Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Philippines Defense Forces Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
RP defense against air attacks weak, says PAF
Topic Started: Jun 20 2009, 02:46 AM (6,389 Views)
maverick
Member
[ *  *  * ]
dude,anti-ballistic missiles,SAM,etc. cost like millions of dollars and you can only use that once,a hundred million dollars can acquire dozens of modern MRFs,MRFs first before missiles like those.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
shooter
Trainee
[ *  * ]
Dude, MRFs cost millions of dollars too. Not only SAMs. And you can't buy dozens of "modern" MRFs with only a hundred million dollars. Maybe you can buy 3 to 5 units of modern MRFs but I think it doesn't include missiles and other costs that should be taken into account like AEW systems, etc. And because of that, your MRFs will fly blind and would still be vulnerable to attack.

Quote:
 
a hundred million dollars can acquire dozens of modern MRFs


Dozens of modern MRFs for only a hundred million dollars? Wow, that's cheap. What kind of "modern" MRFs are these?

There are SAMs that are less than a million dollar. Have you heard about the ground launched AMRAAM? AMRAAMs cost range from $300,000 - $700,000 (source: Wikipedia) depending on the variant. The lauch platform for this is a humvee and the system is known as the SLAMRAAM. This is just one... there are others too.

Posted Image

Anyway, you also have point that SAMs can only be used once and MRFs can be used over and over. But if the PhAF are going to send out MRFs against attackers, I think MRFs must be potent enough engage interception and air combat with the help of support units. Without the support units, I think the other side would be well favored. So, if it's MRFs, PhAF should also consider acquiring support units.

Peace out.
...live for nothing ...but die for something - John Rambo
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
raider1011


shooter
Oct 3 2009, 05:30 AM
It is not enough that the air force buy MRFs that can intercept intruders. With that, the air force also needs to consider acquiring advanced radar systems, AEW aircrafts, ordnance, support facilities, trainings, spare parts, fuel costs and maintainance. It's too costly for us as of now. I think that one way of beefing up our air defense as of this time is starting it with updated radar systems and a decent number of SAMs. These will cost money but this is a necessity but it is not as costly as the acquisition of new MRFs and all the things required to operate a decent MRF interceptor fleet. It is an investement for our sovereignity and national pride. With these assets, I think there will already be deterrence in asserting our airspace, at least.

Then, let's just wait and save a little more for the jets to come.

:specool:

Agreed. No room for myopia here, buying MRFs piecemeal without the system to back it up is a waste of money. Radar before fighters, which, apparently, is exactly what the government's thinking:

EADS Defence & Security to enhance Philippine air traffic security

Quote:
 
27  August  2008

EADS Defence & Security (DS) has delivered the most advanced secondary radar system for air traffic control purposes to the Philippine Air Transportation Office (ATO). The MSSR 2000 I (Monopulse Secondary Surveillance Radar) is the first building block of a comprehensive modern air traffic control network in the region.

Defence Electronics, an integrated activity of EADS DS, thus establishes the first air traffic control system employing the latest Mode-S standard in the region. EADS DS in Germany is currently bringing the second of only two Mode-S air traffic control networks into operation. Mode-S is an enhancement of existing air traffic control procedures which increase considerably the reliability of air traffic guidance. The local partner Integrated Energy Systems & Resources Inc (IESRI), Manila/Philippines, has taken over the system responsibility with technical support of EADS DS.

The MSSR 2000 I secondary radar provides detailed information about the current air situation based on interrogations that are in part transmitted in coded form, and automatic replies from the aircraft. This enables the MSSR 2000 I to identify absolutely accurate and track every aircraft in the airspace. MSSR 2000 I is working according to the requirements of the German Air Force Flight Safety Authority (AFsBw) which exceed even the strict requirements of any civil air traffic control organization like EUROCONTROL.

MSSR 2000 I is also employed in the military area for automatic identification of friendly forces, thus reducing the danger of friendly fire. MSSR 2000 I is the only civil/military qualified Mode-S enhanced surveillance secondary radar in the world also offering military Mode-5 capabilities. This dual use capability offers significant commonality savings. More than 140 Mode S-capable systems have been sold worldwide.

EADS

Not a radar per se, but the fact they're willing to invest in top-of-the-line "building blocks" is encouraging. It's a start.

RE: SAMs, this is an option that should not be readily dismissed.

Quote:
 
Unlike Sukhoi Su-27/30 fighters which many expect will require a robust support infrastructure, intensive training, good tactics and talented fighter pilots to operate, all taking time to mature into a viable capability, the S-300P/S-300V series SAMs were designed for austere support environments, to be operated and maintained largely by Soviet era conscripts. Therefore the integration of these weapons into wider and nearer regional force structures will not incur the delays and difficulties expected by some observers with the Sukhois. A package of S-300P/S-300V batteries could be operationally viable within months of deployment in the region, and earlier if contract Russian or Ukrainian personnel are hired to bring them online faster.

Air Power Australia

Of particular concern is the long range of the later missile types deployed by S-300PMU variants, as batteries located along the Taiwan Straight could be used to produce an effect not unlike that seen in 1973, when Egyptian 9M9/SA-6 batteries were able to extend a protective umbrella across the Suez Canal, allowing Egyptian forces to perform an amphibious assault against fortified Israeli positions in the Sinai. The 80 nmi range of the baseline 48N6 missile allows a high altitude target over Taiwan's eastern coast to be engaged by a mainland shore based battery. Should the PLA deploy the S-400 with the 108 nmi range 48N6E2 missile, or longer ranging weapons like the 48N6DM, it gains the capability to deny airspace over Taiwan proper.

With SAMs which have range performance well in excess of 100 nmi, the PLA acquires the means of effecting a partial airspace blockade over Taiwan, forcing all air traffic into Taiwanese airfields via eastern approaches at low altitude, to avoid entering the envelope of the SAM systems. Most of Taiwan’s international and domestic air traffic travels along its Western coast, which would be covered by the longer-range S-300 weapons.

Strategy Center

Russian SAMs are just an example, but the obvious advantage of SAMs is in being a hell of a lot easier to operate and maintain than MRFs. A competent pilot takes years and millions of dollars in fuel, simulator time, and spare parts to train; a missile crew can get going in a matter of months. Also, like the second article says, a SAM umbrella supports your navy and ground forces without risking your precious MRFs against other MRFs. An F/A-18 might be in trouble against an Su-27, but all planes are equal to a SAM.

Besides, the radar system controlling those SAMs is never idle, it's watching your airspace 24/7; the radar on an MRF is no good when it's on the ground.

FYC
God grant me the courage not to give up what I think is right even though I think it is hopeless.

|| Chester W. Nimitz

Loyalty to the Nation ALL the time, loyalty to the Government when it deserves it.

|| Mark Twain
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
shooter
Trainee
[ *  * ]
Very true indeed. Nice back-up raider1011.

Let's drink to that!

:armycheers:
...live for nothing ...but die for something - John Rambo
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
maverick
Member
[ *  *  * ]
yeah,we are going use that 300,000 dollar missile in just 1 fighter jet or any other aircraft,thats gonna be a waste,
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
shooter
Trainee
[ *  * ]
maverick
Oct 4 2009, 06:31 PM
yeah,we are going use that 300,000 dollar missile in just 1 fighter jet or any other aircraft,thats gonna be a waste,

You still don't get it, do you?

Haven't you done the math?

Let me break it down for you.

You have a $20-50 million worth MRF, plus the missiles on it, let's say 4 AMRAAMS. 1 low variant AMRAAM costs $300,000. So $300,000 X 4 is equals to $1.2 million. That's $20-50 million worth of MRF and $1.2 million worth of missiles. Plus factor in the fuel and the traing cost of the pilot. Do not forget to include the life of the pilot (and the RIO or navigator, if it has).

Now, your MRF is flying blind in pursuit of an intruder or an attacker... BUT... your MRF got shot down without even seeing the enemy and without putting up any fight because it does not have any radar or AEW support.

BOOM! There you go...

Which one is more costly, hmmmmmmmm?

Think boy!
...live for nothing ...but die for something - John Rambo
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
raider1011


Cool it, dudes, we're all anonymous posters here. Let's keep things friendly. :ssalute:

BTT: A $300,000 SAM--in exchange for bringing down a $100 million MRF?! Deal! Besides, shooter brings up a good point, firing off an AAM costs just as much money. And who says you can't use a SAM as an AAM?

Missiles are just expendables; with an MRF, your capital equipment is the airframe. With a SAM system, it's the radar controlling it.
God grant me the courage not to give up what I think is right even though I think it is hopeless.

|| Chester W. Nimitz

Loyalty to the Nation ALL the time, loyalty to the Government when it deserves it.

|| Mark Twain
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
shooter
Trainee
[ *  * ]
Oooops... I never really intended to hurt anyone's feelings. I might have over-emphasized.

:ssalute:
...live for nothing ...but die for something - John Rambo
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
maverick
Member
[ *  *  * ]
Missiles like SAMs will be wasted if the fighter your trying to shoot down used counter measures,still think that this type of defense your suggesting is not gonna happen,though that is a good defense but still......,the philippine government will not approve this,our airforce will only rely on missiles (ground to air)?,don't think so
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
shooter
Trainee
[ *  * ]
maverick
Oct 6 2009, 07:46 PM
Missiles like SAMs will be wasted if the fighter your trying to shoot down used counter measures,still think that this type of defense your suggesting is not gonna happen,though that is a good defense but still......,the philippine government will not approve this,our airforce will only rely on missiles (ground to air)?,don't think so

I think you haven't read my 1st post thoroughly.

That is why I said this ---

Quote:
 
shooter Posted on Oct 3 2009, 05:30 AM
  It is not enough that the air force buy MRFs that can intercept intruders. With that, the air force also needs to consider acquiring advanced radar systems, AEW aircrafts, ordnance, support facilities, trainings, spare parts, fuel costs and maintainance. It's too costly for us as of now. I think that one way of beefing up our air defense as of this time is starting it with updated radar systems and a decent number of SAMs. These will cost money but this is a necessity but it is not as costly as the acquisition of new MRFs and all the things required to operate a decent MRF interceptor fleet. It is an investement for our sovereignity and national pride. With these assets, I think there will already be deterrence in asserting our airspace, at least.

Then, let's just wait and save a little more for the jets to come.


I did not say that the Philippine government must rely solely on SAMs.

If you think so, then that's your problem. It was not my argument with you. My argument was the first reply I posted.

To reiterate :

(excerpts) ...Then, let's just wait and save a little more for the jets to come.

:armywink:
...live for nothing ...but die for something - John Rambo
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Philippine Air Force · Next Topic »
Add Reply