LCA/FLIT tender closing date 22nd September

Who will won? Hopefully jf17

Pakistani aircraft? Combat proven and reliable or not?

Thought a Korean news mentioned TUDM wanted a BVR capable LCA & the FA50 aren't capable of it?

Personally doubt anyone else can offer a better deal then m346.
Since it's capable of BVR out of the box with 7 or something jet being free.

It's not.

M346fa needs the same modifications to make it BVR capable that a T50 would to become a Fa50.

You're insane if you think you can build a UUV 1/3rd the size of a Scorpene for 3 million dollars.

And what's the use of 9 UUVs? Who do you intend them to fight, and what are their forces?

Not according to laws of physics. Fuel, dude.

Nope...
LCA is not MRCA. It is not designed to engage in air to air combat. It has only limited capability in air to air or aiir to ground combat.

I don't know if TUDM want LCA with BVR capability....that is too much to ask and too much to hope for any LCA can do what MRCA can.

Even if they can make a BVR capable LCA. The question is will it worth to buy that?

This post has been edited by Lampuajaib: Sep 7 2021, 09:33 AM

3 million dollars is the price of a single Kratos XQ-28 valkrie UCAV. I am putting that price to show that going unmanned can reduce cost compared to manned version.

If you really read carefully, the 1/3rd is not the size, but the price that i expect of the UUV. the price should be around 1/3rd of the scorpene price. you know the price of a scorpenes right?

What is the use of 9 UUVs?
https://therestlesstechnophile.com/2021/02/...sistent-strike/

As stealthy missile carriers for second strike capability. something that can lurk underwater and launch a salvo of NSM missiles to the enemy naval base for example. As our asymmetric deterrance. To enable us to save some money to buy large OPVs for peacetime missions.





UCAV range 1700km + missile range say KEPD 350 that is carried by the UCAV 300km. Isn't that 2000km total range? Its not physics, its just comprehension that you need.

UCAV numbers apply direct to UUV concept lmao

Whose naval base? How many missiles? To accomplish what?

NSM is NSM, Taurus is Taurus, why you say one missile but cite performance of another

This post has been edited by KLthinker91: Sep 7 2021, 09:36 AM

you did not know of the FA-50 Block 20 and its BVR capability??

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/def...50-golden-eagle

M346 capable of BVR out of the box? that is the most hilarious statement i have ever heard. It has maximum detection range of less than 100km due to its tiny size. So it can never be BVR capable unless you redesign the whole front cockpit section to have bigger nose radome and put in a new bigger radar.

https://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/08.a...arte019.en.html

whose naval base? anyone that attacks us first and steal our EEZ. If china, then it would be Sanya on Hainan

https://thediplomat.com/2017/03/chinas-most...-military-base/

to accomplish a deterrence capability. An essential element in successful deterrence is a degree of uncertainty on the part of a would-be aggressor as to whether the target power, although attacked and badly damaged, will nonetheless retaliate—even at the risk of suffering further, crippling damage in a second attack.


NSM is for the unmanned underwater vehicle UUV.

Taurus is on the unmanned combat aerial vehicle UCAV.

because you say it is impossible for 2000km when i was talking about UCAV.

reading and comprehension problems?

or i need to spoonfed all the data to you?

Is it adequate deterrence?

UCAV of 1700km range that is unjammable and can send in a cruise missile with impunity? Lmao such a drone doesn't exist yet and you think WE can do it and without the other superpowers developing a counter?

Who on earth do you think we are lol

Combat proven? Yes. Reliable? No.

When you compare M346FA to the FA-50

The M346FA has inferior speed, inferior range, inferior weapons load weight, inferior radar when compared to the FA-50. The only similarity is probably the price. M346FA performance is just about equal in performance to our current Hawk 208. FA-50 can do most of what our former MiG-29 can do except the Mach 2.2 top speed, which the FA-50 can only manage Mach 1.5. So why do you want to get the M346FA for the LCA?

Itu bukan kickbacks, but offset
it was clearly documented between government and government deals
mana2 major procurement semua ada offset between government involved
bukan senang satu negara nak bayar harga besar macam tu.

BAe was favourite to win due to the offsets la
siap sangup bagi free T1 for every T3 Typhoon bought with free upgrade to T2
kau rasa?

Kickbacks ko tak nampak bang

MMRCA?
Dah tutup lama dah, bila menteri at that time cakap budget MMRCA sedia ada akan shift to MPA and UAV procurement. Tak silap aku before 2018.

Pasal UAV dulu 2018 finalize dah kontrak, siap dapat discount under US EDA lagi but then last minutes zaman menhan bodoh tu cancel kontrak ni. Jadi US counter offer dengan UCAV tapi dapat kat mangkuk tu senyap je. Last yang dapat UCAV to Taiwan, tapi Taiwan bayar harga penuh
I remember the price for that same UCAV Malaysia only have to pay about 1//3 je

Yes the unseen kickbacks is what the politicians are excited about, even if we don't really have the 2.5 billion dollars to waste on just 12 Typhoons.


I would not call the MQ-9 Predator a "UCAV" but for a similar capability, as a learning step for malaysian UAV operations I would prefer malaysia to go with the Bayraktar TB2. Please get some of those TB2 before Indonesia does...

Getting to learn recent operational experience of TB2 operators in Syria, Libya and Nagorno Karabakh would be priceless for malaysia to develop its own UAV and UCAV capabilities.

Even 1/3 of the price of the MQ-9 Predator system sold to Taiwan, we could get like 3 squadrons of the bayraktar TB2 (36 units)

https://www.defensenews.com/unmanned/2020/1...hase-by-taiwan/

https://www.thedefensepost.com/2021/04/20/m...yraktar-drones/

This post has been edited by alexz23: Sep 7 2021, 12:39 PM

Right now Iraq and Latvia (a NATO country) and even Serbia is interested in the Bayraktar TB2

https://www.thedefensepost.com/2021/09/01/i...h-weapons-deal/

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2021/06/busin...-expresses.html

https://balkaninsight.com/2020/10/06/serbia...h-armed-drones/

TB2 has now in service or has been ordered by Turkey, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Morocco, Libya, Qatar and Poland (2nd NATO country after Turkey to get the TB2)

Don't know.
Leonardo the one that claim theirs are BVR capable
Use the same radar as Gripen C, can use Rafale targeting pod.
And unlike KAI, already have a finish product that's already being sold to Turkmenistan.

I only said it's highly unlikely KAI would want to spend for R&D to make FA50 BVR capable then sold 18 jet for the price of 11 unless they know for sure they going to win it.

Don't know.
Just repeat what I read.

Probably the contract is design simply to give Leonardo the advantage?

Then what?

Let's go buy a Turkish drone then an American drone to do the kind of mission the American drone are design to do?

This post has been edited by darth5zaft: Sep 7 2021, 02:56 PM

FA-50 fighter variants have been delivered to Philippines, Iraq and ROKAF itself which are AMRAAM-capable. Koreans even considered adding cruise missiles. The ELM2032 is well capable of adding most any Israeli missile, but haven't integrated only.