2013 is indeed a good year for South Korea’s KAI T/TA/FA-50 Golden Eagles. In what is seem as an upset coup by Alenia M-346 Master in Israel and Singapore, the South Korean Lead-In-Fighter-Trainer has gathered its strength and manage to clinch important exports deal coming from Indonesia and Iraq. Though the procurement of the Golden Eagle by the Philippines has been confirmed and secured, the latter is still strugling to secure funds to finally realised and finalised the deal.
On December 26, Philippines media has reported that the Defense Department has asked the Presidential Palace to allow the release of a 52% down payment to KAI for the supply of 12 FA-50 jets to PhilAF.
Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin said they have submitted their recommendation to the Office of the President, which will have the final say on the matter.
Nevertheless, it is not expected that the big ticket item, crucial to rearmed and modernise the PhilAF amidst the on and off tension in the South China Sea due to the growing aggresiveness by China to assert its claim over the resource rich waters, would be finalise this year.
Despite the initial hope that 2 FA-50 could be delivered to PhilAF by the end of 2013, it is now thought that delivery of such would only begin in mid 2015.
Ever since its F-5 Freedom Fighter jets were retired in the mid 2000s, PhilAF has to rely on its OV-10F Broncos and Siai Marchetti S.211 jet trainers to maintain its presence over the skies in the West Philippines Sea. But these two aircraft are also ageing fast hence making the Air Force more difficult to enforce its status quo against the Chinese hoards.
To some extend (although debatable), the FA-50 would give the PhilAF the capabilities to better served this daunting role.
Meanwhile, another ASEAN member, Indonesia has received its ninth and tenth T-50i advanced jet trainers which will replace its ageing Hawker Siddeley Hawk Mk.53. The move by the Indonesian Air Force (TNI-AU) echoes those embarked by ROKAF in early 2000s, when the T-50s were inducted into service to also replace the Hawker Siddeley Hawk Mk 67 and Cessna T-37 jet trainers. Both air forces as also the Iraqi Air Force operates the F-16 Falcon jet fighter, the very type that the Golden Eagle’s design was based on.
To date, before any finalised deal is being concluded with the Philippines, ROKAF remain the only operators of the FA-50. This armed version of the T-50 is marketed as possible F-5 replacement, which is still flying hard and strong with many countries including Malaysia, Taiwan and Thailand.
Thailand for example, is looking for new replacement of its Aero L-39ZA/ART Albatross advance jet trainers which are currently serving with the RTAF. (here) Beside the T-50, other candidates being considered are the M-346 as well as the Chinese made Hongdul L-15 (an analogous to the M-346/Yak-130). Being an operator of F-5s and F-16s, the T-50 might still stand a chance to prevail in front of its two other competitors.
ASEAN’s first F-5E operator, the RMAF, has been operating this fighter ever since the first example was delivered in 1975. Nevertheless, with the induction of more modern and capable fighters into service, such as the Mig-29N/NUB, the F/A-18D and the SU-30MKM, most of the RMAF F-5 fleet has been retired and pull out of service, with the exception of two each of the F-5E, F-5F and RF-5E. All six are still serving No 12 Skn at Butterworth AFB.
Nevertheless, it’s a matter of time before these fighters being replaced by newer one and perhaps when the time comes, probably the FA-50 might be one of those considered.
Recently, I’ve had an interesting discussion in the Tweeter on whether the FA-50 really is something which is up to the ante. It is true that in the East China Sea front, it wont probably stand a chance against PLANAF and PLAAF fighters. Interestingly, Senkaku lies directly in the middle of all belligerents main airbase. Worse, these airbases houses today’s most modern fighters including Shenyang J-11, Chengdu J-10, Mitsubishi/McDonnell Douglas F-15J Eagle as well as others. I don’t think that ROKAF would be deploying FA-50 in these areas.
But considering the fact that the nearest PLANAF base relative to the South China Sea’s Spratly Islands is about 600 nautical miles far, any type of aircraft deployed by other claimant countries would definitely have some sort of advantages since their respective bases are much nearer that their northern rival.
If PLANAF did not deploy its sole and only aircraft carrier, its shore-base fighters would need a complex support from PLAAF H-6 air tankers. The Shenyang J-10 has a range of almost 1000 nautical miles which means the fighter is only able to be in combat airspace for a few minutes if un-refuel.
Countries like Vietnam and Malaysia, which had Su-30 Flankers, would enjoy a lot of time in combat airspace, thanks to its un-refuel range of 1619 nautical miles. Labuan AFB, where the Malaysian Flankers could be forward deployed is just 300 nautical miles while VPAF airbase in Bien Hoa where its Su-30MK2 reside is just a little over 400 nautical miles. The Palawan Island on the other hand is just 213 nautical miles away, more than enough for the FA-50′s 1000 nautical miles range when deployed from the island.
Remember the destruction of Royal Navy’s Force Z to Japanese naval bombers off Kuantan? Most of these Betty and Nell bombers were shore based from Japanese held airfield in Indo-China but had single-handedly decimate Allied’s only available strike flotilla in the Pacific during the opening stage of World War 2.
Any air operations over the Spratlys would be nothing more than similar to those of the Falkland Island. Due to its huge distant from the Argentinian mainland, most of shore based FAA fighters are only able to be at combat area for just a short period of time. Any intense air combat over the airspace would mean that these aircraft would not going to make it to its Argentinian mainland airbases.
Despite having an aircraft carrier, China would also face similar problems like those suffered by the Argentinian Navy. Both Vietnam and Malaysia possesses submarines which would definitely create problem to any carrier strike group. China should know as it had once create nuisance to a US Fleet in 2006.(here)
Although not losing any aircraft carrier during Falkland War, it has learn through bitter way when its ARA General Belgrano cruiser was sunk by a Royal Navy submarine. The sinking of the Argentinian crusier has effectively hindered any attack from the Exocet armed Super Etendard fighters embarked from its aircraft carrier. It is pertinent to note here that the only available air asset available to the British forces in the Falklands were just a handful of subsonic Hawker Harrier VSTOL jump jets.
Easier said than done, it’s not easy to fight in someone’s turf which if far away from one’s own turf..
On December 26, Philippines media has reported that the Defense Department has asked the Presidential Palace to allow the release of a 52% down payment to KAI for the supply of 12 FA-50 jets to PhilAF.
Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin said they have submitted their recommendation to the Office of the President, which will have the final say on the matter.
Nevertheless, it is not expected that the big ticket item, crucial to rearmed and modernise the PhilAF amidst the on and off tension in the South China Sea due to the growing aggresiveness by China to assert its claim over the resource rich waters, would be finalise this year.
Despite the initial hope that 2 FA-50 could be delivered to PhilAF by the end of 2013, it is now thought that delivery of such would only begin in mid 2015.
Ever since its F-5 Freedom Fighter jets were retired in the mid 2000s, PhilAF has to rely on its OV-10F Broncos and Siai Marchetti S.211 jet trainers to maintain its presence over the skies in the West Philippines Sea. But these two aircraft are also ageing fast hence making the Air Force more difficult to enforce its status quo against the Chinese hoards.
To some extend (although debatable), the FA-50 would give the PhilAF the capabilities to better served this daunting role.
Meanwhile, another ASEAN member, Indonesia has received its ninth and tenth T-50i advanced jet trainers which will replace its ageing Hawker Siddeley Hawk Mk.53. The move by the Indonesian Air Force (TNI-AU) echoes those embarked by ROKAF in early 2000s, when the T-50s were inducted into service to also replace the Hawker Siddeley Hawk Mk 67 and Cessna T-37 jet trainers. Both air forces as also the Iraqi Air Force operates the F-16 Falcon jet fighter, the very type that the Golden Eagle’s design was based on.
To date, before any finalised deal is being concluded with the Philippines, ROKAF remain the only operators of the FA-50. This armed version of the T-50 is marketed as possible F-5 replacement, which is still flying hard and strong with many countries including Malaysia, Taiwan and Thailand.
Thailand for example, is looking for new replacement of its Aero L-39ZA/ART Albatross advance jet trainers which are currently serving with the RTAF. (here) Beside the T-50, other candidates being considered are the M-346 as well as the Chinese made Hongdul L-15 (an analogous to the M-346/Yak-130). Being an operator of F-5s and F-16s, the T-50 might still stand a chance to prevail in front of its two other competitors.
 |
| RTAF L-39 Albatross |
ASEAN’s first F-5E operator, the RMAF, has been operating this fighter ever since the first example was delivered in 1975. Nevertheless, with the induction of more modern and capable fighters into service, such as the Mig-29N/NUB, the F/A-18D and the SU-30MKM, most of the RMAF F-5 fleet has been retired and pull out of service, with the exception of two each of the F-5E, F-5F and RF-5E. All six are still serving No 12 Skn at Butterworth AFB.
Nevertheless, it’s a matter of time before these fighters being replaced by newer one and perhaps when the time comes, probably the FA-50 might be one of those considered.
Recently, I’ve had an interesting discussion in the Tweeter on whether the FA-50 really is something which is up to the ante. It is true that in the East China Sea front, it wont probably stand a chance against PLANAF and PLAAF fighters. Interestingly, Senkaku lies directly in the middle of all belligerents main airbase. Worse, these airbases houses today’s most modern fighters including Shenyang J-11, Chengdu J-10, Mitsubishi/McDonnell Douglas F-15J Eagle as well as others. I don’t think that ROKAF would be deploying FA-50 in these areas.
But considering the fact that the nearest PLANAF base relative to the South China Sea’s Spratly Islands is about 600 nautical miles far, any type of aircraft deployed by other claimant countries would definitely have some sort of advantages since their respective bases are much nearer that their northern rival.
If PLANAF did not deploy its sole and only aircraft carrier, its shore-base fighters would need a complex support from PLAAF H-6 air tankers. The Shenyang J-10 has a range of almost 1000 nautical miles which means the fighter is only able to be in combat airspace for a few minutes if un-refuel.
Countries like Vietnam and Malaysia, which had Su-30 Flankers, would enjoy a lot of time in combat airspace, thanks to its un-refuel range of 1619 nautical miles. Labuan AFB, where the Malaysian Flankers could be forward deployed is just 300 nautical miles while VPAF airbase in Bien Hoa where its Su-30MK2 reside is just a little over 400 nautical miles. The Palawan Island on the other hand is just 213 nautical miles away, more than enough for the FA-50′s 1000 nautical miles range when deployed from the island.
Remember the destruction of Royal Navy’s Force Z to Japanese naval bombers off Kuantan? Most of these Betty and Nell bombers were shore based from Japanese held airfield in Indo-China but had single-handedly decimate Allied’s only available strike flotilla in the Pacific during the opening stage of World War 2.
Any air operations over the Spratlys would be nothing more than similar to those of the Falkland Island. Due to its huge distant from the Argentinian mainland, most of shore based FAA fighters are only able to be at combat area for just a short period of time. Any intense air combat over the airspace would mean that these aircraft would not going to make it to its Argentinian mainland airbases.
Despite having an aircraft carrier, China would also face similar problems like those suffered by the Argentinian Navy. Both Vietnam and Malaysia possesses submarines which would definitely create problem to any carrier strike group. China should know as it had once create nuisance to a US Fleet in 2006.(here)
Although not losing any aircraft carrier during Falkland War, it has learn through bitter way when its ARA General Belgrano cruiser was sunk by a Royal Navy submarine. The sinking of the Argentinian crusier has effectively hindered any attack from the Exocet armed Super Etendard fighters embarked from its aircraft carrier. It is pertinent to note here that the only available air asset available to the British forces in the Falklands were just a handful of subsonic Hawker Harrier VSTOL jump jets.
Easier said than done, it’s not easy to fight in someone’s turf which if far away from one’s own turf..
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar
Catatan: Hanya anggota dari blog ini yang dapat mengirim komentar.