16
AFP Modernization & Defense Acquisitions / Re: Surface Attack Aicraft / Lead-In Fighter Trainer Acquisition Project
« on: February 21, 2017, 10:27:00 PM »
Do anyone know what the pod-like protrusion on PAF FA50 002 is?
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.
17
First posts / Re: What-if: 21st century AFP @ Battle for the PH December 8, 1941 to May 8, 1942
« on: January 29, 2017, 05:38:45 PM »i wonder how would our infantry fare against IJA infantry? Comparing our current small arms doctrine, small unit tactics down to the squad level against theirs? You know, with all those Jap human wave "Banzai Charge" attacks.
Banzai charges against AFP units with full auto capability even at the squad level c/o K-3s, M249s, and the basic M-16/M-4 assault rifles. That would be interesting.
Not to mention 25mm autocannon, 105 and 155 mm howitzers, mortar and auto grenade launchers
18
General Discussion / Re: FA-50PH's first combat mission?
« on: January 28, 2017, 11:53:56 AM »
First use of the FA-50 for combat operations in an ongoing conflict.
19
First posts / Re: What-if: 21st century AFP @ Battle for the PH December 8, 1941 to May 8, 1942
« on: January 26, 2017, 11:13:33 AM »head to head, our navy would have been totally annihilated by the third fleet - For the invasion, the Third Fleet was augmented by two destroyer squadrons and a cruiser division of the Second Fleet, and the aircraft carrier Ryūjō from the 1st Air Fleet. The Philippines Force consisted of an aircraft carrier, five heavy cruisers, five light cruisers, 29 destroyers, two seaplane tenders, plus minesweepers and torpedo boats.(source:wikipedia). even though our radar-equipped ships (commercial grade??) could detect the invading forces, we lack the offensive weaponry to stifle their ...
The scenario is already way forward to what you opined.
Reading back and digesting what has been shared by everyone so far would help.
20
First posts / Re: We just broke 22K members on the FB extension
« on: January 26, 2017, 11:10:18 AM »Congratulations sir! I hope the FB extension does end up educating the public about PH defense
Sadly, a lot join with zeal, fervor and love for the motherland...
Wisdom and knowledge is oft wasted on the shallow and superficial.
21
General Discussion / Re: Where it makes sense to go Russian
« on: January 15, 2017, 09:21:45 AM »Well, perhaps you can help me critique articles such as these: Possible Russian Weapons Options for AFPQuoteThe improving relations between Russia and the Philippines serve as a primary sign that the Russians may offer these said weapons in the sense that it may find ideal to the armed forces. However, these things will never just deal and immediately procure without any conditions like for instance, having Mi-17 or Mi-24 may serve as a logistical nightmare wherein the PAF already runs different types of helicopters in the arsenal. In that case though, existing helicopters such as Bell 412 and AW109s will be in favor for since those are the ones that are already in the PAF arsenal. Another is the rifles. It is deemed possible for the AFP to have AK-101s, RPG-7s Dragunov rifles and drones since it seems that the Department of National Defense is after such weapons albeit that it can be changed as well as the decisions pertaining to it and the same may apply to other weapons candidate here which leaves to the perusal or rather, the decision of the Defense Department. But then again, these matters will never downplay the possibility for the Philippines to have such weapons considering that such decision may be remote for today, it will be different by tomorrow or by the next day where the AFP will diversify weapons sources that has it's advantages on multiple sources and a logistical disadvantage. Overall, the Russian weaponry as well as the western ones will definitely benefit the Philippines in order to protect its national sovereignty against any potential adversary wherein it does not favor the West nor the East, but rather for the benefit of the Filipino people who deserve to live peacefully.
How about some tough, constructive critique on your entire blog site?
22
War on Drugs / Re: Duterte's War on Drugs
« on: January 08, 2017, 07:16:44 AM »It's simple. Under State Department regulations which are implemented *jointly* by the DOD and State - there are vetting requirements that the end-user nation must meet regarding Human Rights controls in order to receive said FMA/FMS. In fact, the GAO has argued for years that those controls are inadequate depending upon who the recipient is. Eqypt is a perfect example.
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-16-435
Note my last sentence. It implies that whoever is in Office in Washington has the ability to strongly influence how that aid is delivered vis-a-vis HR monitoring and record of the end-user. Obama's administration AND Congress sent clear messages to Malacanang that they believe the Drug Campaign is contributing directly to the reported loss of life.
Just look at how Sen. Ben Cardin was able to throw the entire SIG-Sauer sale to the PNP in doubt with one single press release. Now imagine when State Department actually implements sanctions - at an agency level - against a nation state. They've done so in the past. They can then use the DOD's DCSA program to limit the release of or the shape of future and current aid.
I don't know why people think this is so implausible. It happens all the time. Here's a running list of Defense Trade embargos, updated regularly and by Fed reg violated:
https://www.pmddtc.state.gov/embargoed_countries/
Why do people like myself think its implausible?
1. The condition behind your premise is totally different from what Duterte asked the AFP to do, which is constitutionally provided for in cases where a state of lawlessness is declared, be it were a specific or the entire country.
2. Last I checked the Philippines is not part of the Union, where the Federal Government has a modicum of power over its member states.
3. You confuse this option for EJK.
In effect, are you saying that the USA will stop aid to a MNNA because of a constitutional provision, based and influenced by the way by the US Constitution?
You got to be clearer and define your answer properly.
Perhaps, a better observation you could have made was:
1. IN THE EVENT THE AFP CONDUCTS WIDESPREAD ACTS OF VIOLENCE AND INDISCRIMINATE KILLINGS OF CIVILIANS DURING THE SAID TIME, IT WOULD OPEN UP (Insert your comments here).
The questions you were asked to help clarify your statements you avoided. The situation in Egypt is far different as to what's happening on the ground here.
Note that US Aid, specifically military, have continued in many countries where there are perceived human rights violations as well.
In scopes, quantities and quality far beyond the few million dollars and under equipped EDA.
Careful now, remember the AFP has not been implicated in any EJK attributed to the Duterte Administration.
It was flippant and irresponsible of you to make and continue to belabor your point simply because of an obvious bias against Duterte.
For the record, I too, am alarmed by the ongoing killings conducted by both the PNP and the druggies. Specially with those conduct by the PNP. Too much impunity with little accountability.
Why not shoot to disable?
Also, in the old forum, it would show that I was against the perception that the Dutertes are Davao's only hope. And that a political dynasty was not what we ought to have, as it opens the city up to abuse.
My loyalties lie with my country, not personalities.
But, I see it fit to request you clarify your statements, as biases often cloud judgement when none are warranted.
You still wonder why? I often wonder myself at the level of opaque points of view from both sides of the politic fence, many from seemingly intelligent personalities.
Your reply, which I appreciate you taking the time to make, is not applicable to my questions, which were clearly defined.
Apples to oranges. I asked what makes a tilapia so, sinagot mo ng, kasi bangus...
Statements and declarations like these, plus sweeping generalizations, places the USA in the role of a meddlesome imperial power, not a co-equal ally.
Thus Duterte's "who cares if your aid is cut" attitude.
There are other countries who hide the same attitude behind the smooth sugar coated statesmanship that this President lacks.
SORELY LACKS.
But I digress. You answered my questions obliquely. And we all know how fair the US applies these penalties.
So, who cares really? Hence, the better for the Philippines to seek alternative AFP Modernization options.
Better FA50 weapon systems, cheaper but good quality options for other AFP Acquisitions, with little political strings attached.
BTT.
23
First posts / Re: What-if: 21st century AFP @ Battle for the PH December 8, 1941 to May 8, 1942
« on: January 06, 2017, 02:17:14 PM »So far, the only arm we have that will definitely trump their Japanese in terms of qualitative, numerical and equipment advantages, are the ground forces, both marines and army.
Any IJA force will be decimated, once on Philippine soil.
Let's explore this a bit.
If we are talking about night action. Absolutely. NVG equipped troops backed by FSVs with Elbit thermal imagers will make mince meat of them at night. Throw in the MSSRs and Barrets for decapitation operations . . . they'll have a hell of a first sleep-over.
Things to think about:
Did Japanese troops land with armor?
Did they have artillery? (IIRC, in Malaya, the Japanese would take howitzer apart so that they could be moved using bicycles and then simply re-assembled. Not sure about the Philippines)
Would they use naval gunfire to clear the beaches of any opposition? Given that by the time the land force gets to shore, they should already be aware that the Philippines has "wonder weapons". Could they potentially reach our howitzers and take them out?
[/list]
http://cafefiles.naver.net/data27/2007/10/18/170/npe11e_apils.jpg
1) yes they landed with armor;
Quote
...Japanese air forces had almost liquidated the Allied opposition, and the main invasion troops were carried safely to the Lingayen beaches. Here the main strength of Homma’s XIV Army began to disembark at 0500 hours on December 22. The XLVIII Division, the IX Infantry Regiment, four artillery regiments with 75-mm, 105-mm, 150-mm guns and 150-mm howitzers, two tank regiments with 80/100 tanks, and a large number of service and special troops were put ashore on the north coast of Lingayen Gulf.
http://www3.plala.or.jp/takihome/history.htm
A) 4th Tank Regiment/Lt. Colonel Kumagaya
38 Type 95 Light Tanks
B) 7th Tank Regiment/Colonel Sonoda
34 Type 89 Medium Tanks
14 Type 95 Light Tanks
2 Type 97 Medium Tanks
For more info re: tank specs
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_tanks_of_World_War_II
2) yes, they landed with artillery;
Quote
the fall of Bataan, the Japanese had a straight shot at Corregidor, just 3 miles across the north channel. They didn’t hesitate to set up everything from 75-mm to their big 240-mm guns, all bearing on Corregidor — the bullseye of the target.
For the siege they assembled the best in the Imperial Japanese Army: an Intelligence team of 675 men with flash and sound gear; a squadron of observation planes and a balloon company; 46 155-mm guns; 28 105-mm guns, and 32 75s; but the weapons that were to do the most damage were Colonel Hayakawa’s 240-mm monsters. With the artillery team assembled and with the observation balloon up, the duel started. Observers in the balloon were able to pinpoint targets on Corregidor, by now stripped of protective covering and camouflage, and direct battery fire into any and all positions. It was an uneven fight.
3) while they had NGF, the composition of the IJN Escorts will show they range available to them, and the distances from the beach they'd have to be to reach out and touch PA Arty, and if this would open them to counter battery fire.
http://lastchinaband.com/photos_fall.htm
The link shows photos, the numbers and the timelines in which the Japanese deployed their forces, and what they had with them, and provides an overview of OPFOR strength and movement during that time.
Should provide fodder for interesting discussion.
24
First posts / Re: What-if: 21st century AFP @ Battle for the PH December 8, 1941 to May 8, 1942
« on: December 31, 2016, 04:14:19 PM »how about the air control/superiority question? does everyone agree that the speed, thrust, and altitude advantage of the PAF jets will allow them to prevent any jap bombing sorties (with ATC and wallace providing EW and GCI, and fa50 elm2032 providing local air search)...
I recall @docD initially expressed reservations that the PAF could survive the jap bombings, how does the prognosis look now?
with PA/PMC forces effectively limited in AD assets to just the manually-trained/optical fire-control 20mm and 40mm AA guns, will the 7 PAF jets be enough to gain and sustain air control?
Hey Rem,
I was just about finished with researching various references on how the ME-262 impacted Allied Bomber and Fighter forces.
While 1400 ME-262s were produced, only 204 was combat ready, while of that number, 100 was available at any given time, due to issues with pilot shortages, fuel, jet engine reliability etc.
But those who made it to battle were nigh unstoppable, despite issues with maneuverability, guns, the time needed to bring the aircraft energy up.
We won't have that we the FA-50s or the AS-211s. Also factor in the break in case of emergency F-5 flight. Issues with limited flight maneuver envelop due to structural concerns won't matter in a fight were the PAF would go straight for the bombers, zoom away, and come back for more.
If a handful of (squadron strength at the most) rudimentary jet fighters like ME-262s had that effect on the 1000 bomber raids (not counting P38/47/51 escorts), what more for a squadron of jet fighters that will have no issues of keeping their energy up?
Most of the 262 destroyed were caught while landing or on the ground.
The FA-50s were designed as point defense fighters, and with the elm2032, wont spend too much fuel and time looking for the bombers and zeroes.
25
First posts / Re: What-if: 21st century AFP @ Battle for the PH December 8, 1941 to May 8, 1942
« on: December 31, 2016, 11:49:45 AM »
So far, with regards to the Naval aspect, one caveat I have is the PNs Battle Doctrine, given its current assets on hand.
What sort of cohesion do they have? Will they be able to operate as a battle fleet, and effectively take advantage of the fusion of modern sensors and guns they have?
So far, the only arm we have that will definitely trump their Japanese in terms of qualitative, numerical and equipment advantages, are the ground forces, both marines and army.
Any IJA force will be decimated, once on Philippine soil.
What sort of cohesion do they have? Will they be able to operate as a battle fleet, and effectively take advantage of the fusion of modern sensors and guns they have?
So far, the only arm we have that will definitely trump their Japanese in terms of qualitative, numerical and equipment advantages, are the ground forces, both marines and army.
Any IJA force will be decimated, once on Philippine soil.
26
First posts / Re: What if: 21st century AFP vs British Task Force (Falklands)
« on: December 31, 2016, 11:42:13 AM »Interesting present day comparison from Binkov's Battegrounds:
https://youtu.be/_fg5amio4jU
For a 30 year gap, the only thing the AFP would have is a 21 day lead time (~9000 nm at 18 knots via the suez canal). What can the AFP or GovPH emergency procure to deter the British armada?
It was rumored that Argentina had less than 10 exocets at that time, but they were able to get a momentary shock and awe with the sinking of the HMS Sheffield and Atlantic Conveyor that the British blinked and realized they are not that invincible fleet. More exocets could have turned the tide in Argentina's favor.
The PN deter the Royal Navy TF?
This scenario is a far simpler equation to compute. There is nothing it can do. Too much firepower, technological advancement over the AFP.
We cannot stop them from claiming the spratleys. Any ground force we get to the islands would be subjected to a massive bombardment. They'd be reduced to an ineffective fighting force quickly.
Even if the British exercise a gentleman encounter, by storming the beaches with just a modicum of softening up, it would be no contest.
The FA-50s would be hard pressed against the AD Coverage from the British flotilla. After which they'd have to face AAM equipped Harriers.
The DACT they received from the USAF and ATACS will not prepare them for a gun encounter with the Sea Harriers, where VIFF maneuvers would befuddle them. And they're outnumbered.
And, with very little fuel to stay in the area of engagement, they'd be cannon or missile fodder.
Any A2G missile it may use are the AGM-65s; although there is/was an anti ship version, the most we can do is damage a ship or two.
27
Military History / Re: Did the Philippines make a request for F-5Es?
« on: December 31, 2016, 09:26:49 AM »i know they're old but man its going to be a good addition. we still have crews that are familiar with its flying and maintaining. it will save us some money. i think we need to get all the f-5e/f's retired from other nations and fly em in ours.
Really? Do we really still have crews steeped with F5A/B knowledge? After a decade and 3 years since their retirement?
If there still are, how many would it take to keep the supposedly last resort flight of flyable F-5 Freedom fighters in a state of modicum readiness?
Not to mention F-5E Tigers are larger, has major structural differences, and utilizes antiquated avionics, but compared to what we had in the A/Bs, were a considerable step up?
They're different aircraft, actually.
And qualify your stating the "NEED" to acquire all the F-5E/Fs remaining from other countries. What would they represent in the PAF scheme of things?
To be an effective, and that is dependent on the kind of upgrades it will need to operate in our situation, fighter:
1) it will need a SLEP to last at the very least, 8000 FH.
2) After which, they will need modernizing. avionics, weapon systems certification, etc.
Generalized points of discussion. Then, you'll need a training syllabus to graduate pilots to fly and operate them as a major AFP weapons system.
At what cost?
Wouldn't it make sense to purchase more FA-50s, serving as LIFT and Interim MRF, to prepare the PAF for a sensible MRF?
28
Military History / Re: Did the Philippines make a request for F-5Es?
« on: December 31, 2016, 09:21:20 AM »I saw this last night and was wondering how many people here will misread this historical tibit as a real acquisition today.
1976, Juan Ponce Enrile (DefSec) and William H. Sullivan (US Ambassador) are pretty big giveaways.
PAF never got the "E" models. Interesting to find out what happened. Martial law? US reservation on human rights violations like today?
Slight OT:
We got the F-8s. 1977.
I know you were merely asking, LF, to enlighten yourself, given it was Martial Law and all, but if true, the F-5E inquiry would've been concurrent to a supposed PAF desire to purchase F-15A/Bs, an imitative parlayed by Adnan Kashoggi into the F-8 acquisition, with apparent tacit US Approval.
No offense, but this is addressed to the general audience visiting the site:
I'd like to illustrate how media and trolls would see LF's statement, and without proper research, results in presumptive statements, headlines, etc. hereby clouding the perception of others.
Usapang barbero uwi. Be advised.
Little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
BTT
29
First posts / Re: What-if: 21st century AFP @ Battle for the PH December 8, 1941 to May 8, 1942
« on: December 29, 2016, 07:53:40 AM »No need for paratroops if you have helicopters 12th. Parajumps are inherently harder to coordinate and troops end up being spread out.
C-130s could be used be used to bring in heavier equipment. Artillery pieces, V-300s, etc.
I agree.
However, I was thinking in terms of moving more men faster and farther, in locations where a rough landing strip/area are unavailable. And paratroopers use steerable chutes nowadays, or am I mistaken?
Anyhow, moving forward with the discussion, will the landing at Batan (not to be confused with Bataan), be contested? That's where they established a forward airbase, shortening the distance their fighters needed to travel.
30
War on Drugs / Re: Duterte's War on Drugs
« on: December 29, 2016, 06:05:39 AM »This opens the AFP to direct sanctions. The US State Department Blue Lantern program delivers sanctions and penalties at the Agency Level, which could mean cuts or halts to US military aid.
http://cnnphilippines.com/news/2016/12/08/Duterte-AFP-help-drug-war.htmlQuote
FRONT PAGE NEWS
Duterte seeks AFP help in drug war, says PNP 'fractured
By CNN Philippines Staff
Updated 00:40 AM PHT Thu, December 8, 2016
2.6K15
President Rodrigo Duterte (L) welcomes Lt. Gen. Eduardo Año as new Armed Forces chief.
Metro Manila (CNN Philippines) — Describing the police organization as "fractured," President Rodrigo Duterte repeats his call for the military to step in and help him out with his war against illegal drugs.
In his speech at Camp Aguinaldo on Wednesday during the change of command ceremony of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), Duterte said that "there were so many (police) men and officers involved in the drug industry."
He again admitted that he could not handle the problem on his own — as he would run out of time — and bullets — if he were to deal with this alone.
"And that is why, I repeat my orders and that's the reason why I declared a state of lawlessness so that I can call upon you, the Armed Forces, to help the civilian sector, to help the police. Di nila kaya 'to. At ang pulis mo, the policeman, the very ones who would be preventing the crimes, solving the crimes, arresting the criminals, are themselves into it."
How? And Why?
Can you cite the Program's governing rules and conditions that the Philippines would be violating, necessitating cuts and/or halting aid?
Note that declaring a state of lawlessness in certain areas and calling in the AFP in to assist in such an event is a constitutional provision. There's nothing wrong, per se, with what the President said.
Interesting. Will wait for the provisions governing aid packages under the Blue Lantern program you speak of.
I could find nothing that falls under an allied nation invokes the use of its armed forces to assist in a constitutionally provided option made available to said state.
Perhaps you confuse "EJKs" with law enforcement?
Please show cause for your statement. Or a similar situation elsewhere that a nation invoked the use of its military to help in the law and order situation of a country, and thus US military aid was cut.
Maybe there is/are reference(s) available that you can share, which I may have missed out on.
Again, the questions are:
1) How would the above open the AFP to direct sanctions;
2) Why would military aid be cut.
https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/forms-documents/update-2015-presentations/1375-civil-military-ddtc/filehttp://pmddtc.state.gov/reports/documents/End_Use_FY2012.pdf
http://www.braumillerlaw.com/blue-lantern-highlights-the-need-for-a-strong-compliance-program/