Topic: which is better ? ...new jet fighters or multiple surface to air defence system

[asanti]

Which is better ... buying those fancy jet fighters at maybe 30 million each with support  system or we copy vietnam and other asian countries which have a vast arsenal of surface to air defence system like long range missiles, short range missiles, shoulder fired missles, close air defense multi barreled guns ........

[frost entangle]

Why buy? when you can have it for tech research. buying either equipments will not ensure you good offense or defense it will be rendered obsolete in the near future whereas doing tech research and implementation would keep us safe now and in the future although it would really take time.

[backfill]

Why buy? when you can have it for tech research. buying either equipments will not ensure you good offense or defense it will be rendered obsolete in the near future whereas doing tech research and implementation would keep us safe now and in the future although it would really take time.

tama!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
dami kaya sa danao........ wala lang gov't support....

[bathalatao]

it all boils down to modernization budget and maintenance of any purchased equipment. To give you some Ideas on how much is the cost per flight hour, I copied and pasted some date from another forum (timawa.net)


   


MRF

F-16: Between $3,600 [1] to $9,000 [2] per flight hour

F-5E: $3,910 per flight hour [3]

F-5A/B: P114,660 per flight hour (1999 prices) [15]

F-8H/P: P92,690 per flight hour (1999 prices) [16]

F-18A: $5,977 per flight hour [4]

F/A-18C: $3,871 per flight hour [7]

Gripen: $2,000 [5] to $3,000 [21] [22]

Mirage 2000: $2,700 per flight hour [6]

Mig 21: $4,500 per flight hour (Lease rate, therefore includes profit mark-up) [8]

Mig 17: $2,300 per flight hour (Lease rate, therefore includes profit mark-up) [9]

F-4 Phantom: $5,628.52 to 5,804.41 per flight hour (See here to determine how these figures were computed)

F-15: $6,000 to $8,000 per flight hour [13]

Su-30MK: $12,000 per flight hour (RTAF) [19] [20]

F/A-22: $44,000 per flight hour [21]

[bathalatao]

it all boils down to modernization budget and maintenance of any purchased equipment. To give you some Ideas on how much is the cost per flight hour, I copied and pasted some date from another forum (timawa.net)


   


MRF

F-16: Between $3,600 [1] to $9,000 [2] per flight hour

F-5E: $3,910 per flight hour [3]

F-5A/B: P114,660 per flight hour (1999 prices) [15]

F-8H/P: P92,690 per flight hour (1999 prices) [16]

F-18A: $5,977 per flight hour [4]

F/A-18C: $3,871 per flight hour [7]

Gripen: $2,000 [5] to $3,000 [21] [22]

Mirage 2000: $2,700 per flight hour [6]

Mig 21: $4,500 per flight hour (Lease rate, therefore includes profit mark-up) [8]

Mig 17: $2,300 per flight hour (Lease rate, therefore includes profit mark-up) [9]

F-4 Phantom: $5,628.52 to 5,804.41 per flight hour (See here to determine how these figures were computed)

F-15: $6,000 to $8,000 per flight hour [13]

Su-30MK: $12,000 per flight hour (RTAF) [19] [20]

F/A-22: $44,000 per flight hour [21]

oooppppsss... data hindi date.

[asanti]

kaya nga ..mas mura kung multi defense misile system na lang ...tingnan nyo ang vietnam ....during the vietnam war the modern air force of USA is no match versus the vietnam air defense arsenal
our army is already comparable to the chinese ..we have one of the most battle experience army while most of the chinese soldiers are not battle tested

[bathalatao]

kaya nga ..mas mura kung multi defense misile system na lang ...tingnan nyo ang vietnam ....during the vietnam war the modern air force of USA is no match versus the vietnam air defense arsenal
our army is already comparable to the chinese ..we have one of the most battle experience army while most of the chinese soldiers are not battle tested

Yup, you are right asanti, multi defense missile system is much cheaper..

But the problem when we talk about using defense missile (considering its positioning and range), it only means that the enemy has already in our airspace. But if we have some multi role fighter planes that could intercept  incoming Jets or naval boats before they could enter our territory (we could use the rancudo airfield in spratly's island to launch our jets) that will give us more security. The best thing to do is to engaged the enemy while they are still outside our territory, if ever they set foot on our land... that will be a great devastation....  back to world war II situation, men being killed and women being raped.

[Zornhau]

AFAIK, hindi pwedeng puro SAM at AAA lang ang defense. Unang una kung gagamit ka kasi ng missiles. Kailangang sure ka muna sa target mo. So sometimes you'll have to use planes to identify the target. You might end up painting the wrong target..


____________________________________________________________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

[geshpenst]

SAMs and AAA are much cheaper. hindi rin ganon kahamal ang training. new jets = pilots, fuel, ammo. gastos.

kaso air defense is JUST defense. hindi ka pwede mag-counter-offense.

air power is flexible. just look at the f-14 tomcat. air to air lang dapat yun, ginawan ng paraan ng ilang mechaniko para maging bomber kaya nagkaroon ng mga 'bombcats'. kaso flexibility (ie quality service) is also costly.

kaya naman afp needs to tailor its equipment to our present threat and other possible threats as well. terrorist/counterinsurgency ang pressing concerns. possible china makabangga dahil sa spratlys. kung air defense ang pipiliin, nakatengga lang yan waiting for an attack. hindi pwede ilaban sa mga terrorista. pag jets, pwede kang magbomba, magpatrol, etc.

kaso magastos. baka wala pang 5 yrs. eh di na kayang supportahan ang fighting standards training at mga peacetime missions. kung ganon lang eh wag na lang magkaron ng jets, fuel pa lang, mamumulubi na.

and don't think pabor ako sa air def. tignan nyo US, may jets and air def, hindi pa rin napigilan ang 9/11. kasi kung gusto ng attacker talaga, mahirap silang pigilan.

[dark_machine]

IMO, we dont need jets since it cost pretty high per flight. So, I think, we need those ground defense that capable of the ground and air defense. And that's more effective I think. But jets also are necessary for survey, so we need a few of them.

[kluverbucy]

Nothing at all.. All we need is FULL BATTLE GEARS for the Militaries, Rifle, granade, Vest, and mga Sasakyan na pang transport, ang Fighter Jet isang missile ng kalaban sabog agad, Ang Air bahala na ang gma kaalyado natin dyan, LAND dapat ang palakasin.

[asanti]

we will need airborne radar platforms like AWACS planes to really pinpoint where the dangers are ..... and maybe need a few jets but i still think we invest more on mobile ground air defense system cause we can not hope to match other countries resources in air warfare

[Fossilized]

EMP research... since electronic laht.. sana may makaisip ng katulad ng solar storm na kayang mag disable ng microchips.. para pag pasok sa defense perimeter.. kusa n lang cla mahhulog sa langit.. XD

[wickedsaint]

medium range ballistic missiles dapat i-deploy dito satin..tapos nuclear ang  warhead..hehe..sigurado ako hindi mangangahas kahit sino..yung USSR nga dati kating kati na durugin ang china pero hindi nila magawa kasi kahit papano alam nila na matalo man nila china, malaking problema pa rin ang nuclear weapons nito..

[Adonai]

what we need is a little jets and more SAMs and AAA. paano kung ibang parte pala yung lulusubin nila? hindi naman siguro lahat malalagyan ng SAMs at AAA sa pinas.  siguro 1:4 ang ratio. 1 jet 4 SAMs. just my two cent.

[Zornhau]

AAA? Yes mas mura nga ito compare to 4th Gen. to 5th Gen. Fighter jets. Pero dehamak na mababa ang range ng attack at the higher the altitude of the target mas mahirap tamaan. AAA AFAIK is suitable lang talaga for acquiring low flying targets. Samantalang for SAMs di rin masasabi na mas mura ang mga ito sa mga jet fighters. Ex. Patriot Missile System palang yung isang missile is malamang mas mahal pa sa maraming klase ng eroplano. Pano pa yung expenditures para sa mga equipments and navigation systems ng missile. When you are buying missiles and missile launcher isang buong system at package ang bibilihin mo same with aircrafts. Kasama na training, spare parts, maintenance equipments etc.

And one more thing. most of the Philippines' area of responsibility eh dagat. Paano ipapakalat ang mga SAMs at AAA? San kaya magandang ipuwesto ang mga ito? May long range na radars ba tayo na operational din para maintercept ang mga targets na malapit sa edge ng area of responsibility natin? Aabot ba ang mga SAMs na ito mula sa main island papunta lets say sa spratleys? anong model kaya ito? at mas o mas mahal ba siya sa mga 3rd gen, 4th gen to 5th gen fighter planes?

[frost entangle]

As I have said. Imagine the costs of those equipment converted into tech research funding. I don't see our country as offensive, pwera nalang yung mga kelangan nating ipadala pag may joint operations with other allied countries. What we need is defense and the key to a successful defense system is being original.

[gkhan]

Compared with US or China or India, buong land mass ang bansa nila. Tayo ay archipelago at kalat kalap pa.  Hence, guarding our territory would necessitate a system that can cover a very long coastline.  Hence, mas effective kun marami tayong fast attack patrol crafts na fully armed cris-crossing the West Philippine Sea and fully synch and integrated with a radar system which can monitor any incoming air or sea craft.  We can buy them cheap from Australia kasi decommission nila maraming patrol crafts nila ngayon kasi mag modernize sila.  Now, these patrol crafts can radio to one or two submarines na meron sea-to-air missiles for incoming aircraft or exocet for incoming seacraft.  Cheap submarines can be bought from Russia and retroffited here with missiles from France who are more than willing to sell now dahil kailangan nila ng pera.  Pag nakapasok, then, dun pa lang sila pwede salubungin ng multi-role fighter jets natin.  We can get the Mirage2000 of Brazil kasi mag modernize na sila now at bibili na naman sila ng bago. 

Yun equipment na bibilhin or gagawin should follow a national defense concept.  We can not be offensive so kailangan ang hardware na pang defense lang - na pansalubong sa sinumang papasok sa atin.  Pag ginamitan tayo ng long range missiles nila coming from their mainland, that can be tracked by a radar and that missile can be met by a submarine-based anti-missile system.  I am sure di nila kaya mag land ng army dahil matatalo sila sa isang guerilla war.  Remember that it was the Filipino who invented guerilla warfare at dito rin sa atin nag train ang mga US Special Forces.

[kenkoy2005]

..mas maganda parin kc ang air attack tactics lalo na sa pagpenatrate sa ground ng enemy, meron kc akong naread na manual ng military.. ginagamit rin pala nila ang mga jets sa ibat-bang purpose.. so ang magiging bentahe lang talaga ng mga developing country like philippine,vietnam,indonesia,malysia na walang jet.. ay sa ground, d niu ba alam na natalo ang america sa vietnam kahit na ang viet. army e walang mga plane na ganyn.. ginamit nalng nila ang alam nila sa pamumundok.. at other ground(jungle) tactics..

ang u.s nuon walang alam sa jungle kya nagpa-train sila sa mga pinoy.. kya kahit paano nag-advance knowledge nila.. pero di parin matutumbasan ang mga taong experto sa bundok..

so ganun nga kung nagka gyera isip ng government natin mamumundok nalang sila.. at mang guerilla tactics ulit

[Unclefrancy]

I'm going for the Multiple surface to air system...Mainly using the FIM 92 stinger missile which is considered a Man-Portable Air-Defense System (MANPADS).  And I'd copy what the vietnamese did.  They built a net work of tunnels in the jungle to hide their troops from satelites, radar and infrared.  Learing from dessert storm and the other wars in iraq.  the U.S used stealth fighters to destroy radar installations and S.A.M. sites.  But in the Vietnam war the U.S. lost to a less equipped, less technologically advance foe.  What the vietnamese had going for them was gorilla warfare.  So if the philippines has lots of underground tunnels like the Chatuchak tunnel network in the vietnamese Jungle to hide the manpower and the stinger missiles.  A tunnel system would also allow undetected mobility.  The cost of a FIM 92 Stinger is $38,000 each, it's cheaper than a fighter plane.  And if we every get to have fighter planes like F-16.  Whose stopping a more technologically advanced enemy from blowing up our planes.  Dehado tayo so guerilla warfare is the way to go.  Boats or bangka's and vehicles like jeepneys or pickups can be platforms to launch stinger missles.