Well, to be fair Indonesia is the largest country in ASEAN region, so practically it needs a somewhat larger than usual armed forces. Being a collection of widely-distributed islands also magnifies this need (need more ships and planes to cover more ground across seas).

To have Indonesia as armed only as the level of a significantly smaller-sized state like Singapore is illogical.

I think now that the cash-rich TNI is seriously upping their capabilities, some players in the region will start to get nervous. Probably Malaysia will also, but I doubt we'd bother as much as we don't have the means to spend that much cash to match them in the first place.

TNI have tons of power projection already, due to the nature of their terrain. They can easily transport forces across significant distances by their air and naval units. You kind of need that capability if your country is an archipelago.

I wonder where will this fighter get its stealth features? I don't see any angular features that usually is associated with stealth design.

China already have 2 stealth fighter designs (J-20 & J-31) on advanced stages of testing, so I don't think its such big deal for them.

Also, most stealth features come from the use of radar deflection, so good stealth fighters have this certain common 'look' to them, and I'm not currently seeing it on this plane, at least in this photo.

This post has been edited by MilitaryMadness: Jan 29 2016, 02:23 PM

I'd say almost 99% unlikely any aggressive action will happen between both countries, period. The truth is both countries are intertwined wayyy too much to consider any conflict between them. Heck, both Malaysia and Singapore are each other's biggest trade and economic partners with bilateral trade around nearly 20% of all foreign trades going on between both countries. The slightest thought of armed conflict will possibly be economic suicide for both countries.

Asshats from both countries who advocate this and that military actions against are probably naive morons with no understanding of international relations.

Why is this even an article?
Must be slow news day.

This post has been edited by MilitaryMadness: Jan 30 2016, 10:44 AM

All good MBTs built in the past 50 years can swim. Just slap on a snorkel and you're good to go.



What so special about K2 MBT swimming that makes this newsworthy is beyond me.

People do realize 'Andy McNab' is a pseudonym, right? His actual name is Steven Mitchell.

He was an actual SAS trooper and I think his face is still censored whenever he is interviewed.

American mercenary leader among dozens killed in Yemen ballistic missile attack on Saudi coalition base in Southern Yemen



An American mercenary leader, said to be named 'Colonel Nicholas Petros' were among dozens killed when a Tochka (NATO: SS-21 Scarab) tactical ballistic missile hit a Saudi coalition base in Al-Anad in Southern Yemen.

'Colonel Petros', a Lebanese-American, is purportedly was hired from a US-based mercenary company, allegedly Academi (formerly Blackwater security) to oversee the mercenary combat units hired by the Saudi-led coalition on its military support to deposed Yemeni president Abdullah Mansur Hadi.

Besides the death of personnel, some Saudi helicopters deployed at the base were also damaged in the missile attack.

Strategic Weapons Review: MGR-1 'Honest John' unguided nuclear rocket


Technicians inspect an Honest John rocket

The MGR-1 'Honest John' rocket was the first nuclear-capable surface-to-surface missile in the US arsenal. Designated Artillery Rocket XM31, the first such rocket was tested 29 June 1951 and the first production rounds were delivered in January 1953. The designator was changed to M31 in September 1953.

The Honest John was a large but simple fin-stabilized, unguided artillery rocket weighing 2,640 kilograms (5,820 lb) in its initial M-31 nuclear-armed version. Mounted on the back of a truck, the rocket was aimed in much the same way as a cannon and then fired up an elevated ramp, igniting four small spin rockets as it cleared the end of the ramp.

The M-31 originally had a range of 24.8 kilometres (15.4 mi). As the rocket was unguided, accuracy is negligible with a circular error probability (CEP) of around 1,000 meters. Early tests exhibited more scatter on target than was acceptable when the rocket was conventionally armed. Development of an upgraded Honest John, M-50, was undertaken in 1960 to improve accuracy and extend range. This included the addition of booster rockets and smaller stabilizing fins to reduce wind deflection, this increased range to around 50 kilometers (31 mi) and the rocket's CEP was also improved to 250m.

The Honest John was armed with either a 2, 10 or 20kt nuclear warhead. There was also a 15kt airburst nuclear weapon designed to burst above the battlefield. Alternatively, the rocket could also be armed with a 1,500lb high-explosive warhead or a cluster bomblet dispenser. Chemical weapons containing Sarin gas canisters were also fitted to some Honest John rockets.

The Honest John was largely replaced in the 1970s with much more modern and capable weapons, but conventionally-armed Honest John units still served with many other US allies such as Greece or South Korea until the late 1980s.

This is wishful thinking propaganda.

No respectable General in any army would be anywhere near any sort of battlefield these days other than the occasional parade inspections. It's simply not their jobs.

Also Condor APC very easy to maintain and service. That's why they have lasted this long. Most of its key parts including engine, transmission and drive axle are the same as Daimler-Benz UNIMOG lorries so spare parts are cheap and can be ordered from civilian stocks. So the Condor APC basically a UNIMOG lorry with an armored shell.

As an amusing side note, I heard that any Daimler-Benz repair and service center are fully qualified to service and repair any Condor unit. Imagine that.

Haha these newfangled SF helmets sure lets people hang a lot of tactical things off them, but to me it looks like their ballistic protection may have a lot to be desired.

This post has been edited by MilitaryMadness: Feb 6 2016, 05:55 PM

That's pretty much near-impossible to do, considering Chechens are invariably the best fighters IS have at at the moment.

Sometimes the point of having an air defense system is just have it standing there, as a deterrent.

You don't need to shoot down every plane that goes into your territory, usually just a few planes shot down here and there is usually enough to convince the enemy that their fighter/bomber planes will be too valuable to risk, whatever the gains may be.

Barring that, worse-case scenario is you will force the enemy to restrict their tactics and missions to enable them avoid the air defense network. There are many examples in recent wars where the threat from high and medium-altitude SAMs has forced enemy planes to lower their operational altitude where they don't have as much space to maneuver and thus became more vulnerable to point defense and light anti-aircraft guns & cannons.

A MiG-15 would cost around $150,000 USD in 1950, about $1.3 million USD in today's money. Pretty cheap.

Russian ejector seats have gyro-powered stabilization system that uses small thrusters. That way even in what position you eject you will always be auto-corrected to be upright in midair.

Some pilots lose their lives during ejection because their parachutes deploy when they are not in a stable upright position, so the parachutes don't deploy correctly or even can entangle with the seat itself, plunging the pilots to death.

The act of using an ejector seat is an inherently a dangerous and violent affair. The G-forces involved during the sudden acceleration of the seat ejecting would stress the heart and organs, while the cockpit area surrounding the seat has a lot of sharp surfaces that can seriously cut the arms or legs if caught.

Even successfully parachuting out of the plane itself is not a guarantee of safety. You can get major injuries hitting a lot of hard stuff on the way down or you can break legs with an incorrect landing.

I got a elder relative who was a RAMD veteran in the 1970s, he liked to tell us this story where there was during one of his deployment to a 'hot' jungle base in a communist black area, he swears he never removed his boots for the entire 3-month deployment period for fear he won't have the time to put them back on in case communists attacked.

It sounds funny to me back then, but later I realized how stressful and dangerous it must be for him and everyone there for it to get to that level.