RSS

Dua Sukhoi Dilock Missile

20 Feb

Sukhoi 27SK dan 30Mk TNI AU

Berita dihari jumat siang ini sangat mengagetkan berbagai pihak, sampai saat saya menulis artikel ini banyak teori-teori bermunculan berkenaan dengan berita dua pesawat Sukhoi 30mk2 kita dilock (multiple lock kah?) oleh sesuatu yang tidak diketahui.. Mulai dari teori yang masuk akal, sampai dengan pernyataan yang merendahkan pilot kita dan teknologi yang dimiliki Su-30Mk2.

Saya akan bercerita sedikit tentang proses lock terhadap sebuah pesawat, ketika radar pesawat A mengidentifikasi pesawat B, ketika proses identifikasi ini terjadi maka “perang” jamming akan terjadi, pesawat B akan memancarkan gelombang untuk “menutup” mata radar pesawat A dan radar pesawat A juga akan melakukan hal yang sama. Hal ini dilakukan pesawat A untuk mengidentifikasi pesawat B, sementara pada pesawat B akan muncul informasi yang menyatakan sumber radar apa yang mengidentikasinya (bisa dari pesawat, SAM dan kapal laut atau unknown apabila tidak dapat diketahui sumber radarnya) serta arah darimana radar itu berasal, cara membaca radar tersebut juga muncul di MFD pesawat A. Ketika pesawat A berinisiatif menghancurkan pesawat B maka pilot pesawat A akan meng arm kan (mengaktifkan) missile yang dibawanya setelah itu radar akan mengunci dan di pesawat B akan muncul bunyi tit..tit..tit… yang artinya pesawat B sudah dikunci oleh rudal pesawat A. Kondisi pesawat B inilah yang dihadapi oleh 2 Su-30 Mk2 kita tadi pagi.

Berikut adalah pendapat saya tentang hal tersebut:
1. Apakah pesawat Stealth yang melakukannya??
Hanya ada beberapa pesawat didunia ini yang memiliki kemampuan Stealth yang aktif, B2 Spirit dan F22 Raptor sementara F-35 masih dalam pengembangan dan F-117 sudah dipensiunkan. B2 adalah pesawat Pengebom sasaran darat dan F22 adalah pesawat multirole, bisa untuk pengebom sasaran darat dan superioritas di udara. Jadi asumsi saya yang melakukan tindakan lock on adalah F22 Raptor. Hingga saat ini belum ada radar pesawat tempur baik buatan barat maupun rusia yang mengklaim mampu mendeteksi keberadaan F22 Raptor. Jadi walaupun pesawat Su-30Mk2 kita masih baru, tetap saja tidak mampu mendeteksinya. Alasan berikutnya pihak Komando Pertahanan udara (Kohanudas) juga tidak mendeteksi adanya penerbangan disekitar tempat latihan kedua Sukhoi kita sehingga asumsi F22 Raptor semakin menguat. Kalau ini yang terjadi maka alasan apapun akan terbantahkan walaupun Su-30MK2 kita salah satu yang terbaik dikelasnya, ya tetep susah menghadapi F22 Raptor karena memang belum ada teknologi untuk “menangkap” F22 diradar, walaupun satu pesawat F-117 pernah ditembak jatuh di Bosnia (diperkirakan pesawat ini dideteksi oleh radar pasif, yaitu radar yang mencari gelombang yang dipancarkan oleh F-117 tersebut) tetapi banyak pengamat menyatakan bahwa pesawat tersebut jatuh karena “lucky shot”.

F22 Raptor

Klo alasan ini yang kita terima maka mengapa ada pesawat F22 disekitar makassar?
Kita ketahui bersama ketika seorang pejabat Amerika Serikat mengadakan kunjungan ke luar negeri ada sebuah protap untuk melindungi yang bersangkutan, dalam hal ini Menlu Hillary. Protap tersebut bisa berupa pengawal yang selalu melindungi dan bisa kita lihat disekitarnya. Dan pengawal yang berada disekitar laut yang terdiri dari sebuah kapal induk dan armada pendukungnya yang akan memberi “bantuan” di perjamuan politik dengan kepala negara yang dikunjungi dan bantuan dalam arti yang sesungguhnya jika terjadi sesuatu.  Analsis saya, mungkin ada pesawat F22 Raptor yang terbang dari  Guam menuju Jepang dengan pengisian bahan bakar diudara disekitar Indonesia Timur. Dan dalam perjalanan mereka berpapasan dengan Su-30Mk2 dan ingin sedikit “bermain2”. Betul pernyataan dari TNI yang menyatakan tidak ada permintaan untuk ijin lintas di kepulauan Indonesia, karena jika saya mempunyai menjadi KSAU USA pun, untuk apa meminta ijin lintas, jika pesawat Stealth tersebut tidak mampu dideteksi.

2. Apakah Surface to Air Missile yang melakukannya??
Saya mengambil asumsi ini karena ada rumor kemungkinan mungkin bukan pesawat yang melakukan lock on tapi radar dari surface to air missile .. Mengapa saya berani mengambil asumsi itu,  saya melihat reaksi TNI AU mengirimkan B737 Surveiler nya untuk menyisir lautan dan bukannya meng scramble sukhoi yang dipersenjatai untuk mengejarnya, nampaknya pelaku lock on berada didarat bukan di udara. Yang jadi masalah tidak disebutkan apakah wilayah latihan adalah diatas lautan atau daratan..
a. Jika pelaku lock on adalah war ship dari negara lain nampaknya akan segera ditemukan oleh B737 kita, tetapi tidak ada tetapi tidak ada war ship yang ditemukan, apabila pelakunya adalah submarine lain lagi ceritanya.. Saya mencoba menawarkan sebuah asumsi lain, yaitu submarine pelakunya.. Lho kok sub bisa ngedeteksi pesawat yang terbang tinggi.. Saya mengasumsikan ada pesawat AWACS dan submarine dari negara yang sama, yang berada di sekitar makassar.. Lalu keberadaan Sukhoi kita dideteksi oleh AWACS (jangkauan radar AWACS lebih jauh daripada Sukhoi kita dan mampu terbang lebih tinggi, 2 tetangga kita memiliki AWACS dan submarine + paman sam) lalu koordinat data Sukhoi tersebut di link kan ke submarine, lalu submarine me lock on menggunakan missile yang dibawanya. Kemudian setelah “bermain2” submarine tersebut kembali melanjutkan perjalanannya.. Mungkin B737 kita telah menemukannya, tetapi B737 tersebut tidak memiliki kemampuan untuk “menghancurkan” submarine itu. Lalu kemana AWACS nya?, karena AWACS tidak dapat terbang dengan cepat.. Pertama AWACS memang didesain untuk perang elektronika, sementara B737 untuk intai maritim, sehingga ada kemungkinan radar B737 “dibutakan” oleh AWACS. Dan apakah Kohanudas memiliki kemampuan untuk mendeteksi AWACS yang mampu terbang hingga puluhan ribu kaki dan didesain untuk perang elektronika?

awacs

b. Klo SAM itu berasal dari darat, maka saya meragukan pernyataan beberapa orang yang menyatakan bahwa SAM tersebut berasal dari negara tetangga.. Mungkinkah SAM yang dipasang di wilayah utara Kalimantan atau yang dimiliki Australia mampu mendeteksi dan melakukan lock on terhadap sukhoi yang terbang disekitar makassar. Klo bener semua pesawat tempur kita yang sedang terbang berada dalam bahaya, karena bisa di lock sewaktu-waktu.. Saya mempunyai asumsi yang agak “gila”, mungkin ga sih klo ternyata Arhanud yang berkedudukan di Makassar, menggelar Poprad missile, dan ternyata melakukan lock on terhadap Sukhoi?? saya kurang mengetahui apakah semua persenjataan TNI yang menggunakan radar, sudah mengaplikasikan peralatan IFF (Identification friend or foe) sehingga mungkin Sukhoi kita dianggap sebagai suatu ancaman dan apakah peralatan Arhanud sudah di link kan dengan Kohanudas?

3. Pesawatnya tidak Stealth tetapi Radar Kohanudas tidak bisa mendeteksi
Klo asumsi ini yang benar maka kita benar-benar dalam bahaya, karena makassar berada ditengah-tengah Indonesia yang artinya wilayah udara kita benar-benar bolong.

peta indonesia

Tetapi klo iya, mampukah pesawat tempur negara tetangga membuat Sukhoi kita terlihat “bodoh”? F-18 Hornet memiliki cakupan radar yang hanya 3/4 dari Sukhoi, F-15 Singapura mungkin bisa melakukannya, Su-30 milik malaysia jg bisa melakukannya. Tetapi kenapa Sukhoi kita menunjukkan tanda unknown?

Asumsi saya memperkirakan bahwa pesawat AWACS, yang pertama mendeteksi keberadaan Sukhoi kita, kemudian data dilink kan dengan pesawat tempur yang telah disebut diatas dan dengan rudal yang memiliki kemampuan BVR (beyond visual range) maka me lock on bukan merupakan hal yang susah.
Terus terang saya mengesampingkan hal ini, karena tidak bisa membayangkan kalau Kohanudas tidak bisa mendeteksi penerbangan gelap ditengah-tengah kepulauan Indonesia. Apa jadinya klo hal ini benar2 terjadi..

4. Radar Su-30 MK2 mengalami kerusakan
Alasan ini, klo ini benar adalah hal yang paling bodoh.. Bagaimana bisa radar-radar baru yang terpasang pada 2 pesawat bisa mengalami kerusakan pada saat yang sama. Tetapi saya agak bisa menerima alasan ini dibandingkan asumsi sebelumnya, sbaiknya TNI meminta diganti radar tersebut dengan radar-radar yang benar-benar baru.

Banyak orang bertanya, apa tujuan dari si pelaku lock on itu? dengan asumsi kita menghilangkan asumsi kerusakan radar.

Saya memiliki beberapa asumsi:
1. Tujuan untuk mempermalukan Indonesia dan Rusia, ingat kah anda beberapa saat lalu ada tawaran dari beberapa negara barat untuk “membantu” memodernisasi alutsista TNI. Mungkin mereka ingin menyatakan produk barat lebih baik dari produk Rusia.. Sehingga akan membuat pengambil kebijakan beralih ke produk barat, dan TNI kembali bergantung pada pihak barat.
2. Dalam dunia militer, saya mengistilahkan ada kegiatan scratch and bite, yaitu kebijakan untuk mengetahui kekuatan lawan denga cara “tidak sengaja” terbang melewati perbatasan (jadi teringat saat TU-16 membuang sampah di Australia) yang saya yakin TNI juga melakukannya.

Apapun jawaban yang ditemukan nantinya, semoga semua pengambil kebijakan (TNI, Dephan dan DPR) mulai berpikir untuk memajukan TNI dan proses moderniasasi bisa dipercepat, agar kita tidak kembali dipermalukan..

Btw, CMIIW..

 
49 Comments

Posted by on February 20, 2009 in Catatan Pribadi, TNI AU

 

Tags: ,

49 responses to “Dua Sukhoi Dilock Missile

  1. Mike

    February 20, 2009 at 9:17 pm

    Hi Adie.

    Interesting assumptions. However, there are some errors in the judgement, that I wish to highlight.

    On point 2(a), that it was locked on by a submarine via datalink from an AWACS. As far as I know, there are very, very, very few submarines in service that has the capability to launch SAM. And these subs are operated by very,very,very few nations in the world. AFAIK, no countries in SEA/Oceania region has this capability. And from what I know, only SSBNs have this capability so far. Please enlighten me if otherwise.

    Point 4 is hard to ascertain. Btw, there has been no indication so far on the type of radar use in Indonesia’s Sukhoi, which amazes me. Since there is no official confirmation from TNI-AU, I safely assumed that the radar in use will be N001VEP, or at least the earlier N001VE. This assumption is based on the Chinese Su-30MKK-2 (Su-30MK2) variant, which is the baseline version. I agree with you on the replacement, as N001VE/P is an outdated version – the introduction of F-15T and Su-30MKM in the region mark the entry of state-of-art, highly capable radars. Its a worthy investment to get NO11M Bars (such as in Su-30MKI/MKM), the best radar for Sukhoi (at least until Irbis is ready). Detection range of N001VE/P is really poor to be honest, maybe thats the reason? What do you think?

    On point 2(b), it is vital to learn some of the characteristics of the KOBRA system (bought from Poland). The system consists of light 3D S-Band MMSR radar, WD-95 battery command system, ZUR-23-2KG guns and Poprad launcher(equipped with Grom missiles). The instrumented range of MMSR is a meagre 40km, and it is intended to be used for low-level air defence purposes only. Although no specific details on the exact exercise location will be made public, it is safe to say that the Sukhois were definitely out of MMSR range during the exercise. IMO, the reason to deploy 737-2X9 Surveiller is obvious – target won’t be near mainland.

    and the way Grom operates, you do not “lock” the aircraft; the way a RWR (radar warning receiver) ascertained that it’s being “missile lock” is different from a ground radar.

    Cheers!

     
  2. adiewicaksono

    February 21, 2009 at 2:21 am

    Thanks for the corrections

    Ya, anda benar hanya SSBN yang memiliki kemampuan SAM. Jadi kita tahu kan siapa yang kemarin mengancam sukhoi kita (no offence, ini hanya asumsi saya)

    Seperti saya katakan sebelumnya, kemungkinan pihak yang melakukan lock on berada di lautan lebih besar mengingat AU mengirim B737 nya,

    Dan ya (my bad) saya tidak mempelajari KOBRA System dengan detail (thanks for the big correction). Fiuh.. nampaknya saya harus banyak belajar tentang arsenal di Arhanud (that’s my homework right now)

    Tentang radar, saya juga kurang tahu tentang jenis radar yang dipakai di Sukhoi, karena AU tidak pernah mempublishnya (semoga dimasa depan juga tidak dipublish, biarlah menjadi rahasia). Saya kira, prajurit TNI yang berada pada level operasional/lapangan akan mengajukan NO11M sebagai pilihan radarnya. Karena prajurit dilapangan cenderung untuk memilih yang terbaik,tetapi prajurit yang duduk di “arm chair” lah yang menentukan spesifikasi akhir.

    Tetapi kalau radar N001VE yang digunakan, dan kita tidak bisa mendeteksinya karena kemampuannya kurang dan Kohanudas tidak bisa melihat adanya pesawat asing disekitar Makassar maka pelakunya pesawat Stealth atau bukan pesawat Stealth tetapi radar Kohanudas kecolongan ditengah-tengah kepulauan Indonesia (semoga bukan ini penyebabnya).

    Klo NO11m yang dipakai tetapi tetap tidak bisa mendeteksi dan Kohanudas tidak bisa mendeteksi. jawaban saya itu pesawat Stealth, saya yakin radar NO11m juga tidak bisa mendeteksi F22. atau pswt bukan stealth milik tetangga di kawasan minus F-18 oz, karena cakupan radarnya kurang dari Sukhoi. Jadi pilihannya antara f-15 dan Su-30MKM dan radar Kohanudas bolong ditengah-tengah kepulauan Indonesia.

    Atau baik N001VE ataupun NO11m yang digunakan mengalami kerusakan dan terjadi pada 2 pesawat secara bersamaan. Anda percaya??

     
  3. Mike

    February 21, 2009 at 1:34 pm

    Thanks for your reply. For this discussion, I’ll use Su-30MK2I (“I” as Indonesia) for reference. And I am truly sorry if its quite long.

    Judging from cost of purchase per unit, the baseline aircraft it is based upon, examples from other users (Venezuela, China etc), timeframe from order to delivery, complexity of N011M design – it is assumed that Su-30MK2I uses N001VEP. Just a mere assumption. Otherwise, it could be equipped with N011M Bars Mk I/II as well, who knows..

    Now, I’d like to discuss further on what makes F-22 Raptor ‘stealthy’. It is known that there are 2 major factors why F22 is said to have ‘stealth’ capability – first due to very,very low RCS of its airframe, 2nd the use of radar absorbing material (RAM). Now, most MRCA on the market use RAM -including Su-30MK2I- so its not a critical factor. But with a very low RCS, the Raptor become ‘invincible’ to enemy’s radar over a certain distance. Thus giving it, with a powerful radar on-board, the capability to ‘know-first’, ‘track-first’ and ‘shoot-first’ in BVR scenario.

    The reason why I don’t include EW suites is due to the fact that to say invinsible, you have to stay silent. By using advanced EW suites to distract/jammed the enemy’s sensor, the enemy will know of the aircraft presence.

    Now, not necessarily only F-22 can perform this feat (“lock” the Sukhois while being ‘silence’). I agree with you, using a datalink together with AWACS will work as well. Another theory is, an aircraft with a powerful radar (APG-63(V)3/(V)4 on F-15 Super Eagle, or future APG-79 on Super Hornet) can do this, and yes, the advance phased-array radar from Russia as well.

    Ground radar has its own limitation. Assuming that the exercise was done out in middle of the sea (out of GBAD radar’s range), or GBAD radar has a loophole in detecting a low-flying a/c (far away from mainland). Armed with a capable radar, an enemy could ‘shadow’ the movement of Sukhois while being ‘silence'(outrange the search zone of Su-30MK2I) and once inside tracking zone, it immediately perform a ‘missile lock’ for a few seconds and eventually retreat.

    According to Air International, N001VEP has between 100-110km forward hemisphere, detection range, and a rear hemisphere range of 40-45km, against a 3m2 airborne object (F-16 for example). N011M Bars Mk3 otherwise able to detect an F-16 in the range of 140-160km; APG-79/APG-63 (V) 4 is said to has a similar range as well.

    The latest variant of Bars, N011M Bars Mk 3, uses the advance Indian-source Vetrivale processors (RC-2) and currently onboard the MKI/MKM, unlike the earlier Bars which uses Ts101 or Ts200 processors (Russia). AFAIK, even the Malaysian plan to use its MKM in a ‘mini-AWACS’ role, if needed, as temporary solution. It is imperative for TNI-AU, IMHO, to pursue for the upgrade in future -surely, on the assumption stated earlier- and Depkeu, Dephan, Deplu must work together to achieve this target.

    I also agree that claims the radar(assuming N001VEP) on both a/c malfunctioned AT THE SAME TIME is rubbish. Or it happened to the RWR as well – absurd. Details are still sketchy -did the RWR system and other ESM equipment onboard detect any ‘enemy’s’ radar signal before it was being ‘locked’? I don’t want to rule out that both RWR malfunctioned at the same time, but it really sounds ridiculous right?

    The question of which RWR onboard is also another interesting matter. Does the purchase include provision for L-150-30 Pastel (SPO-32), or the more capable L-175 Khibiny? There must be a reason why both India and Malaysia decide not to use Russia-origin RWR. India opted for indigenous Tarang MkII RWR while the latter chose RWS-50 Saab Avitronics as the principal RWR. The sensitivity/capability of RWR is crucial, especially with the availability of phased-array AESA / PESA radars in the region.

    I ruled out MKM (its still in conversion phase, not declared operational) while F-15T is not officially handed over as well. The most logical could be the Super Hornet operating from a carrier, and to some degree, the F-22. I can’t see the logic of the Raptors to come over this far, just to ‘play’ around. Nor the reason of any malfunctions, and ‘blue-on-blue’ scenario. The next reason is the presence of SSBNs..

     
  4. adiewicaksono

    February 21, 2009 at 3:24 pm

    Thanks mike.. your research is awesome, and looks like you more expert than me🙂

    About F22, i can’t talk much more coz you desrcribed it soo detail.

    Well I agree with you, how a flight from our neighborhood can penetrated our border. AFAIK we has many holes at the east region.. and lately, we has many black flight there…

    About RWR, Ya thats our problem when we choose to buy some armament with debt, we cannot choose types of component thaw we want.. The whole think must russian made..

    About radar, when we read the news carefully.. we can found that malfunction radar statement given by “arm chair” general, not by the field officer (hope he doesnt get trouble with his statement). So we can make conclusion that the malfunction radar is a diversion news from the main problem.

    Maybe the Su-30Mk2I can detect the plane, but because they don’t bring the “tombak” they cannot fight back. Latest news said that 2 sukhois (dont know which one) scramble to hunt the plane, but cannot find the plane (same as Kohanudas).

    Mike, some source said the threath from SAM.. But because B737 cannot find the Ship, so the last possibility is a submarine (SSBN?). But i cannot found the sub class, that can launch surface to air missile. Can you give me idea which one that can do that?

    I just found that Raytheon did some project in 2006 that they tried to make a sub can launch SAM(the missile is AIM-9X).

    About the Raptor that “play” around, it’s just my asumption, just try to guess what happen with our sukhoi..

    Btw, we have a weird week, first Su-30Mk2I was locked by something and then some forum said that our “herder” (hope u can understand),the new one, have come. Wanna check it ASAP..

     
  5. Mike

    February 21, 2009 at 4:57 pm

    sorry mate, i dont know what a “herder” is..care to explain?

    my mistake, I forgot the fund for the new birds are coming from the CE facilities.

    BTW, its SOP for any air forces to scramble their assets when this kind of thing happens. But as I said earlier, the would be attacker by then would have retreated, out from Indonesia’s airspace. Scrambling other assets would be futile, no one will be stupid enough to stay/loiter around and get caught.

    to be honest, with or without any weapons onboard is not an issue. Conversion training doesn’t use real weapon, you dont bring a ‘live’ weapon during training, missiles are expensive and limited. During A2A exercise (in conv phase) training will be done electronically – all air forces practice in this way. Its ok to make a mistake, you go back to drawing board and learn some more. Once a while, when you are already proficient, then you might ‘sacrifice’ 1 or 2 missiles for real exposure. Dumb bomb is different, its cheap.

    the real issue here is the failure to detect who locked both Sukhois. AU shouldn’t care what the arm chair/critics have to say, it is good to identify and rectify the problems/weaknesses earlier rather than later. Its not good when you dismiss it out of hand – you’ll learn nothing. Hopefully Perwiras and Politicians will understand this.

    anyway, since the AU already released a statement regarding this issue, lets take it as it is. Since the statement is rather vague so far, I still find it hard to believe that both aircraft could suffer malfunction at the same time. but that is my opinion, so its not relevant😉

    I quoted it from The Jakarta Globe:

    “Two of the Air Force’s three new Russian-made Sukhoi jet fighters were struck with what are believed to be minor mechanical problems during a training session over the Makassar Strait on Friday.

    Air Force spokesman Air Commodore Chaeruddin Ray said two SU-30MK2 fighters, each flown by one Indonesian and one Russian pilot, were undergoing interception exercises when an alarm signalled in both aircraft that they were under attack from a foreign jet fighter.
    ………………..
    Chaeruddin said data collected by the Air Force led to the conclusion that the two Sukhois’ “lock system,” which detects enemy weapons targeting, had malfunctioned.

    “Technicians from Russia are already [at Makassar Airbase] to check and repair the aircraft,” he said.”

     
  6. Mike

    February 21, 2009 at 6:46 pm

    My logical explanation as to why B737 was scrambled..

    FIrst, it could indicate the non-existence of naval assets within the vicinity of the training area. Hence the reason why a Maritime Surveillance Aircraft was sent “to rule out the probability of Sukhois being locked upon by a trespassing vessel”. The fastest, most efficient way would be to deploy MPA as it can sweep a large area and best-equipped to perform the job, right? And since none of TNI-AL’s asset has a radar-guided SAM asset onboard, you can rule out the probability of a “Blue-On-Blue” scenario. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but AFAIK the only SAM system onboard AL’s ship is Mistral -a heat-seeking infra-red missile.

    I read so many comments regarding this theory, and sometimes I can’t help laughing at the suggestions given. To be honest, a Sukhoi (or any other fighter aircraft) can’t really determine whether it was being locked upon by a submarine – its not the way an RWR functions. There is also a need to understand how does RWR indicate the threat (eg data library) and the way a radar,RWR and other ESM system works in such situation.. Perhaps you can find the information on open domain; otherwise I will explain later as my posting is too long already hahaha

    How do you detect a submarine? Either visually, or using sensors. Now, no Sukhois are configured for an ASuW AFAIK. You need sonobuoys, or MAD (magnetic anomaly detectors) to detect a sub. And surely enough, u need several consoles coupled with processors/servers to analyze the sonar findings – no fighter aircraft can do this. Heck, even Raptors can’t do this. Submarine-hunting is a tedious work, using specialised equipment/platform.

    Regarding the subs you asked, its a slip of tounge on my part. I’ve checked again, and found out that its the same AIM-9X program you’ve mentioned, and it has not yet been translated into service. Apart from that, the Polypheme programme by the French has also been mentioned. Also the plan to launch Mica via torpedo-like canister; the same method of launch for the SM-39 Exocet. Lastly the German’s IDAS (based on Iris-T) which has shown good progress so far.

     
  7. aldhi

    February 22, 2009 at 8:37 am

    informasi yg luar biasa untuk nambah wawasan masyarakat. cukup detik. maju terus indonesia.

     
  8. adiewicaksono

    February 22, 2009 at 11:52 am

    We dont receive the final statement from the Air Force (not yet), but looks like they will said the problems was radar malfunction bla..bla..bla..

    I agree with you, that i hope the perwiras and politicians can understand the main problem, and dont blame the armament from Russia. Coz one “stupid” politician said that if the human resource from the air force cannot take control of high technolgy, it’s more better to cancel purchasing the new sukhois from Russia.(sick!). Hope nobody vote him for next election.

    About SAM system that the Navy use are Mistral and AL-1M (modification from Strella), they used it in the last Latgab.

    Btw, i found another story.. Su-30MKM Malaysia, seems have same problem with our sukhoi.. During independence day celebration at 2007, that plane got locked to by something.. looks like something or somebody are trying to test or spying RMAF SU30MKM and our Su30MK2 systems.. or both sukhoi has radar malfunction??

    And finally when “Red Flag – 2008” combat exercises, Indian air force send Su-30MKI fighters. American RC-135 reconnaissance airplanes sat on the tail of the Indian squadron. According to Indian media reports, the Americans first of all registered the radio codes and operating frequencies of the Indian fighter radars. And during the exercises themselves, the airplanes were under the constant control of various technical intelligence systems. American interest in the N-001M “Bars” radar installed on the Su-30MKI was caused by the fact that to a great extent it assures the fighter’s truly outstanding combat capabilities. So… can we make conclusion??

    Herder? (our Navy chief give nickname for subs with the type of dog) ehmm it still rumor, nobody confirmed.. that the herder was stay at our port since last week… Still rumor..

     
  9. Mike

    February 22, 2009 at 9:20 pm

    Ouch! That really hurts!(foul words on my mind now hahaha) What can we do, most politicians are either dumb, or stupid nowadays😉. I always heard people saying, as TNI used to operate Ruskies equipment before, then it will be ‘plain sailing’ in terms of integrating the new hardwares. Nonsense! A very disturbing, dangerous perception for any Indonesians, especially TNI Perwiras, to have.

    As for the so-called issue with MKM, I usually dismissed rumours without any substances/reports, esp if its coming out from forums. What I do know, there were rumours of SingAirForce -using its C-130 ELINT asset- were on air (some says in Malacca Strait) during the practice/actual days. But RMAF were aware of any of their movements (TNI-AU as well – its too close to evade radar detection). Anyway its not an issue, no air force will use its normal radar mode for aerobatic duty. Its the same thing happened to IAF, they were most of the time (during its journey to US) employed a ‘degraded’ radar mode – for the obvious reason. And during the training with US, they made sure not to ‘display’ the full capability of ‘Bars’. No air force, including TNI-AU, will be stupid enough to use the full spectrum of your electromagnetic equipments (EW,radars etc) during bilateral training with other forces; even with a friendly one.

    I dont want to keep this long, but there are many, many ways/modes a radar can be configured, it all depends on the user. In layman’s term, you can say that radar is controlled like an amplifier – you can adjust the range/mode etc. You dont use full capability ie lets say for normal flying from point A to B, but you will use it to the max during CAP in war times (as example). Anyway, its normal for SAF or even AU, to monitor the frequency/ranges of Bars as it marks the entry of a new generation of fighter a/c radar in the region.

    As I said earlier, there is no problem with Su-30MK2 radar. The problem is with the RWR; the radar works fine. Many forummers are confused with this; hence if you look at the statement, Air Commodore Chaeruddin/AU said that the problem lies with the RWR (“lock system” -funny name used by the reporter) and also, no mention of the primary radar.

    Come to think about this, there has been no reports so far of any malfunctions of Russian-based RWR used on other MK2 users ((China and Venezuela). So I’m a bit sceptical that it’s because of RWR issue..BTW, there are dozens of credible,good technical explanations by “those who at least know what they’re talking” on what really happened at Red Flag 08 – you will learn a lot (at least, on how a combat aircraft + its systems work). I know I have..

    It’s better to fix the problem now, than never, right?

     
  10. adiewicaksono

    February 23, 2009 at 7:33 am

    Thats my fault too… i always said radar malfunction.. but the problem was RWR right??? hehehe

    about story from Red flag 08, at least we can say the USA really want to know about Su-30 radar system..

    About, final statement from AU, i can guess that they will
    hide the main problem with other reasons..

    But ya, it’s better to locked by something that we dont know at exercise so we can fixed the main problem, than locked at war..

     
  11. Gideon

    February 23, 2009 at 1:44 pm

    dude…

    kemarin dapet info dr blog siapa ya lupa ni
    kalo lock on SAM ga bisa dari darat …jauh banget dari daratan

    kalo dari kapal ya ga taw dah

    mungkin kelas Lafayette punya negara “Lionpore” iseng
    ntu kan fregat stealth
    [ga enak nyebutnya disini jd Liongpore kwkwkwk]

    kalo stealth fighter, denger2 F22 baru di Guam… deket lah ntu

    kalo psawat non stealth pake jammer pod yg butain radar… ya laen tp bwt apa n maksudnya apa ? resiko di balas malah kan ? Anggap aja F/A 18… nggile om kalo ketauan larinya kekejar Su-30 lah

    “btw inget insiden Bawean ?? ntu kapal segede itu tau2 ada di Bawean bagaimana ceritanya kan lambat kedetect”
    see… jammer ?? kalo pesawat canggih ala Su-30 mah relatif gampang di kibulin ya ,tatapi kalo radar kohanudnas yang dikibulin ya lain cerita….

    versi lain :

    cerita dari masa lampau “radar kita made in USA / UK , ada frekuensi jammer tertentu yang cuman mereka tau, atau dirancang untuk tidak detect ke pesawat tertentu yang di kehendaki…
    ada cerita di sesi ujicoba/latihan harpoon di Jepang awal 90an
    targetnya bekas kapal AL-AmeRika pesawat yang bawa ngga bisa nglock target karena ada IFF ,thats silly isn’t >

     
  12. Mike

    February 23, 2009 at 6:11 pm

    Gideon – nice nick, a powerful-meaning word in Hebrew. also reminds me of a book, Gideon Spies😉

    As for the surface vessel theory, its impossbile. I’ll give you 2 reasons – first, the concept of stealth in a surface vessel and 2, time factor. No ship can evade an organized search operation, without being detected. Unless its a ‘flying ship’ (which is the first of its kind) or a truly invinsible ship not just to the sensors, but also to the naked eyes (also, the first in the world).

    Most modern ships can be described as having ‘stealth factor’ ie in SEA, Sigma with its design/layout, or F-2000 (Lekiu-class) with its hull design as well. Other efforts, such as reducing acoustic/magnetic level of a ship as example, are also considered as part of its ‘stealth-ness’. In short, it is an effort to reduce the capability of detection sensors (radar, sonar etc) in detecting the ship.

    La Fayette is stealthy, but it has limitation as well. It is stealthy to sensors up to a point. Once it crossed this variable ‘point’, it will no longer become ‘invinsible’. Its the same concept with a stealth aircraft, as I’ve explained in earlier comment. If the so-called ‘stealth vessel’ was the culprit who locked both Sukhois, it will need to perform evasive manouvre to avoid frm being detected. But could she? In a foreign water? Surely she’ll knew that her actions would led the ‘enemy’ to initiate a search operation. Will she be able to ‘run’ away from an MPA (equipped with suitable radar)? The answer is NO.

    Look, you won’t use jammer to ‘blind’ the radar if you want to stay ‘silent’. Any ESM on aircraft/ship will pick this up and any radar operator will know as well; the opponent will know that there is something, somewhere -they will intensify the search and also perform ECCM then. Your chances to escape undetected, will be further diminished, right? You don’t jammed your opponent if you want to stay undetected, its the rule.

    I don’t want to explain further on the Bawean incident, other credible bloggers has given a very logical,technical view of the incident as well. There are limitations to ground radar, you can read articles about it via open sources. That is why, in SEA probably only 2 countries that have a clear picture on what is going on in EVERY single inch of its maritime and airspace territory – Brunei and Singapore. Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam and others -sadly enough, including RIndonesia- has this limitation when it comes to radar coverage. So how do you at least mitigate this weaknesses? Integrate all the available sensors (civil, other services/agencies), purchase gap-filler radars (land) or enhance the capability of airspace/maritime surveillance radar, or buy some AWACS platform. Those are just the examples. Any radar -especially ground based ones- has limitations; instrumented range is different from the actual range. There are many factors that need to be taken into considerations.

    Sorry adie, for making it too long – so many things to say.

     
  13. draconins

    February 24, 2009 at 2:52 am

    Gideon, as far I understand, even a plane with “friend” or “civilian” marker can be still locked (yeah that also depends on the avionic software which may requires higher clearance to lock civilian/friend). Logically, otherwise you can not even conduct excercise due unable to lock friend.

    An IFF system declares a “target” as a friend or a hostile based on coded message challenge and response protocol. Say, we (designated “interrogator”) have an unknown target, the IFF will send a message containing IFF message which is encrypted by a secret key. The IFF transponder will reply with another IFF message containing answer. IFF transponders with the same secret key will be able to decode the IFF message. Interrogator then compares each reply to the challenge messages, and marks these targets friendly or hostile while also storing their azimuth and range. The secret key itself can be declared by the operator, in this case Indonesian Air Force can select its own key. Think key as kinda “password” (albeit can be a misnomer in technical sense).

    Normally, if no reply is received from the IFF transponder, the target continues to be declared unknown. Very often the pilot can have the wrong code (encryption key) selected, or the code is expired, and they will have an audible and visual alarm every time they are interrogated by IFF. Any source for that story from Japan? I never heard something like that.

    Jammer? Do you know how jammer works? In electronic jamming, it is by adding so many “noise” into the radio wave. And adding so many noise, you need more power into transmitter. Adding more power means that your presence predicted (aside the noise can also be an indication of jamming) and doing that you can hunt the transmitter by simply looking on “loudest” area as nearer to the source, the signal would be stronger. And that is the way High Speed Anti Radiation Missile doing against radar emitter.

    And also from ground radar perspective, it is difficult to detect other ground target, even without any natural obstacle (mountain , etc) due to round earth. Say go to the a seaport and look to the sea, you will see coming ship will be seen mast first and hull later from the horizon.

    Mike, I disagree that surface vessel theory is impossible. Low probability yes, almost impossible yes but totally impossible no. Even naked eyes have their own hardship to when searching something and that is the cause for searching (like SAR or Spotter) effectively requires training. The efficiency of visual search depends on the target and distractors that may be present, above the sea, sea and wave is primary distractors, especially if the ship is applied with low visibility camouflage. For example the gray scheme camo is applied to have ships fading into the mist..

     
  14. adiewicaksono

    February 24, 2009 at 3:36 am

    No problem mate..
    feel free to give comments.. i hope this article can be alternative explanations, to find what happened to our Sukhois..

    But, draconins.. AU send B737 to hunt down the vessel, but they cannot find it.. but thanks for your comment…

    Another comments please🙂

     
  15. draconins

    February 24, 2009 at 5:45 am

    There are several reason of the failure of hunting down the vessel:
    1. No vessel at all
    2. Vessel is already outside radar perimeter (probably painting Sukhoi on the edge of IAF Radar perimeter with/or low RCS vessel)
    3. Natural phenomenon cloaks the vessel (even mist can significantly reduce radar performance)
    4. B737 look on the wrong area so vessel escapes
    5. B737’s radar is also broken (due maintenance cost)😀 combined with failed visual search
    6. Vessel’s radar return is shadowed by a known island
    7. A lot of other reasons, I have a lot but that takes too much space😀

    I actually expect 1,4,5 as good explanation. For 5 as several equipments in B737 are already broken. And on the radar capability side, any ship equipped with 4 MW AN/SPY-1 (max range classified, stated over 180 KM, guess which ship😀 ) has multiple reason to be feared by any aircraft, especially when combined with AN/SPS-49 (max range over 400 KM, detection only). On spec, those even beat the AN/APS-131/135 SLAMMR ‘s range (about 185KM) used by Indonesian Boeing 737-200 Surveiller. Well, the ship using such radar is quite big (and of course much slower than aircraft) and it is very shameful if such ship actually enter Indonesian teritorial water unnoticed.

    Don’t take me wrong, I also do not believe the existence of the surface vessel “painting”, the reason is that multiple detection attempt which produce negative result reduces the possibility (tough not eliminating) of existance of such vessel, I just don’t believe on total impossibility especially due irrational low budget given by irrational parliament. Expect the impossible.

    As for me the highest possibility are actually the “bugs” within software, hardware, or brainware which cause both RWR have “false positive” (normal for human built equipment, even Raptors have bug, the most famous one is the Date Line Crossing bug, which is solved in few hours). As long as these bugs are fixed, it is okay. False positives and false negatives happen in real life radar, probably this is a big news due existance of press near the brand new jets combined with simultaneous warning. And I disagree if you consider this as stupidity, even in a new radar, there are reasons to calibrate radar and the Russians techies to be here. As long human involved, mistakes do happen.

    And related to radar, AN/APG 73 equipped with F-18D of Malaysians has similar range with N001VEP radar as far as I know. Don’t mistook with AN/APG-65 with earlier and non-upgraded F-18A. Nevertheless don’t forget, Sukhois are bigger target (assuming larger RCS) compared to F-18 and we don’t know whether the “probably exist F-18D” come from which side (well if it is tail side, that is really dangerous).

     
  16. Mike

    February 24, 2009 at 11:35 am

    Draco,
    Thanks for the comment.

    As for the surface vessel, I still find it kinda hard to believe, due to the intensity of the search party. I’m assuming that not just the B737 being scrambled, others (Hawk, F16 or any aircraft available at that time) would be searching for it as well. Plus, the intelligence and signals guys would be looking into all the possibilities, and monitoring all data. Of course, my points are based on the assumption that the 737 is in considerably good condition – honestly I do not know the present ‘shape’ of the 737s.

    I’m guessing that once the incident was reported, all other “non-search-party” assets (sensors, surface/airborne vessels etc etc) would be strategically positioned and tasked, to monitor any suspicious movement, knowing that the culprit (assuming that it was done by ‘someone’) will try to make its way to the international water.

    As I said earlier, I do agree with your point 1 – that there could (or must?) be no ship at all. Maybe other “vessel-theory” advocates can give their own reasoning.

    Look, I’m not surprised at all if this happen somewhere quite near to the airspace border, but it happened almost in the middle of RI’s territory(eventhough the details/exact location a bit vague at the moment).

    First, any ship that has AN/SPY-1 (or any FCS/FCR) must be large in size – no doubt on this. It will be at the very least, a “very-heavy frigate” size. And lets say the tracking range, for a flying object with a large RCS like Sukhoi, is between 220-250km. I still think, given the location of the exercise (as assumed), the vessel needs to be closer. Not just to lock on the target, but to make a quick exit as well. You need a vessel equipped with a ‘super-radar’ to track and lock the target that far, aite? And that vessel must be a ‘flying ship’, a subsonic ‘ship’ at least (for the exit plan). Agree with you, too bad if no one could detected its presence (even after she gave a ‘hint’)…

    Damn, its hard to make a theory when you don’t know the exact location hahaha😀. BTW, is there any SLOC in vicinity of the said area?

    I agree that mist could hinder the search operations, since the exercise was done early in the morning, say between 0800hrs – 0900hrs (its the time HQ got the news). Usually you won’t do a conversion training (esp A2A) during bad weather, so bad weather probably not a factor as well. Assuming that the search party arrived at the area around 0930-1000hrs, it would give the vessel a headstart of an hour or so. All these factors were probably in the search party commandant’s judgement, when determining the area.

    Using radars + visual surveillance, the eyes might overlooked it, but what about the radars and ESMs? The color scheme might fool the eyes/brain – but what about the equipments on board? Lets say, hypothetically, with the help of a bino, you could see up to 50km, would the sensors be ‘blind’ as well at that range?

    Bear in mind that the MPA/other aircrafts would be on the burner, as you probably wont miss a ship that big + you’re looking for an aircraft as well. So the search party would cover a pretty sizeable area IMO.

    Plus, you’re not only looking for a ship, you’re also in the lookout for a flying object as well. An aircraft could escape/win the ‘race’, with a significant headstart, but a vessel? Those 737s/any aircraft radar can sweep much faster than a vessel could ‘run’ and hide – and I agree, if you guess/extrapolate the size/location of the area correctly.

    Correct, any electronic items are susceptible to some mishaps/bugs -even for a new one. But for both radars to malfunction at the same time? Oddly strange. Both RWRs failed to work at the same time? Must be the first time then it happened to both equipment, on 2 aircrafts at the same time (my sceptical brain in works now hahaha)..Considering that it has gone through numerous tests bla bla bla..But then, as I said before, yeah you can’t rule out the probability – even as weird at it sounds. *sigh*

     
  17. adiewicaksono

    February 24, 2009 at 12:21 pm

    This is the first news that quote the air force chief final statement.. (sorry the news in bahasa) probably can find another source tomorrow..

    from: http://www.detiknews.com/read/2009/02/24/131651/1089670/10/ksau-tidak-ada-pesawat-asing-hanya-latihan-perang

    KSAU: Tidak Ada Pesawat Asing, Hanya Latihan Perang
    detikNews
    Jakarta – Misteri dua pesawat Sukhoi-30 TNI AU yang diduga nyaris ditembak pesawat musuh akhirnya terpecahkan. Ternyata oh ternyata, semua itu hanya latihan perang. Sama sekali tidak ada pesawat tempur asing.

    Kepala Staf Angkatan Udara (KASAU) Marsekal Subandrio menjelaskan, hasil penelusuran insiden yang sempat menggemparkan itu bermula pada latihan perang yang digelar Jumat (20/2/2009). Saat itu ada latihan dog fight (perang di udara) oleh satuan penerbang tempur TNI AU.

    “Jumat itu anak-anak figther latihan dog fight, tiba-tiba saja nyala (alarm bahwa pesawat terkunci sebagai sasaran tembak). Senin kemarin sudah latihan lagi,” papar KASAU di Balai Samudra, Kelapa Gading, Jakarta Utara, Selasa (24/2/2009).

    Dijelaskan, kebetulan saja yang dijadikan sasaran adalah dua unit Sukhoi-30 yang sedang menjalani perawatan di landasan Lanud Hasanuddin oleh mekanik dari Rusia.

    “Tidak ada kendala teknis, tidak ada pesawat asing,” tegas KASAU

    ok. i will translate… he said that, in friday they had a dog fight exercise bla..bla..bla.. n their target was sukhois in the ground.. n RWR sukhoi in the ground give signal that it had been locked..

    usually, i never quote news from this site… but they are the only one site that tell us bout final statement from the chief…

    something fishy here… if they did dogfight, why they target sukhoi in the ground, not tried to target each other??

    From the first news they said.. the sukhois got locked at 15.000-20.000 feet, or 4.572-6.096 m from the ground…

    maybe tomorrow, we will get news from another newspaper or site..

     
  18. draconins

    February 24, 2009 at 1:06 pm

    Yeah, I also find it is hard to believe to have a surface vessel targeting both Sukhois. And if this is the case, I humbly believe that the blame should be put on the many Indonesian parliament members which are so corrupt yet still cutting much defence budget, not to any naval/air force officers. But due multiple reasons, I do not think that it is that small chance to be ruled out. I would say, based my knowledge, that the chance is still significant enough to consider despite almost impossible.

    I read in military magazine that some Indonesian Boeing 737-200 Surveiller’s equipment are already broken and irreplacable due budget constraint, dunno which one. Further given case of the Air Force low readibility as reported and Bawean incident, which takes so many time delay just to get higher up clearance, I would say it is safe that actually the search party assembled are not that intense, at least in the early report.

    Guessing in the right place also important. You have mentioned that “knowing that the culprit (assuming that it was done by ’someone’) will try to make its way to the international water”. How if it is not the case. Say that ship is actually not intending harming action or even the captain “brave and genius” enough to think otherwise making search party looking nearer to border while he/she sails deeper, supportted by full understanding that Indonesian ships and aircrafts are actually “glass” sword.

    Yup, any ship that has AN/SPY-1 large in size, but I don’t think it needs to be that close to properly lock on Sukhoi. AN/SPY-1 had been known to successfully track and intercept balistic missiles with SM-3 Missile in various test. In one test against satellite, traveling about 28 mach, destroy it at 240 KM above sea. AN/SPY-1 is one of that “super radar” you are looking for😀 . Even if that is only a test and involve several AN/SPY-1 in data link mode, it is still a rare feat. Further AN/SPY-1 use highly directive pulse which is much harder than common radar detection to track back can contribute to failure in guessing.

    There are also a lot of reason why a lone vessel can not be detected that easy. For example, search radar can also be fooled with presence of island. And don’t forget that radar performance also affected by maintenance too. Looking on wrong place can even start a disaster, despite a ship is very slow compared to a ship.

    Well I won’t be surprised to have some bugs causing both radars malfunction at the same time. I myself is a programmer, and I do understand that given right condition, hidden bug on similar machines can cause some problem at the same time. I have mentioned the date line bug on F22 which causing visual flight guided by a tanker, guess, how many raptors on the sky that time? Six brand new raptors. Another case, how many F-15 affected by longeron crack problem? Six are grounded and suspected never to fly again as far as I remember.

     
  19. Mike

    February 24, 2009 at 1:20 pm

    hahahahaha.. *shaking my head, what a farcical joke all this has been*

    Adie..i think you translated it wrongly. From the way I read it, KASAU said that the 2 Sukhois, currently undergoing ‘maintenance’ by Russian technicians, were being ‘targeted’/’locked’ upon by a friendly ally (TNI) during the training.

    So, did KASAU try to imply that Sukhoi A locked Sukhoi B, at the same time Sukhoi B was ‘locking’ Sukhoi A? LOL..its funny, because why do u need to report it back, if its part of the training? Or both aircraft’s comm failed as well to contact with each other? Why do u leaked the news to public, and scrambled a search operation on that day? Why, why and why..

    Or, KASAU tried to say that there were other A2A exercises as well in the area at that time, that nobody -even the high-rank officers- knew about it? Not even high-ranked officers? And only after it became a national issue, few days after it happened, then only ‘those in the know’ came forward and admitted that they were conducting a secret training in the same area? After such scandal and humiliation? After u wasted jet fuel (energy, time etc etc) to search for the aggressor?? Ohhh man….

    Or is he implicitly trying to say that, since other combat asset (it could be either Hawk or F-16) could ‘lock’ on the Sukhois -without being detected at the same time- than AU shouldn’t buy additional Sukhois, instead lets buy more Hawk,F-16?

    I use ‘tried’ because he seemed to try more than he should, or maybe he should try harder. Sorry if I offended anyone, just trying to be funny (like what KASAU did?) and loose the tension a bit..Or maybe the reporter wanted to be a clown by fabricating this news..

    As I said earlier, there are 2 things still in mystery – exact location of the exercise, and whether RWR (or any other ESM onboard) of the aircraft did pick up any other alert (existence of other radar frequency) prior to the alarm.

    Anyway, sorry for the light banter (‘bashing’?) above – let us wait for a more reliable news.

     
  20. Mike

    February 24, 2009 at 3:17 pm

    Draco,

    I beg to differ. A ballistic missile, has an RCS (and other characteristics eg IRS) that are way bigger than a Sukhoi. And even AN/SPY-1D radar also has its own limitation against atmospheric and horizon obstacles. Plus, it managed to pass the test with support from other elements as well.

    I was looking for ‘super-radar’ that has ‘super-tracking’ capability ie at least >250km tracking range against a flying object with ‘small’ RCS such as Su-30. I dont see any problem for the SPY-1D to detect from >450kms, but to track from 250km is something else, IMHO. Hence my reasoning that the vessel either needs to work in tandem with other vessels via datalink, or there is no vessel at all. But then, I might be wrong again.

    As for the chances of a bug, well the MK2 is not a prototype or a completely new design. Most, if not all, of its equipment are from Russia, and assuming that China and Venezuela also uses the same equipment, I find it rather odd that it could malfunction at the same time. Its a one in a million case. Or two. As a programmer, you test, test and test. You have FAT, SAT and a bunch of other tests, before you roll out the system. You make improvements to the coding from time to time, by deploying patches, right?

    As TNI-AU is one of the latest operator of the MK2s, we can safely assume that all birds have been ‘patched’ as it should – in terms of software at least. When the AU received it, they did some tests on the ground, and up in the air. Only after everything has been tested, all softwares onboard are running on the latest version – then only you start conversion training. You don’t do it concurrently. The mechanics are in-country temporarily (as agreed in contract) to monitor and train local technicians, as well as ractifying any other issues that might arise of course.

    Now, we can assume that the chances for the 2 Sukhois’ equipment to have the “same problem at the same time” is rather miniscule, as it has been tested, operated, used “to the extreme” by the Chinese & other operators before Indonesia. Or in China’s case, you multiply those tests by hundreds. And the fact that it has been tested, used and ‘grilled’ by the Russians as well.

    The IDT bug faced by F-22 is different, as it is a new, complex system. The bug primarily caused the navigation system (plus several systems as well) to go haywire when it crossed the IDL. I suspected, they were sort of being sync continously with maybe the GPS or any other ground station, the computer got confused when it goes to the ‘other side’ and ‘self-destruct’ hahaha..Anyway, the Pastel RWR is not a new system, and being from a single source, it shouldn’t have integration issues. It has been in service for many,many years now. And the circumstances in which it happened the other day, makes me sceptical with the explanation given.

     
  21. adiewicaksono

    February 24, 2009 at 3:25 pm

    wait a sec.. from the way i read… he said that they locked sukhoi in the ground..
    ehmm… for the honest, i never try to quoted news from detik for one and other reason.. let we see the other newspapers or sites report tomorrow..

     
  22. draconins

    February 25, 2009 at 2:59 am

    Mike,

    There is no problem to differ. We are human with freedom of thought.😀

    However, since when Sukhoi 30 has smaller RCS than ballistic missile? As far as I know, standard Su-30MKI has RCS about 10m2 (head on), around the same with F-15. Yeah, there is a test rumoring that by adding much RAM,etc in a tested Su-35BM to reduce RCS to 1m2. That is a big one, consider F-16 which has RCS head on about over 1m2. And lock on range for Su-30MKI against F-16 is around 140-160 Km (using NO11M Bars). And as far as I know, most ballistic missiles have RCS less than 1m2, hence one of the interception difficulty. If you consider the missile form factor, the main source of RCS probably only the fins, while we have engines intake (which contains fan blade) and a lot of other source for RCS in combat plane.

    For the datalink used, I expect the datalink is used for extend area coverage (as ship is slow and serve as backup) so the descend target is still covered by any one of that ship’s radar hemisphere as Sm-3 can do Mid Life Course Update. But that is my assumption. That radar range won’t be extended by itself.

    I don’t think so for the case of bug. In Software development, you can detect a bug but you can not assure its inexistance. Yeah probably one in a million case, but if you hit that one million? Remember millenium bug? Few people expect that using shortened year would cause problem 20 years after. And I believe the chance is not one in a million, but much higher than that. Do you know birthday paradox (“How many the probability that in a set of randomly chosen people some pair of them will have the same birthday”)?

    In a group of at least 23 randomly chosen people, there is more than 50% probability that some pair of them will both have been born on the same day. For 57 or more people, the probability is more than 99%, and it reaches 100% when the number of people reaches 367 (there are a maximum of 366 possible birthdays).

    Yeah I make improvement continually, yet I know that patch itself can cause another problem. Even when you have a very good system, when you try to duplicate it, it may cause new unexpected problem. And for Sukhoi, say Indonesia are using same tested component with other countries, don’t forget for example, the capacitor producer may be different while the mainboard producer is the same one.

    Further to remember, at least to work with Thales radar system owned by Indonesian, I believe Sukhois need to be “patched”. And I believe, the figure of testing number in this case will be much lower.

    Those also assumes that human are perfect on engineering, in reality the probability of so called “bug” or “deficiencies” are much higher and can come from any source, software, hardware, and brainware. You can look on FAA record, how many recommendation on various issue needs to be addressed, even for older plane. That is why planes got a bunch of backup system. Even for old tested system, many source of problem can arise.

     
  23. adiewicaksono

    February 28, 2009 at 2:54 am

    Mike, you’re absolutely right.. i take the wrong way when read the news from Detik.. and your comment about that is great.. why nobody knew that it’s just an exercise, even the Chief of Hassanudin airfield..

    Well, i think this case will still unaswered..

     
  24. draconins

    March 2, 2009 at 1:51 am

    Agree Adie,

    Too much secret probably, making me more suspect of malfunction software/hardware. Yet I think it is fine for Indonesian Air Force as long they do really know the cause and fix that problem.

     
  25. adiewicaksono

    March 2, 2009 at 6:54 am

    well, because TNI AU don’t give us clear statement (you can read article “Final Statement tentang kejadian Sukhoi dilock missile??”).. we just can guess what happened with our sukhoi…

     
  26. Gideon

    March 5, 2009 at 4:29 am

    well thanks for all of that

    about TNI-AU latest statement ? hehehe there is also Goverment version vs News version vs Novelist version etc
    haha

    after all only g and G knows !!!
    g=gov ; G=God
    hahahha

    BTW thanx for make me remember that my name have a powerful means…
    if anyone of you love motorcycle check out “worldofride.blogspot.com” still in progress i hope many critics from all of you to be better in future
    thx

     
  27. monyet gila

    April 5, 2009 at 12:50 pm

    ikut coment mas
    hmmmm dari kejadian di atas terbukti kl sistem pertahanan negara kita kurang.

    oh ya mas bukan cm indo yg beralih ke produk rusia, negri jiran jg (menurut saya). tp singapur msh loyal dngn produk barat (jgn2).

     
  28. blue_leader

    April 15, 2009 at 8:13 am

    Just want to remind you,guys.
    AFAIK,Those Suhkois have datalink that connect each other.
    One get locked, others RWR will also “screams”.

     
  29. Yudika

    June 17, 2009 at 6:08 pm

    Emang sich, kalo soal “bug” RWR, konyol juga, walau ada kemungkinannya, terlalu kecil. biarin “Those Suhkois have datalink that connect each other”, kalo penyebabnya “bug” rasa-rasanya gak mungkin dech.

    Ya… saya sich ngeliatnya yang “mungkin” cuman soal “Herder”-nya…

    Tapi, trim’s atas info, opini dan debatnya. Menarik chui…

     
  30. Yudika

    June 17, 2009 at 6:15 pm

    Kalo soal pernyataan KASAU, jangan bingung…

    “Or, KASAU tried to say that there were other A2A exercises as well in the area at that time, that nobody -even the high-rank officers- knew about it? Not even high-ranked officers? And only after it became a national issue, few days after it happened, then only ‘those in the know’ came forward and admitted that they were conducting a secret training in the same area? After such scandal and humiliation? After u wasted jet fuel (energy, time etc etc) to search for the aggressor??” emang bener, tapi kenapa KASAU mengeluarkan “pernyataan konyol” tersebut?

    Ya menurut saya gak lain dan gak bukan adalah sama dengan “Anyway its not an issue, no air force will use its normal radar mode for aerobatic duty. Its the same thing happened to IAF, they were most of the time (during its journey to US) employed a ‘degraded’ radar mode – for the obvious reason. And during the training with US, they made sure not to ‘display’ the full capability of ‘Bars’. No air force, including TNI-AU, will be stupid enough to use the full spectrum of your electromagnetic equipments (EW,radars etc) during bilateral training with other forces; even with a friendly one.”

    Apalagi lah kalo bukan…
    MILITARY TOP SECRET, COFIDENTIAL…

     
  31. ganang andi

    July 3, 2009 at 10:03 am

    OK ARTIKELNYA.. aku suka !

    Ganang Andi – AEROPAPERMODEL
    Miniatur peswat tempur dari kertas..Unik dan angka !
    http://geocities.com/indonesia_papermodel/miniatur_pesawat.html

     
  32. tri

    November 18, 2009 at 2:09 pm

    jadi setelah bla bla diatas kesimpulan ttg lock on kpd sukhoi indonesia apa?

     
  33. panglima burung

    November 20, 2009 at 7:22 pm

    AH..,aku yakin klo F-22 Raptor pelakunya & di samping itu RADAR Indonesia yg udah UZUR…
    INGAT..,Radar hanya dapat menjangkau/mendeteksi pesawat pada ketinggian tertentu…
    ditambah lagi agen intelijen musuh yang mengetahui kelemahan sistem RADAR Indonesia yg udah UZUR…
    Saya sbg anak Bangsa sangat MARAH seandainya benar2 terjadi & pelakunya negara tetangga kita…
    krna bukan tdak mungkin,negara tetangga kita lebih condong ke-BARAT. jadi bukan hal yg mustahil bila mereka dapat memiliki F-22 Raptor…

     
  34. adiewicaksono

    November 24, 2009 at 1:19 pm

    kesimpulan terakir (press release TNI) menyatakan kesalahan pada radar sukhoi.. tidak banyak cerita yg beredar soal itu.. sebab lain, bisa anda baca diblog ini..

     
  35. mupeng

    January 1, 2010 at 3:20 pm

    Mas Adi..klo SU-30 MKM punya Malaysia juga pernah mengalami hal yg sama spt SU Indonesia (di lock oleh object gak dikenal)..kenapa penyebabnya?

     
  36. adiewicaksono

    January 3, 2010 at 6:17 am

    @mupeng: tidak ada penjelasan resmi dari TUDM, mengenai penyebab hal tersebut…

     
  37. Agungpriy

    February 25, 2010 at 6:04 am

    Kalo saya pikkir ada yg disembunyikan oleh Kohanudnas , ini khan masalah serius . Pesawat kita di “serang” oleh pihak lain / negara lain . Orang benar2 meremehkan kita , sudah terbukti nyata .

     
  38. Agungpriy

    February 25, 2010 at 6:31 am

    Kalo mau beli pesawat alasannya pasti anggarannya tidak ada . Kita2 semua ikhlas kok kalo seminggu sekali patungan gopek2 seluruh rakyat Indonesia . Jadi per Minggu nya 500 rp x 200 000 000 ( orang Indonesia ) . = 100 000 000 000 rp Sebulan dapat 400 Milyar rp . Ditambahin APBN sedikit dapat 1 pesawat tempur Modern dalam sebulan . Asal nggak dikorupsi kita bisa punya banyak pesawat buat njaga seluruh wilayah RI yang sangat luas ini .

     
  39. tri

    March 19, 2010 at 7:23 am

    syukur deh mas adi kalo cuma error di radar pesawat kita mg2 sgr di perbaiki.saya pernah baca waktu retrofit F-5 pada program MACAN ada masalah serius yaitu munculnya ghost atau doble image dilayar radar smp teknisinya ke madiun untuk penyelesaian.mgkn jg sama kalo TV baru spy fungsi baik kan digebuk dulu sewaktu dipabriknya.ya mgkn barang baru gak cocok dengan iklim indonesia meski sdh disesuaikan pasti tetap akan ada masalah kecil.menanggapi Agungpriy dulu waktu N 2130 mau diluncurkan kan ada tuh semacam penjualan saham apa tdk sekalian saja diadakan lg.tp imbalannya apa kalo dibelikan pesawat tempur?blh naik gratis?habis dong jam terbangnya.trims

     
  40. Doni

    March 29, 2010 at 4:03 am

    Mungkin SU kita itu ada yg membidik dan mau menguji sejauh mana kecanggihan SU kita. Karena ketahuan mereeka langsung tancap gas kabur karena mereka ngga mau ambil resiko berhadapan dengan Pesawat Tempur kita. mereka membidinya mungkin dari samudra Hindia atu dari daerah samudra Fasifik dari jarak ratusan mil. masuk akal ngga ya ? mungkin masuk mungkin ngga.

     
  41. Sakai

    November 8, 2012 at 10:51 am

    Saya kira, lock di sini adalah suatu pernyataan dari kubu asing entah siapa itu bahwa “gak ada gunanya lu beli gituan”, ini gue udah dengan mudah bisa nge-lock u. Mohon maaf bila ada salah-salah kata dan ada kata-kata yang kurang berkenan. Terima kasih.

     
  42. Sakai

    November 8, 2012 at 11:02 am

    That’s, because Sukhoi is the best Aircraft’s choice for Indonesia. Dan, saya juga mau nanya, kenapa Sukhoi kalo terbang sering tidak “menggendong” aminisinya? Terima kasih.

     
  43. raspberry ketone plus

    June 16, 2013 at 3:14 pm

    Write more, thats all I have to say. Literally, it seems as though you relied on the video to make your point.
    You clearly know what youre talking about, why
    throw away your intelligence on just posting videos to
    your weblog when you could be giving us something enlightening to read?

     
  44. raspberry ketone fresh

    June 18, 2013 at 7:49 am

    Excellent post. I was checking constantly this blog and I am
    impressed! Very helpful info specifically the final part :
    ) I maintain such information much. I used to be seeking this particular information for a very long time.
    Thanks and good luck.

     
  45. dr oz raspberry ketone

    June 18, 2013 at 6:46 pm

    Good day very nice web site!! Guy .. Beautiful .
    . Superb .. I will bookmark your site and take the feeds additionally?
    I’m happy to find a lot of useful information here within the submit, we need work out extra techniques in this regard, thank you for sharing. . . . . .

     
  46. frontier internet

    July 12, 2013 at 8:54 pm

    Good day! Would you mind if I share your blog with my zynga group?
    There’s a lot of people that I think would really enjoy your content. Please let me know. Thanks

     
  47. sleep aids

    July 14, 2013 at 10:21 am

    Wow! At last I got a web site from where I be capable of in fact get helpful data regarding my study and knowledge.

     
  48. hydrozone

    October 2, 2014 at 2:15 am

    please, check it out of spying satellite over space…cobalah cek satelit mata mata di ruang angkasanya

     
  49. afzaal

    June 10, 2016 at 8:01 am

    Paling cuman kesalahan sistem kali

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: