Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - mamiyapis

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 11
First posts / Re: For returning Timawans
« on: August 23, 2018, 11:13:00 PM »
Welcome back to the old guys, and welcome to the newbies

General Discussion / US dangles F-16 fighters, attack helicopters to PH
« on: August 23, 2018, 10:37:38 PM »
US dangles F-16 fighters, attack helicopters to PH

In light of a possible procurement of Russian submarines, the United States is now offering the Philippines its Lockheed Martin F-16 multi-role fighters and attack helicopters.

President Rodrigo Duterte on Thursday disclosed this as he read a letter signed by three Cabinet secretaries of the United States government seeking a meeting with him to discuss the Philippine military’s modernization program.

The letter was read during the 12th-anniversary rites of the Eastern Mindanao Command (Eastmincom) in Davao City.

“We know, however, that our nations can do even more to integrate our economic and security concerns,” read the letter sent by US Ambassador Sung Kim, as quoted by Duterte...

General Discussion / Re: Duterte to visit Israel on Sept. 2
« on: August 13, 2018, 09:01:01 PM »
i'm excited on what will come out in the defense side!

You and me both. It feels like Israel is gunning to further cement it's role as a leading provider of defence equipmemt.

Sir, does the PN have a short list of diesel-electric submarines ?

There are apparently, all with offers of assistance to out up basing, maintenance, and training.

Germany: TKMS
Sweden: Saab Kockums
South Korea: DSME
France: Naval Group/DCNS

General Discussion / Re: A primer on FA-50 systems
« on: July 01, 2018, 02:55:34 PM »
Trevor's knowledge on the FA50 has actually panned out... and the PAF is now coming to a somewhat similar conclusion for the jets. Upgraded, the FA50s would pose a serious threat to an invading airforce by their capabilities. BVR and small cruise missiles would make them lethal in the modern airspace.

The USAF has apparently learned a thing or two in the few times it has crossed afterburners with our little Fighting Eagle.

With the current MRF project rolling along, it is interesting to look at contracts for other nations and their fighter procurements.

Kuwait will be getting 22 F/A-18E and 6 two-seat F models for $1.504B. Not discussed is the actual contents of the Kuwaiti package, but given the country fly very modern aircraft, it would be safe to assume these don't include things like maintenance hardware and training for knowhow their airforce might already possess.

Kuwait to receive new F/A-18 Super Hornet multi-role fighter aircraft
Jun 28, 2018 -

On 27 June 2018, Boeing has won a foreign military sales contract to supply 22 F/A-18E and six F/A-18F Super Hornets to the Kuwait Air Force, the US Department of Defense’s (DoD) announced.

According to DoD, the Boeing Co., St. Louis, Missouri, is awarded a $1,504,995,240 fixed-price-incentive-firm contract that provides for the production and delivery of 22 F/A-18E and six F/A-18F Super Hornets in support of the government of Kuwait.

The future Kuwaiti Air Force (KAF) aircraft are expected to be completed in January 2021.

The line drawings seem to have been professionally done... we can probably assume this was done by Kongsberg for their Penguin missiles. It's a shame the good Admiral has passed and we can't discuss with him further details, like deck weights and how extensive a refit it would take to install the missiles.

This is however a good jump-off point for further up-arming the Jacinto class, and possibly a good possibility for the PN to try and operate an Anti-Ship missile just shy of larger units like C-Star and others.

Besides, with the AW159s being our defacto ship helicopters, we need to find a small anti-ship missile they can fly with, and the Penguin could be just the missile.

When the truth is stranger than fiction, and most commentators have been out of the loop. The truth is finally out. Construction has been going on for the better part of a year... preparations for this move, happened the previous year.

Palace defends Philippine construction in Spratlys

Metro Manila (CNN Philippines, May 27) — The Palace defends the construction and repairs on Pag-asa island reported by a U.S.-based think tank.

Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque said these repairs fall within the Philippines' mandate.

"Repair of port facilities in Pag-asa is consistent with our national sovereignty and jurisdiction," Roque said in a statement Saturday.

Satellite photos from a the Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative (AMTI) showed the Philippines is doing its own repairs on occupied islands in the Spratlys....

...The AMTI on Saturday reported that the Philippines has been repairing the runways on Pag-asa Island (international name: Thitu Island).

"Thitu sits just over 12 nautical miles from China's air and naval base at Subi Reef, and was the site of a tense standoff with a Chinese flotilla last August," the AMTI said.

READ: Alejano: Chinese vessels seen near Pag-asa islands

AMTI satellite photos from May 17 showed two dredging vessels found west of Pag-asa island, fixing the collapsed airplane runway...

...The dredging, it added, is needed to allow larger vessels carrying heavy machinery and construction materials to approach the island...

...Satellite photos also featured new construction in other Philippine occupied features in the Spratlys, namely Rizal Reef (international name: Commodore reef), Lawak Island (international name: Nanshan island) and Panata Island (international name: Loaita cay) within the year.

If what I've read is accurate, we could conceivably create a cruise missile project using professional grade COTS equipment, and if done quietly enough, none would be the wiser. They could be launched from Palawan and used to strike stationary base infrastructure of China... things that couldn't be moved quickly. Like aircraft hangars or fixed radar installations.


I meant specifically in response to the article headline that "Only 5 Nations (US, Russia, France, England and China) Can Hit Nay Place on Earth with a Missile" which neglects Israel's submarine launched nuclear missiles.

Speaking of which, why not pursue submarine launched (conventional) cruise missiles? Perhaps anti radiation missiles to target the radar sites.

Of course that would require a submarine first...


This would be an ideal stepping stone in building deep-strike retaliatory capability. One that is "conventional" enough to allow wiggle room for our forces to acquire.

The Ballistic option is fraught with dangers from technology bans specific to the program to economic embargoes that cover the nation.

Developing an SLCM capability within the MTCR limit gets nations used to the notion the AFP bas the capability. There is less resistance to an expansion of existing capabilities.

We're talking a missile program that would require approval from allies. Probably Security Council level... meaning we will have to start from basics to skirt the restrictions long enough to develop a tech base to work from.

This means searching for knowledge abroad, preferrably Pinoy expats or willing foreigners... if we do not run afoul other nations of the MTCR.

I propose a staged program, beginning with acquisition of sub-300km SSM, whether air, sea, or land launched. This builds a new status quo in the region. Taking the next step to go beyond the MTCR would then not be so provocative.

Meanwhile, in the Philippines...

Muh Thales! ::)

Ah thanks for clarifying that LionFlyer. Well the FB groups have discovered another revision to the Hensoldt brochure that now shows 750 tracks in all mentions of 3D tracking capacity.

It means the different memtions of 400 and 750 tracks was just a clerical error.

I am pretty sure the whole fiasco has probably reached Hensoldt's attention by now. We are actually generating huge traffic on FB alone regarding the FAP.

What has always piqued my attention and probably the update on their part, is the vague spec stating "Handling >400 tracks per 360° independent of air and surface targer mix". This could actually mean that depending on antenna rotation speed, the TRS-3D is actually actively adding 400 tracks to it's output per full antenna rotation. So depending on the mode it is in, the system could track far more than even the updated ">750 tracks" tracking 3D capacity... hence the greater than symbol even on the updated numbers.

NS100 is AESA while TRS-3D is PESA ...

tama ba ako?

Let me try to answer your question El_F,

Strictly speaking, the NS100 series is AESA, while the TRS-3D is PESA... however, the TRS-3D has something called E-Scan for elevation, a feature which works somewhat like AESA albeit in only one axis. Now, how do we determine which is AESA and which isn't?

The NS series was born only in the last decade, with versions like the -106 only recently completing testing and only having one customer(RSN), so it is solidly in AESA territory. However the TRS-3D has been around since the 90s, and was the radar for a lot of NATO ships during the time period up until the early 2000s, and hence pioneered a lot of technologies commonly found in current radar systems. Lionflyer is right in saying no one outside of Hensoldt or the end-users can determine the exact number of tracks it's capable of at the moment... then you have the TRS-4D on the German F125s... which at the time the radars were under EADS(before becoming Airbus, then Hensoldt) was interestingly called the "TRS-3D/NR"

The NR stands for Non-Rotating, and featured an arrangement of 4 panels, 2 on each mast of the ship. VERY similar to current AESA setups. There is actually Atlas Elektronik documentation that states this. 

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 11