Malaysia to buy 18 Sukhoi Su-30MKM, delivery by 2006
-
To Singapore Tyransaur
"wait till they spend their bucks, then get something more cost effective... leapfrog them but make sure it's their money that's getting less bang for buck. "
There is no way that you can make them get less for their buck if they are using palm oil to pay for the stuff and we are using cash. -
Hey Viper, you are right. This topic keeps raising its head. It is nice to see so many people are so interested in the NGF program. However, as you have rightly pointed out, the end result might be more of a political one rather than based on technical merits. I also do have a slight suspicion that RSAF NGF might end up like the Koreans. I will be bitterly disappointed for the Rafale as it is clearly disadvantaged by its origin and "Made in France" label.Originally posted by Viper52:BTW I'm happy to continue debating about the missiles, but I agree with foxtrout that the NGF discussion should cease. Done to death liao. Thats why I didn't want to post detailed arguments in my previous post.
The French themselves do no favour to Dassault too, cutting down their numbers in favour of the cheaper Mirage 2000. Furthermore, failure to secure a contract in the middle east, India, etc might just hammer the last nail for the Rafales.
Well, I guess it is hello Super bugs, or more likely the good 'o eagles. -
Hey JoeBlack , i dunno abt others but even though im pro-Typhoon, certainly i wouldnt say the Rafale isnt a good aircraft because its is french.Originally posted by Joe Black:Hey Viper, you are right. This topic keeps raising its head. It is nice to see so many people are so interested in the NGF program. However, as you have rightly pointed out, the end result might be more of a political one rather than based on technical merits. I also do have a slight suspicion that RSAF NGF might end up like the Koreans. I will be bitterly disappointed for the Rafale as it is clearly disadvantaged by its origin and "Made in France" label.
I dun understand y would this NGF selection be influence politically by so much as we know , Singapore is still on the hunt for new helicopters , AWACs , Tanks and Missile systems , i believe those pressing superpowers might be sweeten in other deals .
As u know , the Koreans are extremely relying on the US for Defense , thus they might be in a different situation as US. Look at the 30 Pumas , the 350 AMX-13 , 44 AMX-10 , the 7 La Fayette , and the detactment in France . It is obvious that Singapore had comfortable defence co-operation with France while still not fermanting our long relationship with the US , thus dun be pesismistic that the NGF will mostly be from a US source. -
Because this contract will be the most lucrative of all the others. The Americans would want this contract most among the rest of the contracts for this reason(hence more likely to let politics influence) and we'll be happy to let them win this because of its bearing on the future JSF involvement, among other things.Originally posted by foxtrout8:I dun understand y would this NGF selection be influence political so much as we know , Singapore is still on the hunt for new helicopters , AWACs , Tanks and Missile systems , i believe those pressing superpowers might be sweeten in other deals .
We're slightly less dependant on US political meddling, but we more dependant than most people think. I believe in a situation such as this, Yank political influence would be telling. -
Back on topic, according to the June 2003 issue of Air Forces Monthly, the Malaysian Su-30 package includes canards and TVC(AL-31FP engines).
Weapons include R-27 Alamo/R-77 Adder/R-73 Archer AAMs, Kh-31P and Kh-31A Anti Radiation Missles/Anti Shipping Missiles, KAB-1500KR TV-guided bombs, FAB-500M62 free fall bombs and S-8 unguided rockets.
Electronics include the N-011 Bars radar, French and US avionics, glass cockpit and UMOZ OLS-30 IRST. -
smoking.... I assume we will see Amaraams in Singapore skys pretty soon now that a similar class of weapon is going to be introduced into the region....Originally posted by Viper52:Back on topic, according to the June 2003 issue of Air Forces Monthly, the Malaysian Su-30 package includes canards and TVC(AL-31FP engines).
Weapons include R-27 Alamo/R-77 Adder/R-73 Archer AAMs, Kh-31P and Kh-31A Anti Radiation Missles/Anti Shipping Missiles, KAB-1500KR TV-guided bombs, FAB-500M62 free fall bombs and S-8 unguided rockets.
Electronics include the N-011 Bars radar, French and US avionics, glass cockpit and UMOZ OLS-30 IRST.
Lastly, that's a lot of weapons added in the package. Now RMAF has to support Mk 80 series bombs as well as the Russian ones? New anti ships and anti radiation missiles?
Does that also imply that soon we will see HARM carrying Vipers in RSAF colours? Perhaps HaveLite too? Maybe perhaps RSAF might even want to officially annouce Python 4 as part of the inventory, Derby next perhaps?
-
Speaking of sparking an arms race, I really wonder who doing it here Joe Black, your're right in saying that if this AFM article is correct, they're introducing 2 new classes of weapons in the region, Active radar guided BVRAAMs and Anti-radiation missiles. Which is fine and good, I hope the liars masquerading as journalists in places like Utusan Malaysia won't accuse us of being "unneighbourly" when we bring back the AMRAAMs and buy HARMs.Originally posted by Joe Black:smoking.... I assume we will see Amaraams in Singapore skys pretty soon now that a similar class of weapon is going to be introduced into the region....
Lastly, that's a lot of weapons added in the package. Now RMAF has to support Mk 80 series bombs as well as the Russian ones? New anti ships and anti radiation missiles?
Does that also imply that soon we will see HARM carrying Vipers in RSAF colours? Perhaps HaveLite too? Maybe perhaps RSAF might even want to officially annouce Python 4 as part of the inventory, Derby next perhaps?
Yes, they'll have to support air-dropped weapons from all these different sources, which does nothing for their potential logistics logjam. But then, the alternative is rewiring the mission computers, software etc etc of one type to accept weapons from the other type. Which sadly, with all due respect, is beyond the capabilities of their local industry, with or without Indian help. -
http://rsi.com.sg/en/programmes/newsline/2003/05/23_05_02.htm
A look at Malaysia's plans to purchase Russian Sukhoi fighter jets
23 May 2003
Malaysia has agreed in principle to buy 18 Russian-made Sukhoi fighters in a deal valued at US$900 million.
While the contract for the Sukhois is likely to be signed this year, Malaysia is also in talks with the Boeing Company to purchase 18 Super Hornet fighters.
Reports indicate Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad has monetary reasons as well as political ones for sitting on the Boeing deal.
While Boeing is left waiting, several European leaders who agreed with Malaysia's anti-war stance have begun visiting the country to build diplomatic ties and win lucrative contracts.
For more on this, Augustine Anthuvan spoke to Associate Professor Brian Farrell, military historian from the National University of Singapore
and first asked him about the criteria used by countries like Malaysia when purchasing military aircraft
"Governments can rarely afford to give the airforce the professional luxury of making a decision which is based only on technical and operational considerations. There are too many other interests involved. This is going to be big news, its going to get a lot of media coverage, a lot of tax payers money is going to be spent. A lot of jobs are at stake. The fortunes of a lot of big companies are at stake and many of these big companies have important government backing which brings political considerations into play in a variety of different countries. So a purchase like Malaysia's US$1 billion plus purchase of Russian fighter aircraft triggers always inevitably a bidding war. And the familiar players are all there, the big American aircraft companies, the French, the Russians, etc. They all want the business. No government, Malaysia or anyone else, can ignore that aspect. None of them can ignore how this will be connected to their foreign relations. None of them can ignore how it will be connected to their economic considerations, how much money can they have spent on assembling this package in their own country for instance as opposed to spending it all on buying the equipment off the shelf from the foreign supplier. Those decisions are always in the end made by elected officials and they look at other things. Malaysia is doing that. It is attempting to strike a balance between how much money it has available, what its airforce needs, what it can function most efficiently with, and how it can best use this purchase to help promote its goals in diplomacy and foreign relations".
From what I understand in reports, the Defence ministry has either overspent or nearly exhausted its $2.8 billion allocation after heavy outlays on French submarines, British and Russian air-defence systems, Polish tanks, guns for the troops and new naval bases. How is Malaysia going to manage halfway through a five-year economic plan,? Are they going to resort to some form of contra payment - perhaps palm oil?
"Even if they resort to some sort of a barter arrangement, palm oil for planes. That's still going to have an economic impact. That's palm oil that they're going to have to give away instead of selling for hard currency to somebody else. Its going to have an economic effect and there isn't any clever slate or hand trick that they can use to avoid that. There are really only three things that they can do. One, swallow the necessary cost as an unavoidable expense of defending the country and promoting their foreign policy goals. Two, Make it possible to spend that money by cutting some other aspect of military spending. Or three, defer the cost to the point where it becomes nothing more than a book keeping matter. That the eventual expense will be incurred over 15 to 20 years and its in effect putting the problem off for a successor government to face another day.There is no way to avoid that, palm oil isn't an answer".
The purchase of these weapons from Russia, its more than just a defence purchase, it also building a sort of relationship. And I understand Russian President Putin is expected to visit Malaysia sometime before October. So how do you see relations between Malaysia and Russia, bouncing off the rest of the region here?
"Malaysia of course is not comfortable with the increasing profile of the US in South East Asia. Its ambivalent about this, of course on the one hand it shares much common ground with the Americans when it comes to the war on terrorism, particularly terrorism as pressed by intolerant fundamentalist groups claiming to be fighting in the name of Islam. Malaysia has a domestic political problem of its own in that respect. But on the other hand, the differences that the Malaysian government now have with the American government are outweighing their common ground. Malaysia remains very upset about the American led war on Iraq, it believes that America has pursued a clumsy and excessively physical foreign policy in its war on terror. That its increased its presence in the region in an unfriendly way which is expanding American influence to the detriment of ASEAN when it comes to defence policy and foreign policy. And obviously if it can take steps to pursue some sort of a counter weight to American influence in the region, it will be considering them. Reaching out to the Russians, pursuing a trail thats already been blazed by going on with purchasing Russian weapons to replace earlier older Russian systems that Malaysia already has. That can be presented as not an abrupt and radical change in policy. They've already done business with the Russians. But its also unmistakably a signal to the Americans that there are other people who can supply the kind of equipment that Malaysia needs and other powers whose agenda isn't necessarily identical with the Americans, who might be willing to align themselves with those who want to complain about American agendas or challenge American policies".
Associate Professor Brian Farrell from the National University of Singapore speaking with Augustine Anthuvan.
---------
Does anyone have a breakdown on the cost (or kickbacks - depending on how you look at it) of each set of military purchases? What is their total allocation for Malaysia's defence budget of their 5-year economic plan? -
When things are bought for in cash, it really drains the country's foreign reserver .. i.e USA dollars.
Lets look at how hard it is to EARN US$1.00 .. In Singapore, in order to earn that US$1.00, we have to SELL stuff to people who pay for it in US$ .. so we have to BUY stuff first .. hence outflow of US$ to buy stuff, mark up, add value, create jobs, infrastructure, educating workforce, housing, etc .. inorder to earn US$ by RESELLING the product ... So for every US$1.00 we earn, alot of it is spent already on other parts of the economy (which is good) and alot of it is spent buying raw materials and remitting to overseas from salaries of FW (which is bad)
Over in Malaysia, its just as hard (if not harder) to earn that US$1.00 .. they have to do everything we have to do in order to get people to buy their goods and pay that US$1.00 .. but if they use PALM OIL to pay part of that US$900million, what happens?
Well, what is the cost of creating US$1.00 worth of palm oil? The only cost that GOES OUT of the country is the remittance sent by the BANGLADESHI workers to their families. SO out of a salary of say RM400 a month, they at most can send RM200. But everything else is RM denominated. Every other part of the supply chain in creating that 1 ton of palm oil is Malaysian made or controlled. From the land, the companies doing it, the processing plant, the palm oil research, the transport of palm oil overseas, the commodity trading, the manufacturing of palm oil by-products, the regulatory of trade .. its all Malaysian. Even if Indonesia sells palm oil, the Malaysians make money. Anyone in the world buy or sell palm oil, the Malaysians make money (the palm oil trading centre of the world is Malaysia)
Basically, all that means is that RM3.80 worth of palm oil into the market is easier for Malaysia to manufacture/earn/give away compared to US$1.00 So definately, they are using this method to
a) Sell palm oil
b) Help the primary industry of palm oil manufacturing
c) Keep people employed
d) Take a stab against the soya oil people
e) Get some new weaponary
All that ties in very nicely with that Professor's Q&A session with our reporter. Guess that the Malaysians aren't that dumb after all. -
By offering to barter one's strategic agricultural product in such a massive outflow of US$10's of billions in value to foreign countries (Russia and USA), in exchange for economically non-performing imports of Defense Weapons, one can only wonder if the country is surrendering control of the long term strategic value of its own natural resources.
In the past, Malaysia had tried to "control" the "realistic" market price of its natural resources such as rubber, tin, and more recently palm oil.
All such attempts were a big flop, when foreign countries that have stockpiled such strategic commodities simply flooded the market with timed releases to bust any manipulation to the prices of such strategic natural products.
With so much Malaysian hype of sovereignty and unfair trade practises of foreign countries towards its products, one can only wonder if they have not created further problems in undermining their own efforts to promote such natural products. -
Some interesting reading of the Defense Budget of Malaysia and Singapore:
CIA Factbook – Malaysia
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/my.html
GDP: purchasing power parity - $200 billion (2001 est)
GDP – real growth rate: 0.3% (2001 est)
GDP – per capita: purchasing power parity - $9,000 (2001 est)
GDP – composition by sector: agriculture: 12% industry: 40% services: 48% (2001)
National Budget:
Revenue $20.3 billion
Expenditures: $27.2 billion, including capital expenditures of $9.4 billion (2001 est.)
Exports: $94.4 billion F.O.B (2001 est)
Imports: $76.9 billion F.OB. (2001 est)
Debt – external: $44.7 billion (2001 est)
Military Expenditures Dollar Figure - $1.68 billion (FY00 est)
Military Expenditures percent of GDP – 2.03% (FY 00)
More on Malaysia:
Country Analysis Briefs - Malaysia
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/malaysia.html
CIA Factbook – Singapore
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/sn.html
GDP: purchasing power parity - $106.3 billion (2001 est)
GDP – real growth rate: -2.2% (2001 est)
GDP – per capita: purchasing power parity - $24,700 (2001 est)
GDP – composition by sector: agriculture: NIL% industry: 33% services: 67% (2001)
National Budget:
Revenue $27.9 billion
Expenditures: $19.5 billion, including capital expenditures of $9.4 billion (2001 est.)
Exports: $122 billion F.O.B (2001 est)
Imports: $116 billion F.OB. (2001 est)
Debt – external: $8.3 billion (2001 est)
Military Expenditures Dollar Figure - $4.47 billion
Military Expenditures percent of GDP – 4.9% (FY 01 / 02) -
Reading your post reminds me of the currency trading debacle which ultimately cost Malaysia billions.... In the beginning, Malaysia was making stacks of dosh in currency speculation when their central bank traded for profit... even Dr.M was praising their efforts and defended the whole thing when economists criticised Bank Negara.
After a while, the traders wised up and lots of money was lost by Malaysia.
When Soros did exactly the same thing to the Ringgit, Dr.M cried foul...
Somehow, give the Malaysian politicos enough rope, they tend to hang themselves...
I wonder if they will screw up again with the use of palm oil... if they have not hedged their position (they are capable of screwing up something that basic!) and if the price of palm oil falls to a pittance, I wonder who they will blame...Originally posted by Atobe:By offering to barter one's strategic agricultural product in such a massive outflow of US$10's of billions in value to foreign countries (Russia and USA), in exchange for economically non-performing imports of Defense Weapons, one can only wonder if the country is surrendering control of the long term strategic value of its own natural resources.
In the past, Malaysia had tried to "control" the "realistic" market price of its natural resources such as rubber, tin, and more recently palm oil.
All such attempts were a big flop, when foreign countries that have stockpiled such strategic commodities simply flooded the market with timed releases to bust any manipulation to the prices of such strategic natural products.
With so much Malaysian hype of sovereignty and unfair trade practises of foreign countries towards its products, one can only wonder if they have not created further problems in undermining their own efforts to promote such natural products. -
"Reading your post reminds me of the currency trading debacle which ultimately cost Malaysia billions.... In the beginning, Malaysia was making stacks of dosh in currency speculation when their central bank traded for profit... even Dr.M was praising their efforts and defended the whole thing when economists criticised Bank Negara. After a while, the traders wised up and lots of money was lost by Malaysia.
Actually, the Malaysian government lost billions on speculation of the UK pound many years BEFORE Soros shorted the ringgit.
As for palm oil, its a newer commodity than rubber and tin. Those were traded well before WW2. So who knows, maybe the Malaysians want to do all this to get more exposure of this commodity. Its well known that China and India are the worlds 2 biggest importers of the stuff and mabye Malaysia is trying all it can to create new markets. -
4 key questions on malaysia's palm oil for weapon agreedment...
1.....the pricing of the malaysian palm oil used in barter trade... more correctly... spot market price or future market price... and whose price...malaysian or russian price evaluation?
2... what if russians dump this oil into the global market?? wont then the poor malaysian palm oil grower ended up paying the price of the weapon purchase through facing a lower price for their palm oil... a form of indirect taxation?
3... lastly.... is there any price guarantees for the ruskies... that is to say.. if the ruskies decided to dump the oil into the market... will malaysia gaurantee to purchase all these oil back at a minimun price set by the ruskies should global price drop below that price?
4.... unlike money..... palm oil can incurred additional cost in terms of transportation, storage, insurance, labor, administration, taxation and processing fees... furthermore... palm oil are perishable items... who is gonna pay for all these and guarantee for all these? obviously... it aint the russkies...
-
are u sure? that's not what an editor who flew the super hornet thinksOriginally posted by Viper52:- Stealthiness. Rafale wins over all the others in the RSAF NGF competition by a mile.None of the RCS reduction features employed in the F/A-18E/F are visible on any of the three Eurocanards, which raises interesting questions about the relative forward sector RCS reduction performance of these types.
http://www.sci.fi/~fta/aviat-5.htm -
Read that article already, maybe Rafale does not employ the 3 types of RCS reduction Carlo Kopp mentions, but its active radar cancellation technology is something the SuperBug doesn't have. Avaition writers the world over have already agreed that Rafales RCS is the best among the modern multirole fighters save for the F-22 and JSF.
In case you didn't know, the Super Hornet has its pylons canted and toe-out 3 degrees due to some pretty nasty stores separation problem. Which kind of ensures whatever RCS savings from its gizmos will come to naught when it comes to carrying stores.
I'd hate to question Carlo Kopp's credentials, but I've heard lots of criticism over his stubborn campaign to keep the F-111 in RAAF service despite a mounting bill to keep the Pigs flying by arguing it still relevant and needed by Australia. Seems to me hes a person who lets his bias influence his thinking over reality -
Well, I've read quite a fair bit of articles written by Carlo and have even briefly exchange posts with him in rec.aviation.military before.Originally posted by Viper52:I'd hate to question Carlo Kopp's credentials, but I've heard lots of criticism over his stubborn campaign to keep the F-111 in RAAF service despite a mounting bill to keep the Pigs flying by arguing it still relevant and needed by Australia. Seems to me hes a person who lets his bias influence his thinking over reality
To be fair to his critics and him, I think sometimes he could be an idealist but we do need people like him to stir some interesting ideas into the military because sometimes people in the chain of command can be too "stuck" with some pre-conceived ideas, and the ministers (albeit Dr. Tony Tan (SG), or Senator Hill (OZ)) came from non military background. Their understanding of military technology and how they make decisions usually come from some "old" generals and perhaps a panel of experts with very little real military combat experience.
Carlo does have a PhD in aeronautical engineering. He has got a civilian pilot license and have flown in a couple of interesting jets (through some contacts in the Air shows, etc). What he has written so far, much of them are marketing stuffs. He proposal for many of the solutions for RAAF are not necessary impossible or overly ambitious. However, he usually did not take budgetting into consideration. Given that he is still a civilian and has very limited access to ADF's accounting and budgetting plans. I don't think he understood what it is for ADF to adopt his proposal. One fine example is him suggesting RAAF to upgrade the pigs with a new radar with SAR mode. Integrate the pigs with the latest guided munitions like JDAMs, etc. Proposed RAAF purchase the Raptors as "silver bullets", etc. All these suggests sound good but in the real world, many of them are not practical due to the simple fact of lack of $$$$ !!!!.
As to the topic about Rafale being stealtier than the Super bugs, Dassault engineers and marketing personels will quickly point out that Rafales does use radar absorbing materials and paint, plus the aircraft shaping has already taken stealth into consideration. Rather than spending a hell lot more money to achieve even higher degree of stealth (comparable to the US 5th gen aircrafts), Dassault opted to use electronic means (radar cancelling method) to reduce Rafale RCS even further. In fact, radar cancelling method that they have employed interest the American heaps. I won't be surprised to see this as part of the F-35 package because the "AESA" radar derived from F-22 can be built with this feature. F-35 might end up being more stealty than F22 !!!! -
To trip wire,
Firstly, its NOT x million worth of palm oil that is going to be bartered .. its x million worth of palm oil credits (to be used in the commidity trading in KL)
So ... to answer your question
1.....the pricing of the malaysian palm oil used in barter trade... more correctly... spot market price or future market price... and whose price...malaysian or russian price evaluation?
Does not matter, they got the credits, they can use the credits to do whatever they want in the palm oil commodity trading board. They can buy short term, long term etc.
2... what if russians dump this oil into the global market?? wont then the poor malaysian palm oil grower ended up paying the price of the weapon purchase through facing a lower price for their palm oil... a form of indirect taxation?
They can do that .. but lets check whats the volume of export by the Malaysians. Assume say the russians take 50% of the payment in palm oil credits. Thats RM500m @ RM1500 per tonne, thats 333k tonnes. Malaysia's export in March 2003 is 961k tonnes .. so if they were to dump that 333k tonnes, it would be 10 days production for the Malaysians. Absorbable.
3... lastly.... is there any price guarantees for the ruskies... that is to say.. if the ruskies decided to dump the oil into the market... will malaysia gaurantee to purchase all these oil back at a minimun price set by the ruskies should global price drop below that price?
The answer is the same as for question 2
4.... unlike money..... palm oil can incurred additional cost in terms of transportation, storage, insurance, labor, administration, taxation and processing fees... furthermore... palm oil are perishable items... who is gonna pay for all these and guarantee for all these? obviously... it aint the russkies...
Of course this part is the malaysians .. and thats how they make the money back .. they give you a credit, but they are the ones who will make money sending the actual product over to you ..
And one more answer .. Russia can use palm oil to increase trade with India and China, who are the 2 worlds largest importer of the stuff. They don't have to use the stuff themselves, they can trade palm oil for china and india goods ..
And this is also why the malaysians had to their purchases fast. Before India and China also want to barter their goods for russian hardware.
All the palm oil figures and facts are found in www.mpopc.org.my
Interesting to also note that they are fighting a huge battle with the American Soya Oil industry. -
Originally posted by kenhor:
nothing new lah... but unfortunately for them... palm oil got an inherent weakness compare to soya oil..... its called....
To trip wire,
Firstly, its NOT x million worth of palm oil that is going to be bartered .. its x million worth of palm oil credits (to be used in the commidity trading in KL)
and just who is gonna be the good provider of this credit.. afterall.. someone gotta incurred the cost in providing this nice credit...
So ... to answer your question
[b]1.....the pricing of the malaysian palm oil used in barter trade... more correctly... spot market price or future market price... and whose price...malaysian or russian price evaluation?
Does not matter, they got the credits, they can use the credits to do whatever they want in the palm oil commodity trading board. They can buy short term, long term etc. i would have thought that since they are already in possesion of the credit... they could only sell it for $$$ right?? of course... at wat price, is something that the russkies would have to decide later...
2... what if russians dump this oil into the global market?? wont then the poor malaysian palm oil grower ended up paying the price of the weapon purchase through facing a lower price for their palm oil... a form of indirect taxation?
They can do that .. but lets check whats the volume of export by the Malaysians. Assume say the russians take 50% of the payment in palm oil credits. Thats RM500m @ RM1500 per tonne, thats 333k tonnes. Malaysia's export in March 2003 is 961k tonnes .. so if they were to dump that 333k tonnes, it would be 10 days production for the Malaysians. Absorbable. you talk like palm oil has no cost of production one... and whether it is palm oil or money or money derived from palm oil sale... ultimately... one cannot escape the economic reality of opportunity cost... but i wonder... if the russkies did dump those oil into the market and depress the price of palm oil... who is then really paying for those military purchase?? the govt of malaysia or the palm oil grower of malaysia?? a sort of indirect taxation perhaps??
3... lastly.... is there any price guarantees for the ruskies... that is to say.. if the ruskies decided to dump the oil into the market... will malaysia gaurantee to purchase all these oil back at a minimun price set by the ruskies should global price drop below that price?
The answer is the same as for question 2 how can it be the same answer?? unless there is no such guarantees... which would understandably imply the ruskies would demand more palm oil then the actual market value to make up for the risk in holding palm oil derivatives right?? ruskies aint dumb you know?
4.... unlike money..... palm oil can incurred additional cost in terms of transportation, storage, insurance, labor, administration, taxation and processing fees... furthermore... palm oil are perishable items... who is gonna pay for all these and guarantee for all these? obviously... it aint the russkies...
Of course this part is the malaysians .. and thats how they make the money back .. they give you a credit, but they are the ones who will make money sending the actual product over to you .. and who is gonna pay them?? how can everyone make money when no one is spending?? think we have half the equation missing... dont we?
And one more answer .. Russia can use palm oil to increase trade with India and China, who are the 2 worlds largest importer of the stuff. They don't have to use the stuff themselves, they can trade palm oil for china and india goods .. more barter trading??? 
like that no need money liow lor ... banks can all close shop ... 
And this is also why the malaysians had to their purchases fast. Before India and China also want to barter their goods for russian hardware. malaysia aint doing this the first time... so it makes one wonder... why other countries dont follow malaysia's style if it is really so good.. 
All the palm oil figures and facts are found in www.mpopc.org.my
Interesting to also note that they are fighting a huge battle with the American Soya Oil industry.[/b]
P A L M I T I C A C I D.... very very bad stuff... mess up your artery and kills your heart... -
Joe Black, while I do agree with you that a paradigm shift is required among our defence planners, having pure idealists who don't have a clue of the reality is somehow not the solution. We all know whats the "biggest and bestest" out there which is nice to have, but we also have to take real world considerations into the equation, something which Carlo seems to steadfastly refuse to do or simply ignore.Originally posted by Joe Black:Well, I've read quite a fair bit of articles written by Carlo and have even briefly exchange posts with him in rec.aviation.military before.
To be fair to his critics and him, I think sometimes he could be an idealist but we do need people like him to stir some interesting ideas into the military because sometimes people in the chain of command can be too "stuck" with some pre-conceived ideas, and the ministers (albeit Dr. Tony Tan (SG), or Senator Hill (OZ)) came from non military background. Their understanding of military technology and how they make decisions usually come from some "old" generals and perhaps a panel of experts with very little real military combat experience.
Carlo does have a PhD in aeronautical engineering. He has got a civilian pilot license and have flown in a couple of interesting jets (through some contacts in the Air shows, etc). What he has written so far, much of them are marketing stuffs. He proposal for many of the solutions for RAAF are not necessary impossible or overly ambitious. However, he usually did not take budgetting into consideration. Given that he is still a civilian and has very limited access to ADF's accounting and budgetting plans. I don't think he understood what it is for ADF to adopt his proposal. One fine example is him suggesting RAAF to upgrade the pigs with a new radar with SAR mode. Integrate the pigs with the latest guided munitions like JDAMs, etc. Proposed RAAF purchase the Raptors as "silver bullets", etc. All these suggests sound good but in the real world, many of them are not practical due to the simple fact of lack of $$$$ !!!!. -
Malaysian Flanker
Aviation Week & Space Technology
05/26/2003, page 33
Alexey Komarov
Moscow
Douglas Barrie
London
The Malaysian air force is the latest to opt for the Russian Su-27
Malaysia is to acquire an advanced derivative of the Russian Su-27 Flanker fighter aircraft, a move that will considerably bolster the nation's offensive air capability.
In a deal valued at roughly $900 million, Malaysia will take delivery of 18 Sukhoi Su-30MKM two-seat combat aircraft beginning in mid-2006.
Malaysian Defense Minister Najib Razak announced the agreement May19 following a meeting with Russian counterpart Sergei Ivanov. The Su30MKM is to be produced by Irkut Corp., previously known as the Irkutsk Aviation Production Assn. It will be based on the Su30 version Irkut is currently producing for the Indian air force, known as the Su30MKI.
This derivative of the Flanker is arguably the most advanced yet in service. The aircraft is fitted with the NIIP N011M Bars passive electronically scanned-array radar.
While details of the Malaysian aircraft configuration and weapons package have yet to be revealed, some Russian industry sources suggest the aircraft will retain all of the air-to-surface capability of the Indian version.
The original Su-27 was a single-role air-to-air platform, but as the design evolved, later versions moved toward a multirole capability. The sources added that the Malaysian aircraft will have modified avionics in comparison to the Su-30MKI. Some of the systems for the Indian air force were provided from Israel.
Contract signature on the Su-30MKM is anticipated during the third quarter of 2003, following the conclusion of detailed contract negotiations.
Besides air-to-air and air-to-ground weaponry, the Malaysian air force will likely look to equip the Su-30MKM with a maritime strike capability. Options may include the Kh-35 (AS-20 Kayak), or the Kh-31A (AS-17 Krypton). Malaysia also might seek to purchase the Indo-Russian Brahmos, now in the final stages of development. Brahmos is a version of the Russian 3M-55 Onyx (SS-N-26) rocket-ramjet powered anti-ship missile. Indian officials have already identified Malaysia as a potential export target. -
To trip wire,
and just who is gonna be the good provider of this credit.. afterall.. someone gotta incurred the cost in providing this nice credit...
Malaysia of course, they run the whole palm oil show .. so they can even use the palm oil credits instead of cash to pay for their military equipment.
i would have thought that since they are already in possesion of the credit... they could only sell it for $$$ right?? of course... at wat price, is something that the russkies would have to decide later...
The credit is not really worthless .. they can sell it to India and China who needs the palm oil. So the Indians and China people can give them cash or goods in kind.
you talk like palm oil has no cost of production one... and whether it is palm oil or money or money derived from palm oil sale... ultimately... one cannot escape the economic reality of opportunity cost...
Its cheaper for the Malaysians to produce RM3.80 worth of palm oil than to earn US$1.00 from exporting electronic equipment. In fact, by freeing their US$ from being tied up on arms purchases, their precious US$ reserves can be used to buy shipping companies, etc.
how can it be the same answer?? unless there is no such guarantees... which would understandably imply the ruskies would demand more palm oil then the actual market value to make up for the risk in holding palm oil derivatives right?? ruskies aint dumb you know?
Actually, there is a precedent already .. go to yahoo and search under palm oil barter .. you will see that in 1999 or something, Malaysia bartered RM2.9b worth of palm oil to India and China in exchange for a railroad project. There was no dumping, and that was a bigger amount like 6x the RM500m I am talking about now.
and who is gonna pay them?? how can everyone make money when no one is spending?? think we have half the equation missing... dont we?
The Malaysians are giving credits .. its never said or implied that transportation costs are free .. (always look for ways for businessmen to make money somewhere in between!)
more barter trading??? like that no need money liow lor ... banks can all close shop ...
The barter trade is between Malaysian government and Russian government. If its a deal between the Malaysian government and a private enterprise (like for F18s) they will have to pay cash.
malaysia aint doing this the first time... so it makes one wonder... why other countries dont follow malaysia's style if it is really so good..
Haven't your read? India wants to do the same with their Onion crop.
nothing new lah... but unfortunately for them... palm oil got an inherent weakness compare to soya oil..... its called.... P A L M I T I C A C I D.... very very bad stuff... mess up your artery and kills your heart...
Thats only if you eat the stuff. Palm oil is now mainly used to make plastics, soap and detergents. Only the very poor will use palm oil for cooking. When we visit JB for shopping, like in Giant and Carrefour, you don't see shelves stocked up with palm oil. You see lots of different oils like sunflower, canola, soyabean, peanut etc.
However, the soap, shampoo, detergent you use all contain palm oil. Not to mention, the lipsticks, the plastic container, the mineral water bottle ... etc ... -
Role Revamp
Aviation Week & Space Technology
05/26/2003, page 34
Douglas Barrie
London
Britain plans to move to multirole Eurofighter Typhoon force
The British Defense Ministry is looking to overhaul how it will field the Eurofighter Typhoon, as well as grappling with number issues and weapons integration demands.
Originally, the British Royal Air Force intended to field four squadrons in the air defense role by 2007, with a further squadron in the air-to-surface role, along with an additional two multirole units in 2009.
Instead, the air force now wants to be able to declare all seven squadrons as multirole around the end of the decade. Such a move would potentially require early-delivery aircraft being later upgraded to multirole standard...........
With budgetary pressure on Tranche2 in terms of what the partner air forces would like, and what industry argues is the associated cost, there is also scrutiny as to what could be deferred.
SOME SOURCES close to the program suggested, for example, integration of the Brimstone anti-armor missile for the RAF Typhoon might at least be delayed. It is currently included in EOC 2.
The Brimstone is being integrated on the Harrier GR7/9 and Tornado GR4. With this capability on these two platforms, integration on the Typhoon, they argue, is by no means essential.
The final number of Typhoons to be procured by the RAF remains in doubt. While the U.K. has a stated production run of 232 aircraft, budgetary pressure could see the number cut
Some industrialists doubt whether the planned Tranche 3 production run will proceed as presently envisioned. -
Actually i believe for Malaysia to trade with palm oil is normal.Why?They need to get rid of their palm oil and they do not have cash so instead they give away their products instead of giving cash it's the same deal.Anyway back on topic does anyone know the stats for the SU-30?Cuz from what i know about old soviet made planes they have this thing about having very poor range...
-
Not for SU-27 and its variants (including SU 30). They do have great range, only behind F-111, F22 Raptors and perhaps F-15E.Originally posted by |-|05|:Cuz from what i know about old soviet made planes they have this thing about having very poor range...