AIM-7 Sparrow Missiles for the FA-50?

(Revised September 24, 2015. See bottom of the page for the complete revision history)

An AIM-7 Sparrow Missile. Photo courtesy of Wikipedia Commons.
An AIM-7 Sparrow Missile. Photo courtesy of Wikipedia Commons.

Shortly after the contract signing for the purchase of twelve FA-50 Fighting Eagles by the Philippines from Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) last March (2014), the Department of National Defense (DND) thru its Assistant Secretary Patrick Velez announced plans to “upgrade” the FA-50s so these will have the capability to carry and fire Beyond Visual Range (BVR) missiles.1 This came as a pleasant surprise to me as it means more capability for the FA-50s we are buying.

BVR missiles are Air-to-Air missiles that have ranges of at least 36 km.2 Note that the FA-50s have NOT been qualified yet for the use of any BVR missiles, in fact the only air to air missiles the plane is currently qualified for are the AIM-9 Sidewinder Short Range Air to Air Missile (SRAAM) versions up to the AIM-9M version.3 South Korea, Indonesia and Iraq have also bought FA-50s, but if this plan pushes thru then we will have the most capable FA-50s in the world so far.

‘AIM-7 Sparrow Missile’
There are several issues that sort of dampens this planned upgrade for me though, the first is that the upgrade will only be for the AIM-7 Sparrow Missile. The Sparrow was initially made by the American company “Sperry Corporation” and first entered service with the United States Air Force (USAF) in 1954. Since then more than 58,000 missiles have been produced and served in the air forces of at least 20 countries around the world.4 The Sparrow is a COMBAT-PROVEN missile design, having been first used in actual combat during the Vietnam War and is credited with shooting down a total of around 117 aircraft since then.5

The latest version of the Sparrow is the AIM-7P which weighs 231 kg with a 40 kg warhead and a range of 70 km. Other physical characteristics of the missile are as follows:6
Diameter: 0.20 m
Length: 3.66 m
Wingspan: 1.02 m
Speed: Mach 4

‘Old Technology’
The Sparrow is a good missile, but it uses a previous generation technology for air to air missiles as most BVR missiles now have moved on to using Active Radar Homing (ARH) guidance system instead of the Semi-Active Radar Homing (SARH)7 system used on the Sparrow. In simplest terms, the SARH system means that the aircraft’s radar “illuminates” the target with radar waves which are picked up by a receiver on the missile’s nose, which then guides the missile to the target.

The disadvantage of this is that the aircraft will need to illuminate the target until the moment of impact, limiting the launch aircraft’s ability to take evasive maneuvers. On the other hand, the newer BVR missiles with ARH guidance are more flexible in that the launch aircraft doesn’t have to illuminate the target until impact, the aircraft can provide datalink updates of the enemy’s position until the missile activates its own miniature radar when it is 25-30 km away from the target, and from there the missile homes in on its own. Another advantage of the newer ARH guided missiles is that the target aircraft will have less warning time that a radar has locked on to it because the missile only activates its own mini-radar when it is nearer to the target.

This means that in any confrontation between the Sparrow-armed FA-50s and enemy aircraft using ARH missiles, the FA-50s will be at a disadvantage because of its inability to maneuver while the Sparrow is in flight. Use of Electronic Counter Measure (ECM) equipment will help the FA-50s as ARH missiles are susceptible to jamming as we have seen in my blogs “Missile Boat Naval Battle Lessons” and “Modern Large Ship Naval Battle Lessons”.

However, I don’t think relying on jamming alone to offset the weakness of the Sparrow would be enough as the dynamics of Air Combat are a little bit different from the dynamics of Ships versus Anti-Ship Missiles (AShM). For one there is less reaction time in air combat because the closing speed of the aircraft and missile is much faster. Another is that air to air missiles are smaller and harder to detect than AshMs. Hence it will likely take a COMBINATION of JAMMING, MANEUVER, and the use of CHAFF to increase the chances of defeating ARH missiles.

‘High Cost’
Another issue is the fact that not all twelve of the FA-50s we are buying will be upgraded to have BVR capability, only 3-4 or 25-33% of the FA-50s will be upgraded. The main reason given is because of COSTS as the cost of upgrade is reportedly between P 800 million to P 1 billion PER AIRCRAFT (USD 17.8 to 22.2 million using the exchange rate of P 45 to USD 1).1 At that price, the upgrade cost is already around HALF the price of each aircraft.

The article is not clear why the cost is so high, I assume it’s because first, the cost will cover the hardware and software testing and integration of the AIM-7 to the FA-50 as the Fighting Eagle is NOT yet certified for use with the Sparrow missiles. However, I don’t expect this cost to be considerable, probably only a couple of million dollars, and most of it should be fixed cost rather than variable cost because once the testing is completed, the certification will apply to all future aircraft. Second, I assume and HOPE that the cost already covers the inclusion of a couple of missiles, which some other reports say is around USD 265,000 each (adjusted for inflation since 2005).5 At that price, assuming around 10 missiles per aircraft is allocated, then the total cost for the missiles will only be USD 2.65 million per aircraft.

Based on the above computations, it seems to me that MOST of the cost will go to LICENSING FEES to Lockheed Martin (LM), the owner to the design rights of the FA-50. Remember that the FA-50 is based on the F-16, but a smaller version and was designed and manufactured with the aid of LM. As the design owner of the aircraft, LM seems to have majority if not full control of what weapons the FA-50 should be qualified with, and could also demand “licensing costs” for whatever weapons that are to be integrated into the FA-50.

‘Corporate Greed’
If the majority of the cost really goes to the licensing fees to LM, then it is an example of CORPORATE GREED which seems to be afflicting many American defense companies these days. By charging such a high cost for integrating weapons like the Sparrow into the FA-50, LM probably hopes to DISCOURAGE countries from using the FA-50 other than as an Advanced Jet Trainer and thus directly competing with the F-16C Fighting Falcon that they are manufacturing. It’s bad enough that the FA-50’s performance is not as good as the F-16, LM still went out to find more ways to discourage users from just settling with the FA-50s. An additional USD 17-22 million per aircraft will bump up the cost of the FA-50 from USD 35 million to USD 52-57 million, still lower than the USD 77 million the Greeks paid for their F-16Cs,8 but not by much and considering that the FA-50s will be using an older technology missile system.

An ALQ-131 ECM Pod, the FA-50 is going to be needing something similar to it, badly. Photo courtesy of Wikipedia Commons.
An ALQ-131 ECM Pod, the FA-50 is going to be needing something similar to it, badly. Photo courtesy of Wikipedia Commons.

I understand that this is just business and LM does need to be compensated for their excellent design of the FA-50, but why does it have to be USD 17-22 million per aircraft? Will they end up as beggars if the licensing cost is brought down to less than half of that amount PER AIRCRAFT? Some American defense companies nowadays seem to be obsessed about milking as much money out of their customers using their products, which is why almost all defense procurements the last couple of years have always had HUGE COST OVERRUNS. This is also why the United States (US) government can’t buy as many F-22 Raptors or F-35 Lightnings that they need because they just end up being so much more expensive.

‘Mediocre Combat Record’5
A third isue with the Sparrow is its mediocre combat record. When it was first used during the Vietnam War, it had a pretty dismal record with a Probability of Kill (Pk)9 of only 9% (56 kills out of 597 shots). After that war, though, the missile was improved based on the lessons learned during the war and its kill rate improved considerably during the next Yom Kippur, Bekaa Valley and Desert Storm wars, improving to a Pk of 33% (41 kills out of 123 shots).

However, out of those 41 kills and 123 shots, only 18 kills out of approximately 68 shots were made to Beyond Visual Range, driving down its Pk for BVR to 26%. To put it another way, the Sparrow missile is only successful one out of three times in shooting down another aircraft OVERALL, but this goes down to only one out of four times if the shot was made to BVR.

In contrast, a Rand Corporation study10 puts the Pk of the ARH missile, the American AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air to Air Missile (AMRAAM)11 to be at 59% (ten kills out of 17 shots) overall, and a BVR Pk of 46% (six kills out of 13 shots). This means the AMRAAM is successful at an around every three out five shots in total or one out of two times if the shot is made to BVR. Of course the AMRAAM hasn’t been fired as much as the Sparrow yet, but then again the Sparrow has not had as good as start as the AMRAAM when it first saw action during the Vietnam War.

(Note that most if not all of the above-mentioned kills were made against targets that did not actively use a combination of maneuver, jamming and chaff to counter the oncoming missiles. Using such combination of counter measures is expected to bring down the Pk of each missile further, perhaps by as much as 50%, maybe even more.)

‘Worth It?’
Based on the items discussed above, the biggest question for me now is, Is the upgrade worth it?

Arguments FOR getting the AIM-7 would be first, it may be our only chance to arm the FA-50s with BVR missiles. LM may only allow the Sparrows for now in order to protect the sales of their precious little F-16s, hence we might either have to take the Sparrows, or not have any BVR capability at all. And even if LM will allow more modern AIM-120 AMRAAM or Derby missiles for the FA-50, how much will they charge for it? Likely to be much more so that it won’t be feasible anymore considering that the AIM-7 upgrade alone cost already about half the price of the aircraft.

Second is that the older technology of the Sparrow may be a good TRANSITIONAL system for us to work with as we have not had any experience with BVR capability before, hence it may be easier to go from zero BVR capability to the Sparrow rather than going directly to the latest missile technology available. There is a need for our pilots to practice BVR capability now so they can easily move on to if and when AMRAAM or Derby or some other BVR missile capability becomes available later with some other aircraft platform.

Arguments AGAINST it would be that it is too expensive for the purpose of training and operational experience; it uses a previous generation technology that is tactically disadvantageous to the aircraft using it as it won’t allow the launch aircraft to maneuver while the missile is in flight. On top of that, it doesn’t seem to be as good in terms of actual combat performance against the type of missiles our enemies will likely be armed with.

So personally for me, the answer would be … NO. IMHO the disadvantages just outweighs the benefits. I think the Philippine Air Force (PAF) would be better off spending money on ECM pods and training how to evade ARH missiles using a combination of counter measures to close in on ARH missile-equipped opponents and use their more flexible fire-and-forget SRAAMs, which hopefully will be better than just the AIM-9L/M Sidewinder missiles (for more on this, see my blog “Offsetting Radar Range Deficiency in Air Combat“).

‘Parting Shot’
Aside from the issues above, another issue I see is that upgrading only a couple of aircraft means that those upgraded aircraft will likely have faster wear on their airframes compared to the others as they will be used more often for both training and patrols. These are just my opinion, of course, and if the Air Force does find the AIM-7 upgrade to be still worthwhile, then I wouldn’t mind … too much.

If the upgrade does push thru, it will be again another of those now getting-to-be-boring first for the PNoy Administration because as I’ve said above, we have never had any BVR air-to-air missile capability before. I feel I am getting a bit repetitive mentioning about all these “firsts” by the Administration, but it is what it is, and in truth I am VERY happy to see that the DND even gets to seriously consider buying weapons like these at all.

Lockheed Martin's "precious little" F-16 firing an AIM-7 Sparrow missile. Photo courtesy of Wikipedia Commons.
Lockheed Martin’s “precious little” F-16 firing an AIM-7 Sparrow missile. Photo courtesy of Wikipedia Commons.

Revision History:
(1) May 6, 2014: Originally posted.
(2) September 24, 2015: Made mainly editorial changes like improving the comprehensibility of the sentences, and then also repaired dead links.

SOURCES:


  1. DND eyes BVR upgrades for F/A-50s,
    (https://web.archive.org/web/20140502110319/http://retiredanalyst.blogspot.com/2014/03/dnd-eyes-bvr-upgrades-for-fa-50s.html
  2. Beyond-visual-range missile,
    (https://web.archive.org/web/20160306125733/http://saabgroup.com/site-info/glossary
  3. KAI contracts for serial production of the FA-50,
    (https://web.archive.org/web/20160602135535/http://www.koreaaero.com/english/pr_center/cpr_view.asp?pg=1&seq=25400&bbs=10
  4. AIM-7 Sparrow,
    (https://web.archive.org/web/20160317002358/http://www.f-16.net/f-16_armament_article10.html
  5. Promise and Reality: Beyond Visual Range Air Combat,
    (https://web.archive.org/web/20160312091608/http://pogoarchives.org/labyrinth/11/09.pdf
  6. Raytheon AAM-N-2,3,6/AIM-101/AIM-7/RIM-7 Sparrow,
    (https://web.archive.org/web/20160303202152/http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-7.html
  7. Semi-Active Radar Homing,
    (https://web.archive.org/web/20160101202052/http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-Radar-AAMs.html
  8. Greek F-16 and Weapons Buys Taking Off,
    (https://web.archive.org/web/20160316213055/http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/greek-f16-weapons-sale-clearing-for-takeoff-01397/
  9. Probability of Kill,
    (https://web.archive.org/web/20150413184622/http://militaryfactory.com/dictionary/military-terms-defined.asp?term_id=2970
  10. Air Combat Past, Present and Future,
    (https://web.archive.org/web/20150111093440/http://www.mossekongen.no/downloads/2008_RAND_Pacific_View_Air_Combat_Briefing.pdf
  11. AIM-120 AMRAAM Slammer,
    (https://web.archive.org/web/20160304023936/http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/aim-120.htm
Advertisements

112 thoughts on “AIM-7 Sparrow Missiles for the FA-50?”

  1. I have read your evaluation.and.comments,.first if our DND will push through for arming the FA50 BVR it will be prototyped since it will have to undergo study by the Korean.and US defense industry the feasibility, reliability, acceptability, efficiency and effectiveness by adding hardware and software components not to.mention the weight that will efffect tge aerodynamic and agility of the FA50 light fighter jet. And if you put a medium range Air to Air missile you should have an up to date sensors and ESM &ECM to counter threat the latest electromagnetic battle space threats, leathality of stealthy supersonic missiles and what we call the latest technology for ECM it can.mimic the pulse being transmit by the powerful radar of the aerborne.and.surface radar to deceive the rdar transmission and receive echos. These capabilities will entail a highly coost driven. We are again in.the learning stage.and.not.to.mention.high cost on technical suatainment of.very complex combat system technology.

    1. I think the hardware update will be minimal, and will be limited to things like pylons with the right attachments to be compatible with the Sparrow. Software adjustments will have to be made also, but I don’t think that this will be considerable.

      There are a lot of weapons out there that can be integrated into the FA-50, and they of course will have to be tested with the aircraft first and minor modifications will be made.

      Last is that the Sparrow will have to be made to work with the existing sensors that the FA-50 has already.

      1. How sure that is minimal base on the DND assessment to have a BVR capability it takes almost PHP800M to PHP1B per aircraft as additional cost. What can you say about this?

      2. I assume that the DND’s figure of P 800 million to P 1 billion for the BVR upgrade is based on their talks with the manufacturer of the FA-50 which is KAI.

    2. I am not an expert in weapons systems technologies but from what I have read in some blogs, is it not more logical & cost-effective to install the most powerful, advanced land-based, long-range radar system along the length of our coastline which can cover the whole area of West Philippine Sea or our Exclusive Economic Zone and which will provide the BVR targeting information via TDL link to our FA-50s (regardless of how many are scrambled to intercept) instead of provisioning each individual FA-50 with expensive AESA radars. Our FA-50s & future MRF fighters are probably going to be limited to patrolling & protecting only our EEZ and never beyond that boundary thus we don’t need expensive sophisticated radars in our fighter planes. The land-based radars will do the job for the fighter pilot of guiding the AAM missiles to the target after being released from the FA-50. The FA-50 just needed to be fitted with a combination of short, medium and long-range AAMs.

    3. I think the best defense systems the Philippine government must pursue to protect the entire country from China’s attack if war breaks out is to request the US under EDCA agreement to install the X-band radar system across the whole length of the coastline of western Philippines just like the one in Japan & Arrow-2 Missile system just like the one in Israel. For offensive systems, a layer of shore-based short & medium range Anti-Ship & Surfaceto Missile batteries (anti-aircraft & anti-missile) that has target range of up to 210 nautical miles just more than enough to defend our 200-nautical mile EEZ. I hope you can blog an article about this X-BAND & ARROW-3 SYSTEMS rhk111.

  2. But remember the texhnical glitch is always on software or component aspects of the combat system which will be a driven cost. I understand your concept to have a medium range BVR operation because warfare now is to hit the target beyond horizon with the C4I. I hope for thesuccess of this air capability of my beloved country Philippines. But in my humble opinion this must thoroughly studied. What kind of radar and EW suit are to install?

    1. I don’t think the upgrade includes the cost of replacing the radar on the FA-50 as its ELM-2032 should be capable enough to handle BVR missiles, although a longer-ranged radar would be nice …

      1. I’m not asking to replace the original designed of the radar. Is this is AESA or phase array radar type. This is the latest radar that it can react into EW threats and it can detect and track stealthy designed missile at longer range. Detection in longer range is necessary for the pilot to have time to react.

      2. Why not buy the AMRAAM instead. I think the ELM-2032 would only require software modifications maybe to its source code to enable its use. I also saw an FA-50 brochure and the wikipedia article stating that its AMRAAM capable. Besides the AIM-7 is obsolete and no longer in production. The Sparrow wouldn’t be competitive against the BVR weapons and BVR capable aircraft of our likely opponents. KAI is also developing an AESA radar specifically for the FA-50. I think that would be a more practical solution. Maybe the SABR, RACR or ELM-2052 if we cant wait. Just my two cents.

  3. if the pirce of upgrading the fa-50 to BVRwill cost almost half of its price, i rather prefer that the FA-50 will not be upgrade but we have to move on by acquiring a real MRF which BVR is laready built in the system. the role of the FA-50 is to train our pilots to adjust to the latest fighter technology or interim fighter while we are still in the process of acquiring MRFs such as the gripens, f-16 block 50 or f-18s and etc. i rather used the added cost as savings for the purchase of MRFs.

    1. Having a BVR-capable fighter is essential. Not only is this critical to perform actual interception and engagement, but equally significant for training purposes as it allows our pilots to train with US airmen on equal capability basis. We need this capability for emergency purposes and to train our men, which are our most important resource.

      Foregoing BVR integration for the sake of minor acquisition savings is not a good idea. The MRF will arrive eventually but it could take a long time before that to happen.

  4. Have 2 questions:
    Will the FA-50 be able to utilize radar data from an AWACS aircraft (or Gripen at standoff distance) for initial guidance of the Sparrow?
    Do our potential adversaries have missiles with home-on-jam capability?

    1. Yes, the FA-50 does have datalink capability and can use data from AWACs or other FA-50s. However, before the FA-50s fire the Sparrow, they will have to activate their own radars to lock on and illuminate the target. This will lessen somewhat the time that the FA-50 will have to turn on their radars.

      Not sure about the Home-on-Jam capabilities of other ARH missiles, nor how good that capability really is. It can home on where it thinks the jamming is coming from, but what if that source is falsified also? It is a good concept, though, but an unproven one as of yet …

  5. Hi, rhk111. Nice post…

    But what is your basis for saying that only AIM-7 Sparrow will be used? The PNA article basically states that AIM-7 is just an ‘example’ of a BVR weapon if the FA-50 is upgraded to BVR standard. To my own understanding, the article statement doesnt necessarily preclude the use of AIM-9.

    1. Well yeah, it is possible that other BVR missiles might be considered also, but they did mention the AIM-7 Sparrow specifically by name while the others weren’t, so it is likely that it is one main if not the main candidate they are considering …

    2. The AIM-9 is not a BVR missile, by the way, it is a Short Range Air to Air Missie (SRAAM), and there is a separate budget to buy it. Now that the FA-50 deal has been closed, I expect this procurement to follow suit, although I am still hoping the Philippine Air Force does get better missiles instead, like the Python 5 or IRIS-T. The FA-50s are still not qualified for those 2 weapons, though …

  6. The DnD will recieve a lot of flak when they push through with this upgrade. It will make the FA-50 more expensive than the Gripen NG which Saab just slashed the cost to $47M. This will be a very ignorant decision if ever it gets approved. Our AFP will be the laughing stock of other countries.

    On the other hand, if the US just wants to use our country as a laundering vehicle to save Lockheed Martin in disguise of financial and military aid under the treaty, i guess this is just fine.

    1. Sorry, but I don’t agree that the Gripen E cost only USD 47 million. I think all of the contracts for actual Gripen E sales so far has been over USD 100 million per aircraft inclusive of training, logistics and weapons …

    2. At this stage, I have no reason to distrust the decision-making of the DnD as well as the military leadership. Just like us, they would want to best possible hardware they can get out of the allocation given them.

      But it is just as good as long as Pnoy is still at helm

  7. If the cost of the upgrade is almost the same or more than a brand new MRF (f15/f16/gripen/typhoon etc.) then i think it is pointless. We could have bought these MRFs in the first place. The FA50 LIFT roles should should only upgraded if it is cost effective in the near and long terms. In the meantime the geagles could be fitted with ecm warfare suite and chaff, flare decoys. As a stop gap we could purchase 2 or 3 kfirs with the bvr ordnance for air policing and interdiction. If the cost you say is what it is this purchase is still very much lower than the upgrade and missiles combined. Yun nga lang luma pa rin yung airframe. How about the israeli route? Do the pythons and derbys still need licensing fees? How about the SAAB missiles? The dassault missiles? The dnd should explore these other options as well. If the upgrade cost are still very much expensive then we have no choice but to stop the geagle purchase to 12 and find newer more cost effective platforms. Thailand already has a SAAB based networked radar air defense with the gripen as its cornerstone.

  8. Way back in 2010 or 2012?, One of the AFP generals already mentioned (browse the net I think you will find the article) that they are looking for a jet aircraft (that would be the replacement for the retired F5 jets) that is capable of carrying medium range missiles. Its one of the basic requirements that they are looking for. So when the AFP zoomed in at the FA 50 and signed the contract I knew we will be having a jet that is capable of firing BVR missiles. I think 3-4 BVR FA50 upgrade would be just fine and practical. The BVR equipped jets would act as “protector” of those non BVR FA 50 in case they got into a situation. It would give the non BVR FA 50 time to get close so they could use their sidewinders in case engagement happens. And in routine patrol I expect that the FA 50 would fly in pairs (minimum), in which one of those jets is BVR capable. They are doing just fine.

    1. Thanks for the link. I was actually monitoring this news since yesterday, and despite Vietnam’s strong comments, I don’t think they can really do much at this point. They already LOST the islands to China after a skirmish a couple of decades ago, and they only way they can stop Beijing is to try to take it back by force, and I don’t think they will do that. Again, its all just about bluff, posturing and noise, I would be very surprised if it goes beyond that.

      1. Well, it seems Vietnam is trying to use force but at the same time avoid a shooting war. They will use Water Cannons, Ramming, etc., but not guns. Its now a game of who will first lose his temper. The first one who can’t control his temper and start shooting “loses”, at least in the court of international opinion. I think THAT will be the game for the South China Sea for the near future, its like bullying each other but not using weapons …

      2. Yes, there will be a lot of rhetoric, threats and posturing, but I think China will come short of shooting first. They ARE hoping we do the shooting first, so this is something we must avoid. They might use Water Cannons, they might even start ramming our ships, I think that is how the “game” is going to be played for now.

        Nobody wants war, not Vietnam, not the US or not even them, so the key is to find a way to assert your interests without using weapons. Its going to be like “Takeshi’s Castle” out there with ships firing water cannons and ramming at each other. We should prepare for this type of a “Non-Lethal” type of warfare …

    2. Ya, I see it the same way too but the likelihood that it will escalate into armed confrontation is now highly probable…

      1. Its possible, eventually magkaka pikunan talaga iyan. But hopefully everybody will resort to non-lethal confrontation for as long as possible, until our armed forces’ new equipment arrives.

        I think China also wants to keep everything non-lethal with regards to the Philippines because they know there is a good chance their favored candidate Binay might win in the next elections. If that happens, it is possible they will be able to gain a better foothold on the Spratly’s under less confrontational circumstances.

  9. if the situation really needs bvr capability…then have to go to KFIR block 60. maybe 12 units. it seems its very hard for us to get the brand new MRFs. lets be practical now, we still need the FA-50 for training and interim fighter while looking into the future in acquiring brand new MRFs. but if we feel its still a long long way to get brand new MRFs then get the KFIR block 60. KFIRs is also capable of air refuelling..although its second hand but the israelis re-designed/refurbished these KFIRs to be competitive even against 4th generation fighters. and if our pilots are trained with the most experience fighter pilots in the world (the israelis), we might get the best of the KFIRs capability which the israelis only knew. just remember the columbian fighter pilots with KFIRs C10/C12 (a later version) have a good show during the RED FLAG by shooting down several F-16s and one F-15. the israelis could have extensively trained these columbian pilots even without actual air to air combat experience.

  10. The only thing for the AFP is to buy Gripen NG and lots of mobile anti-ship missiles. China is planning to use the carriers at hainan.

  11. dont worry gm79s the chinese is still long way to go for aircarft carrier operations. actually the chinese newly acquired aircrat carrier from russia ” liaoning” is very expensive to operate and as of the present its not capable of combat operations. liaoning is only used for training operations because what china in mind is to build its own aircraft carrier.

    1. Which means we will be controlling the skies over Spratlys for a decade at most so there is no need to focus on air-superiority just yet. We just need ASHM capable aircraft. Even turboprops can do just fine. Even if they are able to send their J-10’s and Su-30’s air superiority fighters via aerial tankers, they will still be disadvantaged. Pakistan had so many F-86 sabres during their war with India but despite their air-superiority they lost to India’s hard-hitting Hawker Hunter surface attack jets. Its all about tactics so offshore radars must be prioritized. Their new airstrip in Subi Reef isn’t doing very well so they’re itching for Ayungin, we’d better get developers there fast.

  12. Dont worry!?!?,even without the chinese carrier,chinese will be able to get those shoals and potentially oil rich areas within our country ‘s’ eez, and what we gonna throw on them in case the chinese makes a move?in our present situation,the chinese are already on our backyards…they are acting as if these areas are their own…unopposed…the only thing that’s holding them now on our sea areas is the implied help that would come from u.s.a…look what the chinese doing right now in paracel island near vietnam.the chinese are not just probing on that area…they already have that area since 1974 and now the chinese oil rig is out there too.im not too alarming…but that one main advantage of chinese leaders are being farsighted in
    their vision for their country…the ball is in motion since 1974 on vietnam and since 1995 on the part of the philippines.,almost 20 yrs since then….and until now…we barely have anything on our military arsenal.

  13. In addition to short-range AIM-9 air-to-air missile AIM-120 AMRAAM medium-range guided missile is the addition of 30 billion won , the possible integration costs to buy one of Korea Air Force and Lockheed Martin delicate position because you do not want to attach AMRAAM AMRAAM equipped viewed as difficult for the time being . Even if the moon AMRAAM Lockheed Martin F-16 , as well as the export of Korea Air Force also as tough KFX project is likely to be difficult . Because the price is very expensive , and AMRAAM F-15K and KF-16 can only be because the first dividend FA-50 is unlikely to be allocated . In addition, the FA-50 medium-range air-to-air missile dare to operate most models do not have to hold the Air Force (F-15K/KF-16/F-16 PB improved performance / FX business model can be combined to create the third quantity is close to 300 . ) their capability to operate amram . Pinpoint the attacker has the name you want to mount is definitely slated for a JDAM . If not armed with a variety of high-quality and larger fuel tanks dropped about armed country of purchase needs to be changed so that the export there is room for help .

    However, when considering export AMRAAM can be integrated inventory . For example, the Philippines is the FA-50 is the only fighter . AMRAAM operational performance of the Philippines did not require it (F-16 fighters used , such as the introduction of a separate plan or sangwigeup ) AMRAAM does not have the budget to purchase medium-range air-to-air missiles, not Lee would not consider there is no need . Future because of the FA-50 medium-range air-to-air missile inventory and the current performance of such a missile radome radar in space equipped with a pull out full issue will come up above water ever again . Early warning of the governor of a small country because they can not get help .

    End of February 2014 , an armed operation to further expand business area . For more information, pokjangryang unknown, but the opinion seems to increase business

      1. Personally, I prefer the Sidewinder over the Sparrow for short-range air combat because of the Sidewinder’s fire-and-forget capability. The Sidewinder has a bit of a spotty Combat Record, did well in the Falklands Islands with a 70% Pk, but didn’t do too well during Desert Storm where it had a much lower Pk. But at least it had a much higher actual combat Pk potential than the Sparrow, whose best Pk is only 33%. Plus the Sparrow is not fire-and-forget …

  14. Three groups of four best-selling F-16 or a similar position was the F/A-18 was also increased, specifications, system is not cheap anymore. Griffin NG price is not cheap.
    More than $ 100 million more than 4.5G, you must think of.
    The Philippines is in the Air Force because the equipment is outdated, more than twice that in other countries keep Enters.

  15. We will not be the ones shooting first because we dont have anything to use to shoot back at all. Best case is water cannon warfare. Palakasan ng ihi ng tubig. In the meantime India just successfully tested its homemade air to air missile. It may be an option again if India just speed up its work. The HAL tejas could be the next best option next to the geagles if they could only manufacture them fast enough. The Chinese will never submit to Rp or Vietnam because they know that the ASEAN pretty much is divided. Because the malaysians and indonesians and singaporeans have a wait and see attitude. If china intrudes into their territory then they will act. They will pretty much wait for the chinese to attack Vietnam and RP then they will help. Kakulay at kalahi pa naman natin yung mga yan. i guess its in our Malay culture to be self serving. I also read in the star that the chinese have started radio jamming the ayungin area. Talk about de-escalating tensions by the Chinese. They really want Ayungin that bad.

    1. If our coast guard can’t match up with theirs, we can easily contract out marine cranes and cargo ships to ferry construction and heavy equipment to Ayungin, just like what they did to Subi. These vessels are several times larger than their coast guard vessels so they can’t be easily rammed. Shahani and Saguisag are right. We’d better place structures there fast.

    1. If that is the case then we are in luck. we just build boats made for ramming with fire hoses. Tipid yun. di na natin kelangan bumili ng frigates hehehe. Back to bronze age,300 style warfare. Tipid din sa uniform dapat naka bahag, cape and headress lang din sailors natin.

      1. The Frigates will still be needed, but we will also need non-lethal options. Personally mas maige na nga iyan na mag balyahan at mag tubigan na lang muna kesa mag barilan agad. This will give us more time to strengthen our armed forces …

  16. Bhert, since the chinese have no operational carriers yet, we have to play smart. when the chinese send their whites why we dont send ours. while we still in the process getting our minimum defence requirements (start with the fa-50) we should send our whites. just equipped them for ramming and water cannons. the reason the chinese send their whites its because they dont want to fire first and that is a smart move. since the game is ramming and blasting water cannons we have just to play with it but the most important thing, is our physical presence in the disputed WPS.

  17. thus the necessity for those 40m or more japanese patrol boats for the coast guards. we need more “white ships so as we can play the game the chinese are playing. we escort our fishermen and confront the chinese white ships. while we constantly build up our defence to reach credible defencive capabilties.

    on a different note, i was just browsing youtube and stumbled upon this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJusDQt97qw). if this were factual and not just an israeli self serving ad… i’d say that the purchasing a lesser cost kfir block 60 is a great idea. cheap and effective (has bvr capabilities). the kfirs can be a stop gap mrf till we can get enough experience and budget for a 100million dollar mfr.

    1. Fascinating. If we are getting this aircraft we must must be ready for any political repercussions from the Arab World and our Muslim neighbors. “Kfir” means infidel or unbeliever. Chosen by the Jews to signify their defiance against their enemies in the Middle-East. This is a must have for Christian countries like ours not only as a defensive tool but also for cultural and symbolic reasons. Our pre-hispanic history is dramatized by our relentless resistance against jihadists even as Malays and Indons have succumbed to it. We should be proud of calling ouselves “kaffirs” Purchase 2 or 3 units for keepsakes.

      1. “Kfir” means “Lion Cub” in Hebrew, although it does sound the same as the word “Kafir” in Arabic which means “Infidel/Unbeliever/Atheist”. However, I don’t think the Israelis are using that word to rile up the Arabs as they are not “atheists”, they do believe in a God, just a different God from the Muslims …

    1. Yeah, its going to be one hell of an equipment for our Navy. I still feel uncomfortable though over the fact that it may not have the proper ship with sophisticated sonar equipment to support it, though.

      1. Indonesia is getting 16 asw helos according to janes. Looks like somebody is going sub hunting. After seeing vietnam vs china round one i think the asean will take the china problem seriously. Then again.. How about those kiowas? Can they be navalized? We are getting 21 refurbished uh1s which are almost 40 years old maybe kiowas aint that bad.

      2. 16? Wow, and we’re only getting 2. I wonder if they are getting smaller, less sophisticated ASW helicopters, though.

        I’m more impressed with the fact that Indonesia is getting 3 Chang Bogo class subs, and I am almost sure that more sub procurements are in place for them once they get more operational experience with those Chang Bogos …

      3. Is a matter of placing the meager resources to vantage point of our AFP in securing our territory. In my humble own opinion it must be studied very well base on information to capture the weakness of the enemy. Always remember a great Armed Forces has its own weaknesses.

  18. The original FA-50 wing is £ 20,000 (10 tons) to allow digestion of the armed KF-16 was designed twice as high strength, armed with some of the issues I’ve got one mounted million pounds (4.5 tons) and has been limited. Of the Air Force’s demanding KAI £ 12,000 (5.4 tons) to expand to the entire design, including the wing and fuselage to create a new and seems to be several issues.

    1. Hi, kim205co. Thanks for your comments, but I can’t understand most of what you are saying. Can you ask somebody to help you translate your comments to English? This is so we can communicate better. Thanks.

      1. Sa tingin ko, baka gusto niyang magsulat ganito, “KAI and KAF are in process to enhence the payload of FA-50. So FA-50 can afford more weapons (and missiles) in near future.” They are gonna re-design the wing (Just a little bit.) para makapapayload up to 5.4tons.

      2. Thanks for the clarification, Mike. But will these enhancements cover the FA-50s we are buying? If not, then too bad …

      3. I’m not sure about it. The upgrade will be done in 2015, So maybe PhAF can get it, or not. Plus, FA-50 was originally designed to endure much more payload then 4.5tons. But there are some issues during the developement of FA-50, that makes it inferior. (AESA, Payload, Weapon integration, Fuel tank, etc..)

  19. israelis dont lie about their kfirs block 60…the british dont like it…the argentines are interested to purchase 24 of these jets

  20. http://www.asiatoday.co.kr/view.php?key=20140228010008443

    It’s about P 850,000,000 plan and KAI announced this in Feburary 28. Due to the limitation of F-404’s output, nevertheless KAI re-design the structure of the wing, the maximum payload will be 5.4tons,

    “Extra expanding the weapon operation abillity of FA-50” is the name of the plan. I just translated it literally, so it may sounds odd. Anyway that’s not the point, diba.

    1. Strengthening the wings will enable the FA-50 to have a higher Maximum Take Off Weight (MTOW) which in turn will increase its Payload. And I think it will also increase the aircraft’s G-Limit from 8 to 9Gs, making it comparable to the more modern fighters like the F-16 and Super Flankers. I hope they incorporate these into the aircraft we are buying, it would make for better performance of the aircraft overall …

  21. They are going to expand the wing area no doubt, to give it more lift. It might compromise the maneuverability a little bit. Such as faster loss of velocity at high angles of attack.

    1. I don’t think they will increase the area of the wing, they seem to say they will only make it stronger, increasing the aircraft’s maximum take off weight and thus its payload. It will also means the wing can support the aircraft during higher G loadings, increasing the FA-50s G-limit from 8 to 9Gs (probably).

      Increasing the wing area actually will lower the Wing Loading and allow the FA-50 to turn tighter. But you are right, a bigger wing will mean more drag and thus the aircraft will lose speed more quickly during a turn. The additional drag might also result in lower range and speed for the aircraft …

      1. question, are the israeli made bvr’s and wvr’s also subject to licensing fee of the US? just asking.

      2. The problem is not with the weapons, but with aircraft (the FA-50) itself. Since the FA-50 is built under license from Lockheed’s design and with Lockheed even helping KAI build the aircraft, it seems they retained full control of what weapons to arm it with. Compare this with the Tejas, for example.

        Since the Tejas was ingenuously designed by HAL, then nobody was keeping them from putting whatever weapons they want to put in it, like Helmet Mounted Sights, High Off Boresight Missiles and Beyond Visual Range Missiles. Of course the Tejas is a Light Combat Aircraft while the FA-50 is an Advanced Jet Trainer, but I think that if they could have, KAI would’ve put more advanced weapons with the FA-50s as much as possible.

      3. Yes LM can also affect to KAI or FA-50 but the most affective issues are not the LM but the national issues in korea. KAF just dont want it for now because if FA-50 can operate BVR weapons, they think it will disturb KFX plan. And that is also why they stopped the F-50 plan. Some of congress men and government officers prefer cost-efficient fighter, they are in opposite side of KFX plan. So KAF is strongly pushing the KFX plan before FA-50 become AMRAAM-able. I think BVRable FA-50 is not that serious matter for LM.

      4. Maybe LM also asking some licensing fee for that but I think the python-5 and derby missile are comparable and also reasonable in price. But I’m not sure if LM accept it. And KAF doesn’t want to integrate these weapons into FA-50. They got AIM-120B,C already. The most possible scenario is AIM-120B. For now on, KAF have enough F-16PB so it’s not yet turn for FA-50 to operate AIM-120. Maybe it would be available after KFX plan start.

  22. In other words we got screwed by going the cheapo route. We got a low cost fighter with high cost weapons. Unlike if we invested in a SAAB we get a medium cost platform with indigenous medium cost weapons. SAAB also says that they do not believe in LIFTs rather they train their pilots in the simulators instead of getting a LIFT asset. We could have followed their advise as well. Sigh…If we really wanted a cheapo but reasonably cost wvr/bvr weapons asset we could have gotten the KFIRs. I wonder if the Singaporeans got it right by getting the m346? Are they bvr capable?

    1. The M346 is a lot less capable than the FA-50, read again my blog about it. It is ideal as an Advanced Jet Trainer, but has lot less capability as a combat aircraft.

      I don’t agree with Saab insisting on not having an Advanced or Intermediate Jet Trainer, most countries in the world use an AJT, they are an exception. And the Gripens themselves are quite expensive, all contracts involving the Gripen Es so far has cost over USD 100 million per aircraft.

  23. By the way the chinese got mabini shoal already. Maybe somebody up there in the rp can do something about it…i guess its runway building time in the spratlys.

  24. Nothing!!! Becouse what we have right now is not enough to discouraged the chinese,this what i have said earlier . ..what we gonna do,if the chinese will change the status quo?sooner and sooner ,it will come ,and we will see them that they already occupied those shoals at the west philippines sea…once they got it,there is nothing we could do about it…except to take it in a very expensive and dangerous way.what some us were worrying is started to become reality…chinese intentions is so predictable…we should be worrying about it…

  25. because we commit one big mistake…NO PRESENCE IN THE DISPUTED WPS. dont know what is our intention not deploy even a single coast guard vessel…now i just imagine we cannot sustain to patrol our territory because lack of logistics “FUEL”. now we will be buying new frigates, new helicopters, new transports, new fighters and etc. but with lack of logistics and no definite plan to solve it…that is a big problem…what happen to our 2 del pilars?? where are they?? the last time we saw our del pilar is during the yolanda operation.

    1. One of the Del Pilars is guarding Malampaya. As for the other ships, I think the reason they didn’t want to send Navy ships is because China will only respond in kind by sending in their more capable Navy ships also.

      But I do find it very strange why the Coast Guard has been kept off the WPS until now, and I can’t find any satisfactory answer to it. They say we don’t have any Coast Guard ships, but that is hogwash. We received 4 Tenix boats from Australia beginning in 2003 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Juan_class_patrol_boat), so what happened to these?

      I suspect the CG is hiding something, something is not right here. There is probably some major screw up somewhere that nobody wants to talk about and that certain people want to keep under wraps as much as possible.

  26. when we brought provisions to the marines at ayungin why not used coast guard vessels..why used private shipping..is it a good strategy??..now i’ve heard we stopped using a private vessel but now we air drop again our provisions to the marines. i dont know what strategy we are employing..but seems we are showing our weakness than our determine to claim our territories.

    1. We’re not just showing our true weakness…its wrong policy and strategem,why not our goverment buy a civilian big ships and make it as unarmed coast guarships?in this way ,we have a big maritime patrol vessels to protects and implements our law and sovereignty…without risking a shooting war,if the name of the game right now is ramming ships and shooting water…at least we do have a big ships that rammed and be rammed and this is the best way to internationalized the greedy and creeping invasion of our territory by the chinese….this is a flagrant violations of international law…by not doing proactively…were are just giving up…how could other countries would help us ? If we? are not doing it by ourselves?yes …militarily were still lag behind but we could respond and protect our sovereignty ,by using big converted ship to coast guard…this the only rapid,feasible and cheapest solutions to our coastguard…as well as protecting our country “immediately”…if the name of the game now is ramming and be rammed and water cannoing….we could do it..we could show it proactively….that we are depending our sovereignty in the best we could do..we should be complacent on this situation…we should handle it smartly…we should have an “immediate” or short”,medium and long term plan….see,that building of airstrip at mabini shoal is been going on for a while now…once that one, is completed ,that the end for us…becouse the chinese are more capable of imlementing whatever they like to do like declaring a south china sea adiz…another one is…they are capable of snooping on our military and vital economic facilities…and the worse of all is the chinese would be able to encouraged ,protects their chinese fisherman for whatever illegal activities as well as preventing the filipinos to fish on our own backyard…in the long term,chinese would be having a advance defense and offense capabilty.im not pessimistic but its happening since way back 1994….wr should not trust them…not even entered to negotiations or treaty…look on what they doing to their co communist country – vietnam…they have two treaties and yet chinese is still violating those treaties and vietnam’s eez…at least vietnam have something to in their arsenals to at leat delays and internatinalized the tense situations….the chinese is predictable on their intentions…we need to handle and play it smart or we left nothing…all those long term solutions of fighter planes and frigates would do nothing once the chinese is settled and possed those shoals at west philippines sea.as i said im not pessimistic but it started to show the reality.

  27. Government response to the issue is very frustrating to say the least. Where are the Tenix boats and their boasting of thousands of reserved force?
    RHK, what are they doing or what are they gonna do? Are they gonna wait for us to vent ire on Chinese nationals here in the country?

    Kakainis naman….

    1. I think that’s the problem with this PNoy Administration, it seems its policies and accomplishments are based on ‘tsambahan’. Sometimes it does things right, but sometimes it does things wrong also. No real consistency in terms of getting things done.

      1. You are right. He would rather depend on luck. The problem is the enemy is not fighting fair. While pnoy talks they are building airstrips. Its like fighting fire with words. When the hague unclos decision becomes in favor of us by that time china already has all the islands and shoals. And how will we shoo them off? I hope china fires the first shots just so i could tell pnoy “i told you so.” By the way im confused which one really costs less? The gripen or the viper? Ano ba talaga?

      2. Follow up question..what if we win at unclos but china is still in the un security council can they compel them to leave? Most likely russia will abstain. That is my point. Its gonna be a crimea at sea. How will you negotiate with a person who will not negotiate and play fair? Yun nalang. China will not abide unless the whole nations of the world agree that what it is doing is wrong. And that consensus is gonna be years to cultivate.

      3. If we win our case, then we will have the LEGAL RIGHT and MORAL AUTHORITY of owning the territories there are at the Spratlys Islands. China can, of course stay, but if they do so it will have serious effects on their diplomacy and foreign policy as they will always be seen as a THIEF.

        Political and economic sanctions could be imposed on them, and it will be easier for other countries to help us militarily in terms of equipment or maybe even more because they will only be helping us get back what was legally ours but was stolen from us. It will be a disaster to China’s dream of owning the WPS if they lose in the arbitration case …

      4. Based on past purchases, the Gripen E is more expensive than the Viper Block 52. However, since Saab recently said they are lowering the price of the Gripen E, then it will likely be the same or maybe even cheaper than the Viper. But as of now there are no solid buyers yet of the Gripen E based on their new prices set by Saab …

      5. i hope they do leave peacefully. yun nga lang mapapahiya sila. i think that is the most dangerous problem. how would you explain to your own people you made a mistake. diplomatically i would think the chinese will have to fight a little bit to save face or resort to an incident that would leave both parties with no pride lost. or the worst case that the UN will just slap the wrist of china (because everything is made in china) and leave us hanging.

    1. Not sure if Japan can really help us in terms of modernizing our armed forces. They’ve been talking about relaxing their arms export laws for months now, and yet not much seems to have happened in that direction. So far the only concrete help with hardware they have given us are those Coast Guard boats, which are still a year or so away from delivery.

  28. See!!!we should be worrying even though the chinese doesn’t use yet their aircraft carrier.have you ever remembered,that the chinese tried in vained/begged the philippines to delayed the filing of memorials to unclos way back january/february on unclos deadline of march 2014??? becouse that’s what the chinese is doing?the ramification of this airstrip at mabini shoal are so many and a big changer game..1. It will change the physical structure of mabini shoal to an island.and under the unclos -whoever occupied/possessed that island”peacefully is entittled to have 200 nautical miles from that said island and that means from that ex mabini shoal,it would become a mabini island ,the chinese could claimed sovereignty to palawan!!!where are the bunches of smart people in our goverment especially the negotiating team? They should think ahead of different scenenario/ strategems?we should have a goverment think tank…we are just talking and talking without substance…that’s why we become idiots and stupids in the international news and comments.
    2. “Whoever possessed that island peacefully,is entittled to have 200 nautical miles from said “peacefully occupied island”as per my interpretation from unclos .NOW,what is the goverment response?where is the coastguard?those tenix coastguarships is good enough to exercise our sovereignty? Are we afraid of trading off/loosing ships rather than loosing our shoals and sea territories to chinese?risking of loosing the supposed…our intellegent/precedent action of filling memorials to unclos??.are we giving up our territories and let the chinese occupied it peacefully?it seems for me that the vietnamese is doing right …after all in responding in a kind or sort right now…”not giving up peacefully their sovereignty.., im not encouraging shooting war but at least send those coastguard ships out there…as i previously mentioned….commissioned big civilian ships to coastguard ships for ramming and be rammed.this a good way of showing our sovereignty to west philippines sea. Second .this a good way and cheapest way of internationalizing this issue on european and u.s goverment- as i read here at wanghington post and wall street journal,they recognized that,even thought the chinese occupied that island,those international news recognized that it belong to vietnam.third.by sending those coast guard on that area…and this is the best time to do it …were are showing our resolved that this area is an inherent part of our territory and at thesametime we are showing our support to our asean brother vietnam,and this might encouraged unity among asean nations and be noticed by other countries and encouraged to give us more support.how other countries would support us on this endeavor of our own national territory,if we as a nation would not bother placed any opposition on this chinese invaders?let’s face it…we need help…we should learned first to help ourselves…and be ready to lend help to others…that’s where unity/camaderie comes from….we need a united front against this chinese invaders.
    3.and once the chinese is settled at mabini shoal.it would be very hard to eject them…case point, the mischief reef,which they occupied since way back 1994.it would become part of chinese territory and from them…it would change the geopolitics on this area and then it would have a catastrophic effect on our country’s future economically,militarily and politically.or someday we would be a sattelite country of chinese giving the propensity of some filipinos to be modern days makapili…short of being patriotic and “ako muna and showbiz mentality”filipinos would be living the rest of their life with chinese damocles pointing on vfilipinos neck.
    4. As i have written before,we should play and handle it smartly and wisely…dont be complacent…see…the chinese doesn’t even use “aircraft carrier”,and once mabini shoal turned into island – it would be more than equivalent of unshinkable aircraft carrier,just a stone throw away from palawan…and from military stand point…the chinese could effectively established south china sea adiz on our west philippines sea…and it would have a huge eco-enviroment effect on the philippines..were going to loose our natural resources,not even counting the pontential oil richness of that area.
    We become a de facto official announcer of the chinese…whatever development out there…we ate the one announcing to the world…we become stupid…becouse of being so shortsighted and narrow visions on this area…remember ?this is not just a philippines jurisdiction ,we are in the international arena.
    While we’ re so busy with our daily rotten politics …we were loosing our territories and natural resources…poor the country of my birthplace….filipino politicians are stealing from its national treasury and here comes the chinese stealing from the philippines its territories and its natural resources…
    We need to act together for the remaining hope left for this country…

  29. While we’ re busy and distracted on our heavy dose of showbiz type rotten politics,we were loosing our national territories,poor country of my birhplace…filipino piliticians stealing from its national treasury and here comes the chinese..stealing from the philippines its national territories and its natural resources…what ,what is left for you/ us ordinary,honest filipinos?!?!?
    Why other filipinos living on other countries able to make it well and doesn’t want to stay more in this country of ours?considering it is also hard to live on other countries….maybe wathever hardships they endured,returned to them immediately like good quality of life?good infrastructure?and good goverment and its services to its people and if the its goverment serves its people well,its serves its country well and vice versa….
    We need to think and act together for the remaining hope left for this country…becouse someday philippines would be dismembered to a different entities…were are regressing…not progressing…becouse of the old/closed mentalities especially on those occupied the positions of power …

  30. Relax,
    At least they are not sucking oil from Recto Bank yet. By the time ITLOS ruling comes out, we can say thank you for the free Real Estate Development. There is no way they can claim indemnity because they built it in Bad Faith. We stand to gain ten-fold if we keep ourselves restrained and let them compound their offenses because our real target is the debilitating UN economic sanctions that is ten times worse than what Russia is experiencing right now. When China gets this, it will implode with its huge domestic problem.
    If the whole world betrays us, that’s a different matter. We need a Plan B just in case China gets away with it.

    1. That iswhat im scared of. I hope vietnam files a protest as well. Why would they not pala? Torching chinese businesses and filing an itlos case would be a nice combo for them.

      1. They stand to lose more if they file it themselves. Vietnam occupies a huge chunk of the Spratlys chain that is way beyond their EEZ so they are not in good faith either and the case will only serve to decrease their occupied area. Philippines on the other hand only occupies 2 features outside the EEZ. One is in the neutral spot and the other on the border straddling Malaysia’s EEZ.

      2. That’s another reason why China is can act more brazenly towards Vietnam compared to us …

      3. why are communist countries so greedy and eager to use force? i sense a pattern…russia, china, vietnam, north korea. i thought communism would be more communal, equal, more sharing than capitalism? repressed much?

    2. The problem is, once they have established themselves there it will be very hard to kick them out. Probably nothing but military force will be needed to remove them from their installations.

      1. You’re right. But it will give us more flexibility in the diplomatic front. I foresee ultimatums to be given first before sanctions are applied, same procedure to evict a non-paying tenant from a property.

        Whether they will be kicked out earlier or later depends on how the major powers are slugging it out in the global economy and how much the ASEAN countries are willing to offer the West to help contain China’s greed. China and Russia knows that they can’t unseat the Western World in terms of World trade so they are attempting to get an ace with the Siberian-Pacific oil pipeline, The Spratlys oil is just a minor variable in the equation that could be a decisive one. If they succeed in monopolizing oil distribution, it’s game over for the West.

      2. now i get it. if vietnam was in the right in the first place asean might have denounced china easily. what i find weird is that china can easily diffuse the situation by talking multilaterally to asean and negotiate as equals rather than taking the position that south china sea is their lake. are they that greedy? and their masses are brainwashed to thinking that their country is superior in every way to their neighbors. I read in the philstar that their retired general is suggesting that our soldiers in ayungin be captured in retaliation for their poaching fishermen. it would seem common sense is not so common when it comes to oil and energy resources.

  31. its time we should offer to the americans the full use of our air and naval bases in palawan and to convert the kalayaan island as a marine training base so that philippine and u.s. marines can periodically train there. heck with those anti-americans sentiments.

  32. I hate to sound like a pimp my ride host but maybe it’ll be possible to incorporate the GE F414 engine to the instead of the F404..both I think has the same dimensions, an AESA radar maybe in the future and maybe IRST.

    1. i know the kfir is old news but how about replacing the j79’s of the kfir and replacing it with f414 and add FADEC to it. Upsize by adding fbw and irst to it as well. Now that is a kfir block 61 hehehe. No need to worry about bvr,wvr missiles, aesa radars. I hopw IAI is listening.

  33. with due respect to you opinion Sir Bhert but i think ur understanding of the unclos is unfortunately incomplete. uninhabited islands (islands without native people or animal life) are not given a 200nm eez. though that is one of the topics in the phl memorial where they want a reaffirmation of that rule.
    i have also been wondering where our coast guards are. why aren’t they being deployed in the wps? are all cg ships docked?

  34. i remember during the scarbarough shoals stand off BRP Edsa if im not wrong was deployed facing those chinese CGs..but it was withdrawn when threat of typhoon yolanda was imminent, the chinese also withdraw their ships. but after yolanda the Chinese CGs returned but not a single PCG boats were sent back. these was discovered when our fishermen complained that Chinese CGs bombarded them with water cannons. and elsewhere in the WPS we cannot find any PCG vessels patrolling. only lately a component of our PNP were able to apprehend chinesse fishermen caught illegally fished out sea turtles and other rare aquatic species. WHERE THE COAST GUARD???. since according to our doctrine in the WPS white is white then just the same with china, vietnamn we must send our whites. but in regards to vicinity of Palawan and near Kalayaan island our navy ships must be busy patrolling in its nearby islands and islets or else we might be surprise again that chinese structures are already set-up just kilometers from kalayaan. if possible build structures and sent marines just what we have done in ayungin. we have to occupy all shoals, reefs, islets and islands which we feel part of our territory.

    1. Either the CG is being held back by the Administration for one reason or the other, or that it is in such a bad shape it isn’t able to conduct its duties properly anymore …

  35. we have 8 brand new coast guard vessels build by Tenix, Australia, commissioned between year 2000 to 2004. we have 4 San Juan class all with helipads and 4 Ilocos Norte Class. These are our bigger CG vessels that is capable to patrol the WPS. The BRP Edsa is a San Juan class. i would understand if logistic (FUEL) is the problem but no one is telling us what is the real condition of CG why it is not deployed in the WPS. if logistics is the problem same with the AFP the CG must given a top priority to increase its budget particularly logistics, because we need the CG in WPS. hope they have water cannons.

  36. That’s the problem…where are our white ships,in the first place ,the chinese would not be able to build anything ,if the coast guard ships were on rotational sea duty,right ,remember it was accidentally discoverd during the search flight of missing malaysian airline way back march 2014…relax?we’re so “relax “to the extend of failure to exercise a mandated duties of our sovereignty.
    The coast guard should be equally prioritize with the navy and airforce.actually,we should have 3hamilton class ships by now?but way back some smart govertment people or out of “yabang” declined to have a 3rd one recently,and that supposed 3rd hamilton class ship went to Bangladensh navy,then recently ,the goverment was asking,they want some more hamilton ships.at least we should assigned one or two hamilton as coast guard ship first,with a helicopter would cover pretty much the area of wps,if we could have that supposed 3rd hamilton ship which went to bangladesh’s navy,and that’s what hamilton class ship intent to,they were formerly coast guard ship of america.
    Hopufully,economic sanctions would work for us?i doubt!Chinese economy would overtake american economy and would become the biggest within this decade,there are some u.s economics managers already claiming that at this time,chinese economy is equal to the u.s now.how could you imposed economic/trade sanctions ? 1. If your adversary’s economy is equally or bigger than yours?,u.s economic managers already admitted that chinese economy is equal right now with the u.s. And be overtaken within this decade. 2. How could you imposed eco/ trade sanctions,if you own trillions ofdollars of debt to your adversary? 3. How could you imposed eco/trade sanctions to your adversary without affecting your own economy? America is the 2nd biggest trading patner of u.s. after Canada. 4. How could you imposed eco/ trade sactions in the name of your small allies,when those some small allies nations are dependent to or expecting some economic bonanza from the chinese? this is the main reason why some asean countries are reluctant to be united.and this is the main reason for america’s pivot to asia…to make asean nations plus other countries on this region united , a sort of Asia’s version of NATO and EURO nations. So how america would back us ,if those nations involved would not unite? And the chinese known this…that’s why they dont want to enter to a multilateral agreements with the asean nations meaning a united entity…they prefer a bilateral agrreements for each nations involved with ,which is an euphemism of ” divide and conquer”.look what happened to vietnam?if you remember during sino-vietnamese war,mid70’s,chinese invaded vietnam thru it borders…vietnam gave chinese a very good fight…the chinese were bruised and bloodied and withdrawn and pull back into their own country….why? Becouse russia decided and was supporting vietnam at that time. So chinese is able applied now” divide and conquer” for vietnam,-is an orphaned state now,russia would not help her on this becouse russia needed a chinese support for russia’s CRimean adventure-militarily and ESPECIALLY ECONOMIC SUPPORT for russia.neither india would help( thought india has an agreement to explore oil in vietnam ‘s eez) becouse india still dependent on military tech to russia as well as eco and militarily…india would not invoved herself unless if india’s securities would be threaten.
    Russia/crimean-ukraine situatutions viz a viz chinese/ philippines situation are far different though thesame issue of land grabbing/invasion.
    Though a part of ukraine was invaded(crimea)UKraine goverment is not relaxing,you know what i mean…(though some portion of ukraine citizentry favared russian)
    1.still the ukrained goverment is able to rally ang get international support from european allies as prodded by the u.s.a…trade/eco sanctions partially working against russia becouse europe is united economically/ militarily ,which is you could not see on DIS-UNITED asean nations. 2.ukraine goverment is not “relaxing-” they are able to have and implemented military contigency plan to re-take and prevent further disberment/dis-integration of their nation with majority support of it citizens…so they are willing to sacrifice…so 1n 2 are called an exercise of mandated protecting soverignty of its country…neither you could see and have it on part of the philippines….sorry sad to say……3. America is able to lead/ prodded eco/ trade sactions to russia becouse u.s.a is not a major trading patner of russia,europian nations is russia’s major trading patner though some of its nation like germany and italy were go along with this trade sanctions both of these countries resisting it becouse european countries is dependent on russia’s natural gas.and if russia’s economy would gravely affected…chinese would come and help….remember.?trade and economic sanctions was imposed to chinese way back mid 80s( reason-tienemens massacre) but it was unsuccsessfull and at that time chinese economy/ military was still weak then…and in reverse chinese were able to develop their military industries thru copy cat technology or reverse engeenering, then how come you would know it would be effective at this time??? Even earlier way back 5 – 10 yrs ago u.s.a.was planning eco/ trade sactions against chinese(, reasons are unfair trade pratices and money manipulators)here at u.s.a…america is afraid of economic backlash to its country…. Now think about it? With those in details facts…how could it be successfull for trade embargo agaist china? Another case of point…iran….more than ten years of trade embargo ….and yet still standing plus they were able to develop an indigenous military industries plus nuclear capability which they are using now as their political and economic leverage…those nations are not” relaxing”…,mr corpuz.
    With regard to unclos provision of unhibited island would not be granted 200 eez, you could see the provision of” peacefully occupied island”meaning somebody on that said island already inhabited…well correct me if im wrong but ,the only permanent thing in this world is “CHANGE ” and that’s what the chinese is doing now…so once the chinese get it,there would be a gradual change…and once they are established out there on the shoals…they going to suck oil from recto bank in wps and it would be very hard to re- take back what is belong to us and that means shooting war and you know that we could not do it by ourselvess.the basic problem the is we failed to protect our country’s territory…as if somebody out there in our goverment and our country is “relaxing”.it is a simple logic…if somebody is roaming on you backyard lot…the owner of the said lot should be vigilant…not” relaxing”.if the intruder come into your backyard lot…you gonna make youself available to protect your property…if the guy is bigger than you,you gonna ask help from your household members as well your neighborn ,and in turn that neighbornhood would be united and vigilant to protect their area.there is no time to ” relax “of many facet of one’s life and one’s country’s endeavor to progress.

  37. Two things we can do to get back at China. First is to target it’s economy by attracting all the foreign companies based in China to transfer their operations to the Philippines by providing them the same if not better privileges and benefits that China offers. If China can do it, why cannot the Philippines. Japan is already looking at the Philippines to transfer the operations of Japanese companies after it’s own sea dispute with China. Our government just need to relax our foreign investment restrictions and labor laws. The second thing is to spread the word in the social media not to buy “Made in China” products.

  38. US Air-to-Air Missiles are too expensive for the Philippines to procure compared to those made in Russia, India or Israel. Better buy AAMs from these 3 countries that has comparable if not better performance to the Sparrow or AMRAAN or develop our own indigenous AAMs.

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