized, presidents pushing for them to be modernized seldom happens, and decided to crash the timings for it to have a chance.

Those guys have been waiting for new fighters for most of their career that if you drop them off the AMARC site and tell them to pick up an F-16 and just learn on the go, they probably would.

Our Armed forces gets .9% of the GDP and they are the first one that gets cut when it comes to budget control.

Ought Six
02-17-2012, 12:10 AM
New build T-50s vs. bargain Vipers courtesy of Uncle Sam. Gee, I wonder which one they'll go for...If it was only 'one or the other', and if the 'bargain Vipers' were going to be nearly as cheap as T-50s, you would have a point. Of course, the former is false, and likely the latter, too.

Ordie
02-17-2012, 12:17 AM
What did the Singapore Air Force used for LIFT?
S-211? or A-4's?

junglejim
02-17-2012, 12:35 AM
What did the Singapore Air Force used for LIFT?
S-211? or A-4's?

They use the A-4 to be replaced by the M-346.

The main issue with the T/A-50 is how soone we can get it and its limited range and load compared to the F-16 that is more available and capable.

Ought Six
02-17-2012, 12:54 AM
The main issue with the T/A-50 is how soone we can get it and its limited range and load compared to the F-16 that is more available and capable.I understand the greater capabilities of the F-16 over the T/A-50. It just makes more sense to buy a trainer with a good attack and limited air defense capability first. Then, once the PAF has the experienced pilots and operational experience, they could then move up to a higher-performance fighter like the F-16V. The resulting blend of shorter-range and longer-range aircraft would be a good complimentary mix that would offer a better capability than just F-16s alone.

As for how soon they could get it, I think that the prospect of their first foreign order would motivate the South Koreans to accelerate availability as much as possible. Nothing sells planes like a nation with hostile neighbors operating them successfully in the real world.

icefrog
02-17-2012, 01:26 AM
It's possible that the choice for LIFT could rest on what MRF they will be getting.

There is also word that PAF is considering the YAK-130:


Russian defense marketing agency Rosoboronexport believes Southeast Asia is a prime market for the Yakovlev Yak-130 two-seat advanced jet trainer/light attack aircraft. Malaysia and the Philippines, in particular, have shown interest in the trainer, according to Rosboronexport deputy general director Viktor Komardin.
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/singapore-air-show/2012-02-14/yak-130-perfect-southeast-asia

And there are always alternatives to refurbished F-16s such as the Mirage 2000-9. By the way, Phil.officials will be visiting France very soon and UAE is rumored to want France to either buyback their Mirage 2000-9 or find someone to sell them those as part of a deal for UAE getting Rafales. So, if the US decides not to sell them refurbished F16s (for reasons I would not understand in light of Pakistan getting F-16 blk 52s) or not selling them AIM-120s then PAF could be the one of the customers for UAE's Mirage 2000-9s plus assurance of getting MICA.

icefrog
02-17-2012, 01:40 AM
Then there is this press release from DND on what they inspected during their recent visit to Italy. The M-346 was not even mentioned.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/80630878/DND-OPA-Press-Release-Gazmin-Signs-Agreement-With-Italian-Defense-Minister-6-February-2012

junglejim
02-17-2012, 01:56 AM
I understand the greater capabilities of the F-16 over the T/A-50. It just makes more sense to buy a trainer with a good attack and limited air defense capability first. Then, once the PAF has the experienced pilots and operational experience, they could then move up to a higher-performance fighter like the F-16V. The resulting blend of shorter-range and longer-range aircraft would be a good complimentary mix that would offer a better capability than just F-16s alone.

As for how soon they could get it, I think that the prospect of their first foreign order would motivate the South Koreans to accelerate availability as much as possible. Nothing sells planes like a nation with hostile neighbors operating them successfully in the real world.

Agree on the LIFT first, and as I mentioned this is what the air force had in mind. Till the President said he would support it if the Air Force guns for the F-16's. The first export customer in South East Asia is actually the Indonesians and they had a bigger order. Interesting though on what the Philippine Air Force will look like 5-10 years down the road, given the choices available.

The EU economy going down the toilet definitely will play a big role in this as these countries try to offload hardware to other nations.

highdiver_2000
02-17-2012, 02:53 AM
New build T-50s vs. bargain Vipers courtesy of Uncle Sam. Gee, I wonder which one they'll go for...

Which one has mid air refuelling and carry a reasonable ASM?

To patrol the South China Sea, you definitely need to tank or your TOT is bingo.

Ambassador
02-17-2012, 03:53 AM
New build T-50s vs. bargain Vipers courtesy of Uncle Sam. Gee, I wonder which one they'll go for...

We had that discussion covered some weeks ago. There's a lot of considerations to make. Initial cost of the airframes will only be a small part of the fleet's entire life cycle cost for decades. FA-50 ($600 million for 20) and F-16MLU ($750 million for 24, minus the engine refit) cost the same per plane at delivery, but not for flight hours and maintenance (in particular, F-16 will be a lot more expensive than T-50 in training-purpose flights). T-50 is not the only new aircraft that would compete in the LIFT -> MRF tender anyway. New aircraft vs. old aircraft equation will be working against all competing aircraft, be it AMX, M-346, Yak-130, etc.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?204660-U-S-To-Transfer-Upgraded-F-16s-to-Indonesia&p=5979672&viewfull=1#post5979672

Ought Six is probably right; T-50 production over-capacity on the South Korean side will not be a big possibility. More than half a decade ago we already acquired production capacity for 30 aircraft a year. I actually think the production speed will largely depend on the customer's side, how fast they want the planes delivered and how fast they can transfer the money for the planes to get worked on. Even ROKAF does not spend enough for more than 20 aircraft annually for its own T-50 fleet.


The Sacheon T-50 production line can impress the most critical industrialist. A wholly digital design provides the basis for a near paperless production process. Work instructions appear on video screens at every workstation. Laser alignment systems help workers mate major assemblies with micrometer precision. On the production line, workers are physically fit and take their jobs very seriously. Teamwork is emphasized and practiced by all up and down the line.

The production line itself is another selling point. Designed for a 1.5-aircraft-per-month production capability with a single shift, the assembly process can produce up to 2.5 aircraft per month by simply adding another shift. "We don't have a problem meeting customer requirements for twelve aircraft in one year," explains Man Sik Park, director of the T-50 management team at Sacheon. "If a new customer signs up for T-50 trainers right now, we could deliver those aircraft in three years. Getting more customers than our line can currently handle is no problem because we can increase the production rate further with additional tools and assembly jigs."

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=25


Which one has mid air refuelling and carry a reasonable ASM?

To patrol the South China Sea, you definitely need to tank or your TOT is bingo.

T-50 has mid-air refueling as an option. But the capability is not being seriously reviewed yet while both the current operators of T-50 (Korea and Indonesia) and the Philippines do not have aerial tankers. T-50 as well as other subsonic jets who'll compete in the tender will be able to use ASM as needed.

Ought Six
02-17-2012, 08:18 AM
Almost any new-build fighter can be ordered with a refueling probe. It is a relatively minor engineering effort to add this feature to the design. And the T/A-50 should be able to easily carry a couple Harpoons, a couple Sidewinders for defense, and a centerline fuel tank.

frenchy
02-17-2012, 08:59 AM
Really. It would be great to see Philippines bring back fighter planes to its airforce. But can they really afford those F-16 ?

icefrog
02-17-2012, 09:04 AM
Really. It would be great to see Philippines bring back fighter planes to its airforce. But can they really afford those F-16 ?

That's the question. They may afford the refurbished ones but maintaining it may be another thing. This is where Korea's TA-50 and FA-50 comes in. Operating cost for those maybe more 'fit' for PAF.

frenchy
02-17-2012, 09:51 AM
They try to acquire frigates too from what I've seen in another thread. I don't think they can acquire ships and planes in the same time.

junglejim
02-17-2012, 10:15 AM
They try to acquire frigates too from what I've seen in another thread. I don't think they can acquire ships and planes in the same time.

Really, why do you think we can't?

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/rp.html



GDP (purchasing power parity) (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/docs/notesanddefs.html#2001):



$393.4 billion (2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 33 (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html?countryName=Philippines&countryCode=rp&regionCode=eas&rank=33#rp) $375.9 billion (2010 est.)

$349.2 billion (2009 est.)
note: data are in 2011 US dollars




Budget (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/docs/notesanddefs.html#2056):



revenues: $31.99 billion
expenditures: $36.71 billion (2011 est.)




Industrial production growth rate (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/docs/notesanddefs.html#2089):



6% (2011 est.)





Reserves of foreign exchange and gold (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/docs/notesanddefs.html#2188):



$72.3 billion (31 December 2011 est.)
country comparison to the world: 27 (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2188rank.html?countryName=Philippines&countryCode=rp&regionCode=eas&rank=27#rp) $62.37 billion (31 December 2010 est.)

icefrog
02-17-2012, 10:36 AM
They try to acquire frigates too from what I've seen in another thread. I don't think they can acquire ships and planes in the same time.

They are negotiating to have Italy's Maestrale that is planned to be retired by 2013. I think PH can afford it at 2nd hand prices and I think Italy would be foolish not to sell those ships with the state of their economy.

Countries like PH will be shopping for 2nd-hand or to-be retired early military equipment from Europe.

frenchy
02-17-2012, 11:17 AM
Really, why do you think we can't?


Just a feeling. A lot of filipinos are working abroad so I suppose the country is really poor. Correct me if I'm wrong.
In this case, in democratic countries, governments prefer spending their money in social things and military budgets are secondary.
Of course second-hand can help, in this case for planes it would be old F-16 ? So the maintenance costs are likely to be high if the filipino government doesn't want to have the planes grounded due to a lack of money.

junglejim
02-17-2012, 11:31 AM
Just a feeling. A lot of filipinos are working abroad so I suppose the country is really poor. Correct me if I'm wrong.
In this case, in democratic countries, governments prefer spending their money in social things and military budgets are secondary.
Of course second-hand can help, in this case for planes it would be old F-16 ? So the maintenance costs are likely to be high if the filipino government doesn't want to have the planes grounded due to a lack of money.

The country has a lot of overseas workers mainly due to the high birth rates of the past, declining now but still a bit high. About 20 years ago our economy tanked hence the dictator pushed for overseas employement and became the norm. Before than the country's economy was decent. Now the economy is turning around and there are vast improvements.

We have a lot of poor people, but not everybody is poor.

You are exactly right that most democratic countries social expenditure is number one, hence in the Philippines it is Education and other things. However the Defense budget is only .9% and given the economic performance, it could definitely bigger. At 2% for example it would be about the same size if not bigger than the Singaprean defense budget, but not much chunk of the total money.

Like I said look ate the economic figure and see if we really cant afford it.

frenchy
02-17-2012, 11:38 AM
However the Defense budget is only .9% and given the economic performance, it could definitely bigger. At 2% for example it would be about the same size if not bigger than the Singaprean defense budget, but not much chunk of the total money.

Like I said look ate the economic figure and see if we really cant afford it.

I didn't know this number. My bad, I thought it was higher. In this case why the filipino government is waking up now and not before to buy military equipment ? Too bad, really.

junglejim
02-17-2012, 12:57 PM
I didn't know this number. My bad, I thought it was higher. In this case why the filipino government is waking up now and not before to buy military equipment ? Too bad, really.


We came off Martial law just in 1986,coup in the late 80's and early 90's. Then in 1997 the financial crisis, defense was the easiest to cut out with the people not getting angry and so it was.

Ordie
02-17-2012, 02:00 PM
We came off Martial law just in 1986,coup in the late 80's and early 90's. Then in 1997 the financial crisis, defense was the easiest to cut out with the people not getting angry and so it was.

Moreover, subsequent civilian leaders did not trust the military with repeated coup attempts and mutinies.

Ambassador
02-17-2012, 08:00 PM
That's the question. They may afford the refurbished ones but maintaining it may be another thing. This is where Korea's TA-50 and FA-50 comes in. Operating cost for those maybe more 'fit' for PAF.

As you already know, another important future capability of FA-50 is the SABR or RACR radar. Both Northrop Grumman and Raytheon are optimistic about retrofitting FA-50 with the same AESA radar used by KF-16, which safely bypasses the 'FA-50's capability must not exceed KF-16 (F-16V)' technical logjam (which... admittedly is kind of a ceremonial limitation by this point, while FA-50 is physically quite smaller and F-16V is the most cutting-edge F-16 variant out there). Either one of the radars will unlock almost all F-16 standoff weaponry for use by FA-50; the fire control system itself is already designed to handle F-16 weapons, and the HUD software is likewise augmented. 9 hardpoints would be a sufficient combat load-out for a tactical fighter of the light category. Swapping the FA-50's engine with EJ200 or F414 is under formal consideration, primarily suggested by Eurojet and Lockheed Martin sides, to improve international T-50 variants' physical capabilities such as supersonic performance and payload capacity. This option is not yet being seriously entertained on the KAI side for ROKAF itself, but likely KAI will later choose to retrofit T-50's engine with the same one used by KFX, the strongest candidate for which is EJ200.


Northrop Grumman and Raytheon previously selected the FA-50 as a prime candidate for being outfitted with the same version of active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar slated for use in a United States Air Force F-16 upgrade.

http://defense-update.com/20120106_south-korea-orders-20-fa-50-attack-aircraft-in-600-million-deal.html


That clause is what forced KAI to abandon SELEX’s Vixen 500E AESA radar for the F/A-50, and select IAI Elta’s EL/M-2032 mechanically-scanned radar instead. Adding AESA radars to the KF-16s would remove those strictures, opening the door for similar additions to the F/A-50. The result would be a $25-30 million AESA-equipped lightweight fighter for the global export market, which would be a strong competitor for existing ($40-55 million) F-16s. It could even affect broader ($80-100 million) F-35 exports, thanks to its combination of advanced capabilities and traditional lightweight fighter price.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/South-Korea-Looking-to-Upgrade-its-KF-16s-05404/

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?204022-S-Korea-to-mass-produce-armed-version-of-trainer-jet-starting-in-2013&p=6026347&viewfull=1#post6026347

junglejim
02-18-2012, 12:01 PM
Moreover, subsequent civilian leaders did not trust the military with repeated coup attempts and mutinies.

Not that happened only in Aquino's administration. There were no threats under Ramos, and Estrada was too short and Gloria had teh support of the Armed Forces as well as now. There was an issue about it, but it is not a main factor.

Ordie
02-18-2012, 12:08 PM
What if Korea / Chile were to sell F-5E/F as a stop gap LIFT for the F-16's until the T-50 comes on-line.

icefrog
02-18-2012, 01:07 PM
What if Korea / Chile were to sell F-5E/F as a stop gap LIFT for the F-16's until the T-50 comes on-line.

That has been offered before. Korea is actually willing to donate it or sell at a token price of $100 as incentive to buy KT-1s and T-50s. Not sure if that offer still stands,though. Maybe if they are willing to give their KF5s or F5 tigers and the rumored Pohang corvettes.



[quote]South Korea is to sell supersonic fighters at $100 (101,000 won) per jet. It may be hard to believe, but it’s no lie. The fighter jets to be sold at such a giveaway price are F-5A/Bs, which are being retired from their 40-year-long service this month.


The Ministry of National Defense and Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) said Sunday they considered selling the retired aircraft, which opened the era of supersonic fighters for the Korean Air Force in 1965, to foreign nations including Mexico and Poland.


``We have about 50 F-5A/B fighter jets at the moment, half of which are used for educational and demonstrational purposes. The ministry will consider selling the remaining half to foreign nations at $100 per unit,’’ a KAI official said. ``It’s a nominal price.’’


He hinted that the virtual donation is part of a sales strategy to export KT-1 and T-50 supersonic trainers developed and produced by KAI to the foreign nations. ``We have also sold F-5A/B fighters to the Philippines at $100 each in the past.’’


It is customary for a country to sell outdated military arms at a token cost, a ministry official said. But the source added that the export requires prior consent from the nation that manufactured the weapons. The F-5A/B jets were made in the United States.


South Korea purchased about 120 F-5A/B fighter jets in the late 1960s. They became the mainstay of the Air Force and played a leading role in thwarting espionage agents from North Korea until the 1970s.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1464327/posts

junglejim
02-18-2012, 01:11 PM
What if Korea / Chile were to sell F-5E/F as a stop gap LIFT for the F-16's until the T-50 comes on-line.

It would be turned down. The Philippines Air Force retired the F-5's due to it being obsolete, if we can afford newer MRF's why stick with an obsolete platform? Think of it politically, once you get those F-5's then the clamor for newer jets goes down.

icefrog
02-18-2012, 01:31 PM
It would be turned down. The Philippines Air Force retired the F-5's due to it being obsolete, if we can afford newer MRF's why stick with an obsolete platform? Think of it politically, once you get those F-5's then the clamor for newer jets goes down.

They didn't retire it because of being obsolete. They were forced to retire it because the ones they have are the older ones and not airworthy anymore. Unsafe. They still maintain at least 2 to be flown for emergency situations only w/c are the ones that were also sold to PH for $100. If Korea is to give some as incentives then it follows that the airworthy ones only will be given. And it is only intended as stop-gap until the T-50s are delivered afterwhich it will be retired for good.

zema_06
02-18-2012, 02:14 PM
the problem in my opinion is that buying these f-16 or f-50 or f-5e, probably theywouldn't be to the required mantainance and manning requirements.

even if the they recieve heavy subsides in manning and capability from some foreign country they probably wouldn't be up to the task. till now they've been able to more or less mantain their helicopter and transport fleet on the cost of a dwindling inventory.

how can they be able to operate 4th generation combat aircrafts efficiently on the long term?

subsiding them in mantaining such aircrafts means that in 99% of the cases, that in the moment the outside support stops due to political reasons or simply because they are deemed fit to mantain them on their own, thing will go south very fast...

it's not just the philippines, same goes for iraq and it's f-16s...even if they operated fast jets in the past the acquired know how has been lost over time and i think are not up to the task yet. same story in libya, large arms sale in the past, but they were mostly unable to mantain some of the most basic weapons systems without outside support, ending up as paper tigers...and there are many more examples out there...

i've nothing against the philippine armed forces and people, but i don't think there are up to the task...yet...

junglejim
02-18-2012, 02:27 PM
They didn't retire it because of being obsolete. They were forced to retire it because the ones they have are the older ones and not airworthy anymore. Unsafe. They still maintain at least 2 to be flown for emergency situations only w/c are the ones that were also sold to PH for $100. If Korea is to give some as incentives then it follows that the airworthy ones only will be given. And it is only intended as stop-gap until the T-50s are delivered afterwhich it will be retired for good.

Bahahaha, the planes they have were not airworthy anymore and yes the F-5A/B are seen as obsolete hence the Philippines Air Force actually already rejected the idea of bringing the F-5 fleet back online again. They are actively opposing it, after all the acquisitions are part of the "Capability Upgrade" Program and not a "**** we need fighter now" program. So much so that the depot level maintenance capability is not there anymore.

@Zema,

Given the proper funding the Philippines can very much take care of the F-16's. The Airforce have maintained the following on their own F-8's, S.211's, Huey II upgrades, Hueys, and now C-130's. It all boils down to funding... if we do get the F-16 training for all personnel will be involved till they are proficient.

wheeleuss
02-18-2012, 02:30 PM
the problem in my opinion is that buying these f-16 or f-50 or f-5e, probably theywouldn't be to the required mantainance and manning requirements.

even if the they recieve heavy subsides in manning and capability from some foreign country they probably wouldn't be up to the task. till now they've been able to more or less mantain their helicopter and transport fleet on the cost of a dwindling inventory.

how can they be able to operate 4th generation combat aircrafts efficiently on the long term?

subsiding them in mantaining such aircrafts means that in 99% of the cases, that in the moment the outside support stops due to political reasons or simply because they are deemed fit to mantain them on their own, thing will go south very fast...

it's not just the philippines, same goes for iraq and it's f-16s...even if they operated fast jets in the past the acquired know how has been lost over time and i think are not up to the task yet. same story in libya, large arms sale in the past, but they were mostly unable to mantain some of the most basic weapons systems without outside support, ending up as paper tigers...and there are many more examples out there...

i've nothing against the philippine armed forces and people, but i don't think there are up to the task...yet...

I do not want to start any disputes but have you ever heard about training? Philippines,(and probably Iraquis too), are perfectly capable to support those systems. It depends obviousely on the level of autonomy they want. 2nd level depot maintanance is more than suffcient to provide neccessary operation availability. Most countries do not go beyond this.

junglejim
02-18-2012, 02:38 PM
C130 being restored by the Philippine Air Force personnel:

http://i43.*******.com/281h282.jpg

http://i41.*******.com/kaiamq.jpg

icefrog
02-18-2012, 03:02 PM
Bahahaha, the planes they have were not airworthy anymore and yes the F-5A/B are seen as obsolete hence the Philippines Air Force actually already rejected the idea of bringing the F-5 fleet back online again. They are actively opposing it, after all the acquisitions are part of the "Capability Upgrade" Program and not a "**** we need fighter now" program. So much so that the depot level maintenance capability is not there anymore.

@Zema,

Given the proper funding the Philippines can very much take care of the F-16's. The Airforce have maintained the following on their own F-8's, S.211's, Huey II upgrades, Hueys, and now C-130's. It all boils down to funding... if we do get the F-16 training for all personnel will be involved till they are proficient.

They were opposing it before because they want to force the hands of politicians to buy new planes. Much different from rejecting airworthy F5s (w/c SK still flies) if given virtually free as part of purchasing T-50s and KT-1s. They are in a we need a fighter now situation largely thanks to China. If it weren't for China's aggression, it will be same old, same old. That's reason for buying refurbished F-16s, getting the WHECs and considering Maestrales, Pohangs, etc.. They want something ASAP until newer equipments arrives. They are in a we need fighters and ships now!!

CUP did not materialize because of the 1997 asian financial crisis and the whole largely unfunded AFP modernization program expired last Dec. 2011. All funds now (at the time being) are outside the scope of any so-called formal modernization program.

junglejim
02-18-2012, 03:09 PM
They were opposing it before because they want to force the hands of politicians to buy new planes. Much different from rejecting airworthy F5s (w/c SK still flies) if given virtually free as part of purchasing T-50s and KT-1s. And yes, they are in a we need a fighter now situation largely thanks to China. That's reason for buying refurbished F-16s, getting the WHECs and considering Maestrales, Pohangs, etc.. They want those ASAP. They are in a we need fighters and ships now!!

CUP did not materialize because of the 1997 asian financial crisis and the whole largely unfunded AFP modernization program expired last Dec. 2011. All funds now (at the time being) are outside the scope of any so-called formal modernization program.


Dont get the two mixed up, the AFP modernization didnt materialize hence it was changed to a the Capability Upgrade Program same goals but different systems of going about it. Pne is outright modernization the other is with the beliefe that the Armed Forces needs to be slowly brought to standards where in a proper modernization can take hold. 1st phase is focused on internal security and the improvement on the soldiers equipment, 2nd phase is the transition to external defense, and the third phase is territorial defense.

And no even of the F-5's were given as free the Air Force will reject it, that is why they retired it in the first place. If you are familiar with the local politics getting those F-5's would equal being stuck with them. Just sift through the news, why do you think the Air Force is hell bent on sniffing all over Europe and the planet looking for MRF's rather than ask Korea for more F-5's? They dont want it, getting them equals going back to zero with politicians saying "why ask for F-16, when we can just get more F-5's."

And correction, they are not asking for brand new planes and would gladly settle for refurbished or second hand MRF... key here is MRF.

icefrog
02-18-2012, 03:31 PM
Dont get the two mixed up, the AFP modernization didnt materialize hence it was changed to a the Capability Upgrade Program same goals but different systems of going about it. Pne is outright modernization the other is with the beliefe that the Armed Forces needs to be slowly brought to standards where in a proper modernization can take hold. 1st phase is focused on internal security and the improvement on the soldiers equipment, 2nd phase is the transition to external defense, and the third phase is territorial defense.

And no even of the F-5's were given as free the Air Force will reject it, that is why they retired it in the first place. If you are familiar with the local politics getting those F-5's would equal being stuck with them. Just sift through the news, why do you think the Air Force is hell bent on sniffing all over Europe and the planet looking for MRF's rather than ask Korea for more F-5's? They dont want it, getting them equals going back to zero with politicians saying "why ask for F-16, when we can just get more F-5's."

And correction, they are not asking for brand new planes and would gladly settle for refurbished or second hand MRF... key here is MRF.


They are asking and planning to get new planes and ships!! They are considering TA-50s, M-346 and even considering Yak-130s now (presumed by many for reason that there is no armed M-346 until at least 18-24 months). Do your research. Spend more time in the local forums than spending here. You are out of the loop. They know getting new ones will take time both for training and production/delivery delays and they need some thing ASAP for the mean time. That's the reason for shopping for 2nd-hand planes and ships in conjunction with getting new ones. Indonesia is cramming too for some reason w/c is why they suddenly agreed to the refurbished F-16s.

AFP is basically cramming and trying to bulldoze AFP modernization in a short period of time.

AFP modernization done in two years
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=778928&publicationSubCategoryId=63

Ambassador
02-18-2012, 06:37 PM
AFP modernization done in two years
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=778928&publicationSubCategoryId=63

That kinda drives M-346 out of option. Then again, things can rapidly change in the next 2 years for both Italy and the Philippines.

This is a bit off-topic, but I guess we don't need to make a new thread strictly for this: the article also reports the purchase of a South Korean MRV for the PN. One possibility that I can see is using the Subic shipyard of Hanjin HI in the Philippines to build Hanjin-designed MRVs, with cooperation from Filipino naval engineers and shipyards for technology transfer. Hanjin had built MRV for foreign navies before, and it's also building the LST-II of ROKN currently. Of course, DSME also has strong presence in the Philippines, and the DSME-PT PAL consortium has already offered a Filipino variant of the Makassar class LPD.

5000-ton 'Buffalo' MRV:

http://img840.imageshack.us/img840/3292/kdsriinderasakti2.jpg

http://www.hanjinsc.com/eng/biz/ship/msv.aspx

7000-ton LST-II:

http://img849.imageshack.us/img849/3003/a01050074ecf00d64bce9.jpg
http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/9666/20110701190433.jpg
http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/256/201107011904331.jpg
http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/193/20110409215543.jpg

http://www.*******.com/finance/stocks/097230.KS/key-developments/article/2414427
http://www.*******.com/finance/stocks/097230.KS/key-developments/article/2448367

11000-ton Makassar LPD:

http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=228
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/makassar-class-landing-platform-docks/

Hanjin's LST-II is an especially attractive platform among the three. It has more dedicated amphibious capabilities than Buffalo, and with hangar for two Seahawk class helicopters. It's faster than either Buffalo or Makassar. It is also equipped with an ESSM-class SAM, and the sophisticated radar system to guide them. Most importantly, the four ships together cost only $240 million, a bargain price for a ship of this capability. It's still more expensive than the Makassar class LPD, and smaller, but the defensive capability is more advanced. It will immediately become the most modern, and the first, air defense warship that the PN will possess. The greatest benefit of the ship may be that it can be built on Philippine soil right away with direct Filipino contribution. DSME would take some more time prepping up the technology transfer mechanism.

junglejim
02-18-2012, 10:23 PM
They are asking and planning to get new planes and ships!! They are considering TA-50s, M-346 and even considering Yak-130s now (presumed by many for reason that there is no armed M-346 until at least 18-24 months). Do your research. Spend more time in the local forums than spending here. You are out of the loop. They know getting new ones will take time both for training and production/delivery delays and they need some thing ASAP for the mean time. That's the reason for shopping for 2nd-hand planes and ships in conjunction with getting new ones. Indonesia is cramming too for some reason w/c is why they suddenly agreed to the refurbished F-16s.

AFP is basically cramming and trying to bulldoze AFP modernization in a short period of time.

AFP modernization done in two years
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=778928&publicationSubCategoryId=63

See the new planes as a wish list and they are considering a lot more than those planes and ships, see there is this thing called a budget and planning. You propose for the big ticket brand new ones, then have back ups. They are asking for aircrafts ... not necessarily brand new. Plane listed that are missing that those guys are looking at of the top of my mind:

T-38 Talon
AMX

But you are right I should lurk more in forums couse I am out of the loop ... yeah.

@Ambassador they are looking at the same ship that the Indonesians got, the Makassar.

icefrog
02-19-2012, 05:51 AM
That kinda drives M-346 out of option. Then again, things can rapidly change in the next 2 years for both Italy and the Philippines.


This is a bit off-topic, but I guess we don't need to make a new thread strictly for this: the article also reports the purchase of a South Korean MRV for the PN. One possibility that I can see is using the Subic shipyard of Hanjin HI in the Philippines to build Hanjin-designed MRVs, with cooperation from Filipino naval engineers and shipyards for technology transfer. Hanjin had built MRV for foreign navies before, and it's also building the LST-II of ROKN currently. Of course, DSME also has strong presence in the Philippines, and the DSME-PT PAL consortium has already offered a Filipino variant of the Makassar class LPD.

The M-346 wasn't even mentioned on the list of equipments inspected in Italy and many were surprised that they instead inspected the AMX and then a recent article stated that Rosoboronexport said that Malaysia and Philippines is considering the Yak-130. This leads me to think they really prefer armed trainers as oppose to Israel that just wants pure jet trainers. Also, they could be the considering the YAk-130 (or Italy's AMX) as OV-10 replacement instead of the Super Tucano as recent contracts seems to be pushing the price of the ST very near the Yak-130. Brazil is offering Peru 10 ST for $150 million: http://www.theamericaspostes.com/4225/peru-to-buy-10-super-tucano-light-attack-aircraft/

Syria ordered 36 Yak-130s for $550 million. They could be thinking of buying smaller numbers of YAk-130s (6-8) instead of large quantities of Super Tucanos if the price isn't far off.

junglejim
02-19-2012, 08:52 PM
The M-346 wasn't even mentioned on the list of equipments inspected in Italy and many were surprised that they instead inspected the AMX and then a recent article stated that Rosoboronexport said that Malaysia and Philippines is considering the Yak-130. This leads me to think they really prefer armed trainers as oppose to Israel that just wants pure jet trainers. Also, they could be the considering the YAk-130 (or Italy's AMX) as OV-10 replacement instead of the Super Tucano as recent contracts seems to be pushing the price of the ST very near the Yak-130. Brazil is offering Peru 10 ST for $150 million: http://www.theamericaspostes.com/4225/peru-to-buy-10-super-tucano-light-attack-aircraft/

Syria ordered 36 Yak-130s for $550 million. They could be thinking of buying smaller numbers of YAk-130s (6-8) instead of large quantities of Super Tucanos if the price isn't far off.



I can be pretty sure that the Yak-130 is out of the question. When's the last time the Philippines bought Russian equipment? The incoming RPG's that we just bought for the Army is not even coming from the Eastern Block nations.

ayanami_tard
02-20-2012, 01:33 AM
I can be pretty sure that the Yak-130 is out of the question. When's the last time the Philippines bought Russian equipment? The incoming RPG's that we just bought for the Army is not even coming from the Eastern Block nations.

what the phillippines' army actually bought them american-made RPGs(the one with collapsible stock and M4 grip)?

junglejim
02-20-2012, 03:15 AM
what the phillippines' army actually bought them american-made RPGs(the one with collapsible stock and M4 grip)?

What I've heard is its not from the usual eastern block nations, leaning to that but will have to see when they get delivered.

icefrog
02-20-2012, 08:39 AM
I can be pretty sure that the Yak-130 is out of the question. When's the last time the Philippines bought Russian equipment? The incoming RPG's that we just bought for the Army is not even coming from the Eastern Block nations.

Your reasoning is : "When's the last time the Philippines bought Russian equipment?"

Explain this then:
Russian defense marketing agency Rosoboronexport believes Southeast Asia is a prime market for the Yakovlev Yak-130 two-seat advanced jet trainer/light attack aircraft. Malaysia and the Philippines, in particular, have shown interest in the trainer, according to Rosboronexport deputy general director Viktor Komardin.
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/singapore-air-show/2012-02-14/yak-130-perfect-southeast-asia

It's just a subsonic trainer/light attack for crying out loud. Plus money talks. Before what happened in Libya, Libya signed a contract to buy 6 Yak-130s for $90 million. That's pretty affordable.

But let's use your reasoning. When was the last time Russian warships visited Manila? Not in 96 years. But they just did last month. When was the last time Russia sent 2 Russian cargo planes containing 60 tonnes of relief goods each for victims of the earthquake a few weeks ago. Unheard of. But it just happened.

Not sure if buying Yak-130s will push through but I'm pretty sure they are talking with each other or you can just call Rosoboronexport a liar and call it a day.

junglejim
02-20-2012, 08:42 AM
Your reasoning is : "When's the last time the Philippines bought Russian equipment?"

Explain this then:
Russian defense marketing agency Rosoboronexport believes Southeast Asia is a prime market for the Yakovlev Yak-130 two-seat advanced jet trainer/light attack aircraft. Malaysia and the Philippines, in particular, have shown interest in the trainer, according to Rosboronexport deputy general director Viktor Komardin.
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/singapore-air-show/2012-02-14/yak-130-perfect-southeast-asia

It's just a subsonic trainer/light attack for crying out loud. Plus money talks. Before what happened in Libya, Libya signed a contract to buy 6 Yak-130s for $90 million. That's pretty affordable.

But let's use your reasoning. When was the last time Russian warships visited Manila? Not in 96 years. But they just did last month. When was the last time Russia sent 2 Russian cargo planes containing 60 tonnes of relief goods for victims of the earthquake a few weeks ago. Unheard of. But it just happened.

Not sure if buying Yak-130s will push through but I'm pretty sure they are talking with each other or you can just call Rosoboronexport a liar and call it a day.



Shown interest, how? I used that as a reasoning, since a request for info will be touted as such by suppliers. Again when was the last time the Philippines bought Russian weapons? So that news article has no weight.

icefrog
02-20-2012, 11:15 AM
Shown interest, how? I used that as a reasoning, since a request for info will be touted as such by suppliers. Again when was the last time the Philippines bought Russian weapons? So that news article has no weight.

It has no weight? Showing interest is just showing interest. They are't confirming anything. Geez. So, your basically saying Rosoboronexport is lying. Got it.

No comment on Russian warships visiting Philippines for the first time in 96 years? And sending 120 tonnes total of relief goods for the first time either? There's always a first time for everything and never say never.

junglejim
02-20-2012, 11:22 AM
It has no weight? Showing interest is just showing interest. They are't confirming anything. Geez. So, your basically saying Rosoboronexport is lying. Got it.

No comment on Russian warships visiting Philippines for the first time in 96 years? And sending 120 tonnes total of relief goods for the first time either? There's always a first time for everything and never say never.

Rosboron is just exagerating, and we do get Russian ships visiting us on a yearly basis, it was just big news since it was the same time as an American warship. As for Rosborn it is good publicity, as a project manager it is your task to get all the information on avaialble systems so a query was made and bam "Philippines looking at the Yak." all I am saying is dont hold your breath.

ayanami_tard
02-20-2012, 01:29 PM
Your reasoning is : "When's the last time the Philippines bought Russian equipment?"

Explain this then:
Russian defense marketing agency Rosoboronexport believes Southeast Asia is a prime market for the Yakovlev Yak-130 two-seat advanced jet trainer/light attack aircraft. Malaysia and the Philippines, in particular, have shown interest in the trainer, according to Rosboronexport deputy general director Viktor Komardin.
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/singapore-air-show/2012-02-14/yak-130-perfect-southeast-asia

It's just a subsonic trainer/light attack for crying out loud. Plus money talks. Before what happened in Libya, Libya signed a contract to buy 6 Yak-130s for $90 million. That's pretty affordable.



cheap,blatant advertising :D

well it's cheaper and has 2 engines....i can see how it could attract malaysia(being Su-30MKM,MiG-29N user and possible more) but we're talking about philipppines here

just saying.so move along

junglejim
02-20-2012, 08:41 PM
That's what I was saying, it was nothing but cheap advertising, let me see we have an Italian line up for trainers as for today, and we have a very senior pilot in Italy flying around in an AMX over Europe evaluating it, we already have had major deals with Italy before, but no... we will buy a similar aircraft but from Russia.

Different logistics train, systems, doctrines and personalities.

Western Europeans just have a lot more to offer than Russia right now, avilability of surplus aircraft, trade deals, and overseas employment. Take those into account.

adroth
03-11-2012, 05:15 PM
I can be pretty sure that the Yak-130 is out of the question. When's the last time the Philippines bought Russian equipment?

The Yak-130 is reportedly on the list of aircraft being evaluated.


And no even of the F-5's were given as free the Air Force will reject it, that is why they retired it in the first place.

As recently as October of last year, the PAF was seriously looking at used F-5s as a stop gap measure and even had a couple of specific sources in mind. Not everyone was happy with the effort since they felt that it would endanger the SAA/LIFT project that was already in DSOM.

PNoy's F-16 challenge put at end to this side-effort AFAIK.

icefrog
03-12-2012, 09:22 AM
Well, they are re-thinking about the F-16s now:
http://www.businessmirror.com.ph/home/nation/24362-military-rethinks-f-16-acquisition

Maintenance is the culprit as previously discussed on this thread.

Just go back to the armed trainer TA-50, maybe get some no-frills, economical turboprops like the KT-1C for OV-10 replacements and then get some F5s (donation) from Korea as interim MRFs. After deliveries for the TA-50s they can get FA-50s next. After FA-50s, KFX around the 2020-2022 time-line. That's the most obvious plan.

Also consider Russian Yak-130s combat trainers for diversity and insurance. You have growth and future in the Yak-130s as oppose to the AMX, IMHO w/c are being considered to be phased out in a few years.

junglejim
03-12-2012, 09:46 AM
Well, they are re-thinking about the F-16s now:
http://www.businessmirror.com.ph/home/nation/24362-military-rethinks-f-16-acquisition

Maintenance is the culprit as previously discussed on this thread.

Just go back to the armed trainer TA-50, maybe get some no-frills, economical turboprops like the KT-1C for OV-10 replacements and then get some F5s (donation) from Korea as interim MRFs. After deliveries for the TA-50s they can get FA-50s next. After FA-50s, KFX around the 2020-2022 time-line. That's the most obvious plan.

Also consider Russian Yak-130s combat trainers for diversity and insurance. You have growth and future in the Yak-130s as oppose to the AMX, IMHO w/c are being considered to be phased out in a few years.

As mentioned with out an increase in the current budget it would be hard pressed to maintain the F-16. The airforce is not really rethinking the F-16 more on just going back to the original plan of not getting the MRF on the current phase. As for the LIFT, althought it has not been announced yet (expect around July), there is already an aircraft that is coming out as the most likley candidate for this. Same for the Maritime Patrol Aircraft...so just wait a lil bit longer.

@adroth, true that it was being considered but as I mentioned it would be turned down. There was serious group that opposed the F-5 at the onset due to the fear of it killing the modernization, and thankfully they have succeeded, well until the next smart politician kills it and proposes the F-5 again.

Loke2
03-12-2012, 10:36 AM
They could consider the Gripen if they want low-cost fighter systems....

icefrog
03-12-2012, 10:52 AM
They could consider the Gripen if they want low-cost fighter systems....

Yeah, those Gripens are more 'fit' for the Philippines. The lease-to-own option just like what Hungary opted for also 'fits' them. I wonder why SAAB is not pitching themselves.

I'm speculating that France may have pitched UAE's 2nd-hand Mirage 2000-9 when Phil. Officials visited them a few weeks ago. At 20M Euros, that's tempting.

syncro
03-12-2012, 12:38 PM
Unofficial source say that Philippines is in the final stage of negotiations with Italy for 6 AMX-ATA (AMX Advanced Trainer Attack), a two-seater trainer with multi-mode radar air-to-air and air-to-surface capability combat roles.

adroth
03-12-2012, 01:08 PM
As mentioned with out an increase in the current budget it would be hard pressed to maintain the F-16. The airforce is not really rethinking the F-16 more on just going back to the original plan of not getting the MRF on the current phase. As for the LIFT, althought it has not been announced yet (expect around July), there is already an aircraft that is coming out as the most likley candidate for this. Same for the Maritime Patrol Aircraft...so just wait a lil bit longer.

"Re-thinking" was indeed an unfortunate choice of words.

The current state of affairs is simply an off-shoot of the fact that the F-16 effort was injected into the plan by an outside entity. The PAF's procurement plans are put together with an eye on the PAF's budget and capability. An effort like the F-16 will understandably require a return to the drawing board for a "re-think" . . . especially since other aspects of the plan have already moved ahead.

Money had already been flagged for whatever is currently in the pipeline and defined by what little funding that the PAF had originally been slated to receive. So when somebody plops another piece of equipment into that queue, it would only be natural for planners to ask about where the money is coming from. Petro-pesos may have already been identified as a source of that funding, the devil remains in the details in how that money gets from where it is, to where it needs to be.

While media accounts implied otherwise, it was never really about getting MRFs "in the current phase". Horizon 2 projects (e.g, SAA/LIFT, MPA, etc.) were all slated to arrive before we saw an MRF's shadow. But the intent was to accelerate the start of the next phase. Even with an early start . . . fruits of the next phase wouldn't be realized till after end of H2. It would simply allow H3 goals to be met earlier.

RandomlyGenerated
03-12-2012, 04:45 PM
what about the AMX, they seemed keen on those, didn't they?

junglejim
03-12-2012, 11:23 PM
"Re-thinking" was indeed an unfortunate choice of words.

The current state of affairs is simply an off-shoot of the fact that the F-16 effort was injected into the plan by an outside entity. The PAF's procurement plans are put together with an eye on the PAF's budget and capability. An effort like the F-16 will understandably require a return to the drawing board for a "re-think" . . . especially since other aspects of the plan have already moved ahead.

Money had already been flagged for whatever is currently in the pipeline and defined by what little funding that the PAF had originally been slated to receive. So when somebody plops another piece of equipment into that queue, it would only be natural for planners to ask about where the money is coming from. Petro-pesos may have already been identified as a source of that funding, the devil remains in the details in how that money gets from where it is, to where it needs to be.

While media accounts implied otherwise, it was never really about getting MRFs "in the current phase". Horizon 2 projects (e.g, SAA/LIFT, MPA, etc.) were all slated to arrive before we saw an MRF's shadow. But the intent was to accelerate the start of the next phase. Even with an early start . . . fruits of the next phase wouldn't be realized till after end of H2. It would simply allow H3 goals to be met earlier.

Before el Presidente even talked about the F-16 there were already rumors that some sectors wanted to bump the MRF to the latter part of Horizon 2. If we are getting the news that the MRF purchase will be adjusted back to the older timing, then it seems that they found a middle ground through the LIFT and what they are looking at getting. Which would tie in on what I heard is the current front runner on the LIFT evaluation.


what about the AMX, they seemed keen on those, didn't they?

The AMX though can fulfill the aspect of the "Multi Role" that the Air Force is looking, however it is seriously lacking the Air Defense capability. Simply put if a terroist boarded a plane with the intention of crashing it in the Malacanag Palace, the AMX will be hard pressed to do the Air intercept. It is an awesome bomb truck though, so just my opinion would be a proper replacement for the OV-10's of the 15th Strike Wing... though it was pilots from the Fighter Wing that did the evaluation, so not sure if they are looking at it in the strike role.

Serious upgrade in Firepower though if the AMX is taken in by the strike wing.

adroth
03-13-2012, 12:49 AM
Before el Presidente even talked about the F-16 there were already rumors that some sectors wanted to bump the MRF to the latter part of Horizon 2.

Indeed there was, complete with a position paper. A rather eye-brow raising option that I was happy to see go away.

junglejim
03-13-2012, 01:15 AM
Indeed there was, complete with a position paper. A rather eye-brow raising option that I was happy to see go away.

Indeed, there is a time and place for everything. Unless there is a dramatic increase in the budget to accommodate the operation of an MRF, it would just hamper the operation of the Philippine Air Force in other parts. So as much as I want a decent Air show, I would have to agree at the thought of pacing the upgrades with the improvement in the economy.