US dangles F-16 fighters, attack helicopters to PH

[mamiyapis]

Who's to say that having a swarm of F/A-50s with some form of BVR and backed up by airborne radar platforms isn't the right way to go? Launch and land from a distance instead of trying to tangle with J-11s. 

 

The point is, perhaps the PAF was realistic enough to understand that the old school way of just trying to reach the 'merge' so we can shoot down bad guys using superb training and skills to squeeze the last ounce of performance from our fighter aircraft is ultimately a losing strategy for an air force like ours.

And if that's the context, then I can certainly see why getting 2 Erieyes in the bargain is such an attractive proposition for the PAF, not to mention the possibility of also getting superb standoff weapons like the Meteor and the RBS15.  After all, the ability to engage hostile aircraft and vessels without exposing itself to counter-fire is probably 'sexier' in PAF's eyes than just the raw 'performance' represented by the Viper.

Of course, the US can always match whatever Saab is offering in terms of AWACS and standoff (i.e. BVRAAM, ASM) weaponry.  What I doubt is whether their offer can fit the PAF's approved budget.

Winner winner, chicken dinner!

There is already a growing realization in the PAF that under current circumstances, there will never be enough
money to adequately fund a relatively large(lol) MRF force under any stretch of the imagination. It sounds a bit
wrong but the MRO side seems to have tipped things in favor of cost-effective defensive aircraft over outright
raw performance. This seems to be thanks to the introduction of the FA-50s into the system and exposing the
service of what it means to operate a modern jet force. It doesn't help any bidders for the program that the
Koreans, who in building their 80% F-16 basically pushed to the hilt, got 100% of the 80% they were gunning
to achieve... and basically built an over-achieving LCA. 

Besides, with the current state of the PAF's Air Defense network, if war were to break out rather soon... I think
we would probably be better served with 24-36 FA-50s just flying point defense inside PH airspace than a single
squadron of top-of-the-line F-16s trying their best to re-enact the Battle of Thermopylae.

[tagalacion]

Would that lack of 'daylight' between 39C/D and FA-50 get even more pronounced should KIA get a go-ahead from LM to build and sell a single-seat version of the FA-50 with AAR capability and maybe even CFT?  FA-50's in that configuration forming the bulk of our tactical fighter squadrons and acting as a 'node' in a fully functioning IADS might not be so bad. 

Anyway, to get back into the nitty gritty: Another question that hasn't really gotten much media attention lately is just what attack helo the PAF can source from the US?

Apaches might be out of the question if it costs USD930M for just 6 units, as per the India deal.

However, there seems to be plenty of EDA AH-1Ws that's available, though.  The only problem for PAF - assuming they want those 'Whisky Cobras' - is how they're going to 'sell' that to a president who had already spoken out against getting used/refurbished US helicopters.  (But there's hope, though, since President Duterte didn't seem to mind the AH-1 from Jordan - and that's even older than the EDA AH-1W and is only single-engined.  Of course, that was an out-and-out donation.  This deal for Super Cobras won't be. So...)

To allow Duterte to save face - and assuming they really want to sell off their 'Whisky Bravos' - the US could sell a few new build AH-1Z to the PAF as a 'token' and bundle as much AH-1Ws as the PAF can afford/stomach and call them "force multipliers".  The Americans can also play up the fact that these Super Cobras are being manufactured by the same company that the PAF is trying to get CUH's from, Textron; thus simplifying the logistics chain.

Anyway, I do hope PAF gets AH-1Zs because, based on their reaction to the American F-16 'overture', that might be the only "Viper" they're ever going to fly.

[horge]

I think both SAAB's own estimates and claims from the recent Slovakian purchase re: op costs for Gripen and F-16 should be taken with a grain of salt.

EVERYTHING has to be taken with a grain of salt.
Vendors ALWAYS tell lies, big and small, uphill and downhill.

Who's to say that having a swarm of F/A-50s with some form of BVR and backed up by airborne radar platforms isn't the right way to go?

Myself, for one. 
See below.

Launch and land from a distance instead of trying to tangle with J-11s. 

But which BVRAAMs would those be?
You can only shake wut ya momma gave ya...
Same applies to PGM's for moving sand or spearing fish, and besides, you might have to
rethink what OPFOR air would likely be trying to do, and what PAF would be trying to do,
if actual shooting ever broke out, and the conditions under which shooting would begin.
Try to rethink who would be the one forced to enter the other's AD sphere.

As for the lack of "daylight" between a putative 39 C/D and a 50, I offer a different argument for the
acquisition of the 39 as a weapons platform... why not use the 39s as a dedicated maritime strike or
anti-shipping platform? They have the necessary AAR/IFR capability the current crop of 50s lack. They
also bring the requisite sensor and payload capacity expected of a dedicated maritime strike platform.
They also bring a built-in capability in the RBS-15 missiles instead of having a missile system integrated
on whatever platform we own/buy...

I prefer to think of it this way... the FA50s would act as our Mirages(lol), while the JAS-39s act as our
pissed-off, Exocet-slinging Super Etendards(lolol).

Okay, but you're not changing the level of pain, so much as redefining its purpose, and I
suspect many can point out that there are acquisition/sustainment-cheaper alternatives
as AAR-kitted AShM platforms: the runts of the litter perhaps being those mothballed AM
AMX pitched at PH awhile back (theoretically cleared, or at least successfully-evaluated
for Marte ER and Exocet). There are certainly more capable options that still cost so much
less (lifecycle) than 39, because most of them are EDA.... but I'm rambling now.

With your leave, m...

[soapbox]
We were (correct me if I'm wrong) talking about maritime strike, or worse, interdiction?
In like tone as my caution to Mr.S...  just whose AD bubble is this all taking place in?
What possible, effective role for a 'swarm' of AAR-illiterate, heater-only FA-50PH, then?
That far out to sea (or rather, that far into OPFOR AD), it's all on the AAR-fluent PGM-slinger.
Does ^that not then prescribe true, fully-capable MRF?
It still wouldn't be enough, no? Given the domestic EWR picture, even Viper is a limp dick.

We'd need true MRF operating within a true AD-defeat system, which we can't afford.
It's something 99% of the nations upon God's green earth can't afford.
That's why, in that context again, we'd sorely need our MDT ally's superpower support.

PAF assets will have crucial roles to play, interoperating with the US in an MDT situation.
PAF assets have crucial roles to play, precursive or preventive to an MDT situation.
PAF assets include platforms other than combat jets, and its the "other than" category that
will play the BULK of those crucial roles, keeping our Republic safe from her enemies.
[/soapbox]

Would that lack of 'daylight' between 39C/D and FA-50 get even more pronounced should KIA get a go-ahead from LM to build and sell a single-seat version of the FA-50 with AAR capability and maybe even CFT?  FA-50's in that configuration forming the bulk of our tactical fighter squadrons and acting as a 'node' in a fully functioning IADS might not be so bad.

One can dream.
Until there actually IS such an FA-50 iteration in LRIP man lang and available to PH,
dreaming is all ^that is, 'di ba?

I'd rather focus on what FA-50PH can actually do, before gauging what a putative 'kuya'
(elder brother) MRF should be able to do. What did Marawi teach us about FA-50PH's CAS
and Strike limitations, and in a zero-AD environment no less? What do FA-50PH's real world
(PAF) and theoretical loadouts, its combat radius thereby, and above all, the state of and
prognoses for PH EWR, tell us about FA-50PH's limitations in *gasp* OCA or (okay, I'll play
along with the most common armchair-gaming) DCA or kahit man lang maritime strike?

I've been deliberately talking about a 'sweet spot', and about 'pain', for a reason.
Tell me if a comfort zone is compatible with military readiness.

I do hope PAF gets AH-1Zs because, based on their reaction to the American F-16 'overture', that might be the only "Viper" they're ever going to fly.

You're brutal.  I like you.  
I doubt there will be Zulus though.

[tagalacion]

I'd rather focus on what FA-50PH can actually do, before gauging what a putative 'kuya'
(elder brother) MRF should be able to do.

But isn't it possible PAF had actually already gone and evaluated and realized FA-50PH needs a 'kuya' after all? 

Better avionics, certified for better weapons, aerial refueling, etc.; stuff we'd otherwise pay through the nose for to get for the Geagles - and that's assuming they'd even be available options we can go for - are already pre-loaded for the Gripens.

I doubt there will be Zulus though.

It's true that Zulus would cost a bit more than Whiskeys but I still wouldn't put it past the president if he did go for it.  After all, those would really fit the bill insofar as the president's pronouncements go wrt getting brand new - no more refurbished helos from the US - and insofar as what he believes the PAF needs when it comes to COIN.

Of course, if PAF really is looking to get lots of attack birds (e.g. 12 - 24) they can always lobby the president for it because the president had shown time and again that he does listen to them.  Case in point (again) are those Jordanian AH-1's that are probably going to be older than any of the Whiskeys that the US can offer us as excess defense articles.

[adroth]

I'd rather focus on what FA-50PH can actually do, before gauging what a putative 'kuya' (elder brother) MRF should be able to do. What did Marawi teach us about FA-50PH's CAS and Strike limitations, and in a zero-AD environment no less? What do FA-50PH's real world (PAF) and theoretical loadouts, its combat radius thereby, and above all, the state of and prognoses for PH EWR, tell us about FA-50PH's limitations in *gasp* OCA or (okay, I'll play along with the most common armchair-gaming) DCA or kahit man lang maritime strike?

I've been deliberately talking about a 'sweet spot', and about 'pain', for a reason.
Tell me if a comfort zone is compatible with military readiness.

I wrote the following article about the what the FA-50 was really for just for H's questions above:

http://defenseph.net/drp/index.php?topic=14.0

Partly to help the general public understand how such expensive pieces of kit helped the general cause of defense, but also to help the original proponents of the FA-50 . . . the ones who deliberately labelled it "Surface Attack Aircraft / Lead-In Fighter Trainer (SAA/LIFT)" . . .

. . . from having to explain the difference between the FA-50 and a true MRF.

It's the same pain that the Indian Air Force experienced with their law makers started thinking that India should buy more Tejas aircraft than imported aircraft like the Rafale et. al. The IAF quickly shutdown that idea pointing out that the Tejas was a short-ranged interceptor and it would take more of those types of point-defense fighters to achieve the air defense goals that would be satisfied by the likes of the Gripen, Rafale or the SU-35.

Note: Related discussion on the forum’s FB extension: https://m.facebook.com/groups/781170378635478?view=permalink&id=1508341009251741&ref=m_notif&notif_t=like

=====

Tejas far behind competitors, not enough to protect Indian skies: IAF
The IAF made a presentation to the government to explain why Tejas alone can't meet India's requirements.

Sudhi Ranjan Sen  | Posted by Sonalee Borgohain
New Delhi, November 10, 2017 | UPDATED 19:54 IST

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/tejas-indian-air-force-f-16-mig-21-fighter-planes-ajit-doval/1/1086425.html

The IAF made a presentation to the government to explain why Tejas lags behind Sweden-made JAS 39 and US F-16.The IAF made a presentation to the government to explain why Tejas lags behind Sweden-made JAS 39 and US F-16.

Tejas - the indigenously made Light-Combat single engine fighter - isn't enough to protect Indian skies, the India Air Force (IAF) has told the government. The response came after the South Block asked the IAF to scrap its plans of acquiring single-engine fighters from global, top sources told India Today.

The IAF said the Tejas is far behind its competitors like the JAS 39 Gripen manufactured by the Swedish aerospace company Saab and the US made F-16 manufactured by Lockheed Martin, sources said.

National Security Advisor Ajit Doval is understood to have raised the issue following which the government asked the IAF to scrap its plans to acquire foreign made single engine fighters and go for the Indian made fighters only. Recently, the IAF made a presentation to the government to explain why Tejas alone can't meet India's requirements.

Documents accessed by India Today reveal that the IAF has told the government that the "endurance" of Tejas in combat is just about 59 minutes as against 3 hours of Gripen and nearly 4 fours for the F-16. Also, Tejas can carry a pay-load of about three tons against nearly six tons and seven tons by the Gripen and F-16 respectively.

"In other words, for target that needs about 36 bombs to be destroyed, one will have to deploy six Tejas as against just three Gripen or F-16," the IAF has told the government.

The IAF has also said Tejas needs 20 hours of serving for every hour of flying as against six hours for Gripen and 3.5 hours for F-16.

< Edited >

But when even the PAF started calling its plane a "Light MRF", I just gave up.

[adroth]

There is already a growing realization in the PAF that under current circumstances, there will never be enough money to adequately fund a relatively large(lol) MRF force under any stretch of the imagination. It sounds a bit wrong but the MRO side seems to have tipped things in favor of cost-effective defensive aircraft over outright raw performance. This seems to be thanks to the introduction of the FA-50s into the system and exposing the service of what it means to operate a modern jet force.

Like an athlete who wasn't as ready for a marathon as he originally thought eh? Times like this that I wish we still had the old "Peace Carvin in reverse" discussion. Would have been perfect addition to this.

The PAF has never been open in its lessons-learned. Hopefully someone going through MNSA or GSC will write a come-to-Jesus paper about what needs to happen.

As with many things in the AFP, there are a lot of lessons to learn before we can do our jobs competently. Yet another thing to think about when thinking we can push for the "3rd option" in our current state.


====


So long as the plan is to eventually get MRFs, and not think that the FA-50 is enough . . . then we're still on track.

[horge]

But when even the PAF started calling its plane a "Light MRF", I just gave up.

Pussy. 

[Mr. S]

There is already a growing realization in the PAF that under current circumstances, there will never be enough
money to adequately fund a relatively large(lol) MRF force under any stretch of the imagination. It sounds a bit
wrong but the MRO side seems to have tipped things in favor of cost-effective defensive aircraft over outright
raw performance. This seems to be thanks to the introduction of the FA-50s into the system and exposing the
service of what it means to operate a modern jet force. It doesn't help any bidders for the program that the
Koreans, who in building their 80% F-16 basically pushed to the hilt, got 100% of the 80% they were gunning
to achieve... and basically built an over-achieving LCA. 

Besides, with the current state of the PAF's Air Defense network, if war were to break out rather soon... I think
we would probably be better served with 24-36 FA-50s just flying point defense inside PH airspace than a single
squadron of top-of-the-line F-16s trying their best to re-enact the Battle of Thermopylae.

Can definitely see the advantage of having more platforms, but a bit concerning if they don't plan on purchasing some form of AEW to back up the ground radar. Or am I missing something?

But which BVRAAMs would those be?
You can only shake wut ya momma gave ya...
Same applies to PGM's for moving sand or spearing fish, and besides, you might have to
rethink what OPFOR air would likely be trying to do, and what PAF would be trying to do,
if actual shooting ever broke out, and the conditions under which shooting would begin.
Try to rethink who would be the one forced to enter the other's AD sphere.

A swarm of BVRAAM-armed FA-50 was meant mostly tongue-in-cheek so haven't given this much thought. Rafael's claiming "simplified integration" of I-Derby ER on the FA-50 at least I think aside from a poster from KAI, that's the only vendor-based source I've seen about integrating BVRAAM with the FA-50. Question is of course how much integration is going to cost, and if the Philippine Government is willing to foot the bill?

I'm under no illusions that the AFP could retake an island in the Spratlys without US support.

Like an athlete who wasn't as ready for a marathon as he originally thought eh? Times like this that I wish we still had the old "Peace Carvin in reverse" discussion. Would have been perfect addition to this.

Semi-OT: If this was on Timawa, was this in reference to SG or the US stationing planes in the Philippines?

[horge]

But isn't it possible PAF had actually already gone and evaluated and realized FA-50PH needs a 'kuya' after all? 

With PAF, anything is possible.
As adroth points out, PAF seems to have reevaluated a lead-in fighter-trainer (modified for light attack)
into a "light MRF" now. I actually think that sort of cognitive dissonance goes back to the very beginning
of the SAA-LIFT program. CGPAF Rabena stopped just short of formalizing it.

Name pa lang, no? "Surface Attack Aircraft / Lead-in Fighter-Trainer"
Almost ALL new-gen AJT's have an easy conversion for ground attack precisely because part of the AJT
syllabus includes weps (drill and/or live). E, kaso the impetus for eventual MRF acquisition was problems
out in the WPS, so en vez de "ground attack", ginawang "surface attack" to accommodate maritime.

The point to getting LIFT was to prepare pilots, groundcrew, PAF command, the OOP and above all, the
budget-authoring legislature for the PAIN of increased funding, maturity and competence demanded by
the effective operation+sustainment of MRF. If the "inreased funding" part is truly out of our reach, then
so be it --but the original point of the program is still what it was.

The SAA (Surface Attack Aircraft, lol) part was to address the need for an INTERIM/stopgap combat jet,
when we were down to just a handful of BJT's (the S-211's), so we'd have SOMETHING to fight with,
never mind how feeble the SAA, until proper MRF were online.

... Zulu ...

You're still going on about those? 

Kitted-out Mi-17 daw with a pitch for Mi-28A/N, 'di ba? 

<<Peace Carvin in Reverse>>

That was a thread on timawa that IMO focused on the need for PAF to absorb correct sustainment skills
and culture by osmosis, through direct contact with and exposure to US Armed Forces practices wrt to
sustaining aircraft.

Because of "muh sovereignty" issues with basing US forces here (IIRC, EDCA was still in limbo then) I
suggested the halfway-option of incentivizing ATAC(!) to maintain a permanent presence here, to ease
ATAC's logistics in supporting regional shitfests like Balikatan, Cobra Gold, etc...
all in the hope that PAF might learn a thing or two, by osmosis nga.

However, I admitted it would likely all go sour anyway, because of 'mighty dragon vs. local serpent.'
Learning is so much harder when there's a lot of unlearning to do at the same time.

[adroth]

I'm under no illusions that the AFP could retake an island in the Spratlys without US support.

The key would be to get China to give it up without the use of military force.

Semi-OT: If this was on Timawa, was this in reference to SG or the US stationing planes in the Philippines?

Horge pretty much summed it up.

That was a thread on timawa that IMO focused on the need for PAF to absorb correct sustainment skills and culture by osmosis, through direct contact with and exposure to US Armed Forces practices wrt to sustaining aircraft.

That was before the FA-50 had even been formally selected, the MRV-turned-SSV was not yet a done deal, and we only had one operational C-130.

[adroth]

[Mr. S]

That a hint Mr.A? 

[adroth]

The graphic above was shared by someone with above-average familiarity with what's happening behind closed doors. What it really means . . . is unclear.

Suffice to say, nothing is set in stone :-)

[horge]

Recalls (with weaker ooomph) those vendor's-promotional 'Philippine Air Force F-16 Falcon' decals/stickers
that were shared on timawa years back,

[adroth]

Duterte to talk with Trump on arms purchase
Edith Regalado (The Philippine Star) - September 9, 2018 - 12:00am

DAVAO CITY  , Philippines  —  President Duterte plans to talk to US President Donald Trump about the possible purchase of military equipment for the military and the police.

The President reportedly still has to discuss with the military and the police what more they need in terms of weapons and armaments before taking the matter up with Trump.

The Palace earlier scoffed at the US threat of possible sanction over the purchase of Russian arms.

The President then rejected the US government’s recent offer to give weapons and defense equipment to the military.

The President said that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Defense Secretary James Mattis and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross have sent a letter to him offering US weapons and other defense equipment to the Philippines.

The letter from the three US officials even mentioned the F-16 fighter jets and attack helicopters that Duterte preferred.

Duterte, however, did not seem keen on the US offer, saying he found the letter “distasteful” as he brought up anew the criticism of the US government, then under president Barack Obama, of his crackdown on illegal drugs.

< Edited >

Read more at https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2018/09/09/1849882/duterte-talk-trump-arms-purchase#QklyZjJUf8roXlvR.99