Sd 141x: Fill & Download for Free

Which jet fighters would be ideal for the defense of the Philippines and why?Well, there are many points to consider.I WILL EXPLAIN THEREIN HOW THE PHILIPINNES CAN DO TO BUILD UP A SIGNIFICANT AIR FORCE WITHIN A FEW YEARS, and more…A.) BUDGETWith the only 0.9% of GDP invested in the Filipino military, do not expect fielding a relevant air-force. The NATO regulation ask member countries for a peace-time military budget of no less than 2% of GDP. In case of big purchases in a short time-span or if the nation participates a conflict, it may grow over this. Long time running budgets like 2.4% (India) or 2.58% (Greece) don’t seem to hurt the economics and living conditions for the public. 4%, like Pakistan, is pretty bad, although Israel copes with 4.34% (if we don’t count the US military help paying about 20% of the military budget)., at the same time, it’s a start-up nation, but the population feels hammered by taxes. Note that Australia adopted a NATO approach, they spend 2% (and the money is poorly spent! The kangaroo could have claws and jaws instead of boxing gloves). 2% of the Filipino GDP weights $7.34bn; 2.5%=>$9.135bn; 2.58%=>$9.47bn, the US DoD’s 3.2%=>$11.74bnIt’s not just jet-fighters that are needed! Especially considering the main potential threat, which is the 2nd air-force on the planet doubled with the biggest navy and the biggest army in terms of manpower, it’s really a global thinking of defence that is necessary, so, nonetheless aircraft are needed, but also a combined forces concept and it as to be organised in an effective way with 1% of US military budget and the 24th of PLA’s budget.Moreover, it’s a big area to defend, and the geography matters as much as threat assertionThe good side being… there is no risk of land invasion, now, considering the PLAAF and PLANAF weight 161x Strategic Bombers; 2233+ Jet-Fighters; 59x AWACS; 5x SIGINT; 21x EW; 12x MarPat; 13x Tankers; 364x Transport; 1151 Helicopters; 380x [armed] Trainers; 267 UCAVs and growing while PLAN now has more vessels than US-Navy (82 subs, 405 surface vessels, 285 support/auxiliary ships) and a 3rd and 4th aircraft carriers are on the way while the Type 075-class of landing helicopter docks will be of 8 ships. To make the matters worse, PRC mainland is only 650km from the main Filipino island, while they illegally have made 3 bases in the Spartly isls. at the same time, they can’t put everything in a battle : PRC has territorial disputes with 23 countries…IMHO, many consider that PRC military are unassailable for the Philippines, which is wrong, and the low % of GDP spent in the military may come from two factors : one is a lack of trust in the military due to the Marcos era, the other must be the wrong assertion that the US will interpose, while, well, they’re unlikely to start WW3 unless being themselves under attack and at the same time, Duterte tried to appease the CCP which ended with the contrary results that were wished… Any way, the only realistic way to go is to consider you’ll have to fight alone, if you have allies that help, it’ll make matters easier…So, PLA, PLAAF, PLAN and PLANAF unassailable? Not forcedly, but … You NEED a jet fighter that can be a formidable force-multiplier, you may need a smaller single engine version of this jet fighter for point defence, and you’ll need a really well thought force with force-multipliers at all levels, you may have to displease the US because, well, due to tight budget, you CANNOT sustain a significant fleet of F-15/16/18 and even less of F-35 to do the job, any way, the best jet fighters you can get are not from the USA, although these would work great while working inside the US system, with all their support systems, satellites, etc, and gear they sell to nobody or near nobody. There are even stuff I’d recommand to buy from surprising countries like Russia, India, Israel, Taiwan, Australia, maybe even Japan or… PRC (!). There will be need for some customised gear, maybe to be done domestically or elsewhere, maybe would it be valuable to associate with some countries that are also bullied or may become victims, in order to do scale economy by jointly passing big orders or starting domestic licences building. There might be a lot of EU stuff because in some strategic domains, several countries, or EU consortiums, manage to do better, cheaper and much cheaper to use than the US, then who else is able to sell you a 3000 or 4500km range cruise missile but the Russian?ONE THING IS CLEAR: THE CHOICES SHALL NOT BE DONE ON POLITICS OR INDUSTRIAL INCENTIVES, ONLY THE BEST GEAR IN TERMS OF COST EFFECTIVENESS MUST BE CHOSEN, AND THE DEFENCE FORCE MUST BE ORGANISED IN A WAY TO IMPOSE RAPIDLY SUCH A COST THAT WOULD MAKE THE AGGRESSION UNSUSTAINABLE. Actually, I’d even recommand to pull out from some international conventions like about cluster munitions, incendiaries and even WMDs. Personally, I’d highly consider the use of something that one can be consider as a threshold WMD, it’s radiologic weapons aka dirty bombs = mixing radioactive materials with explosives : just blast a few cruise missiles with 440kg nuclear wastes and 10kg explosives over a naval/air/military base, you won’t kill anybody but they’ll have to evacuate the area and fast, it will cost very big and be very long to de-pollute the site.B.) CAPABILITIES OF THE JET-FIGHTERSI.) MAIN JET FIGHTER1.) The Philippines are a maritime nation. Therefore, aircraft being able of long range maritime strikes, even without the help of refuellers, are to be considered, e.g. Su-35, Su-57, F-15EX, Rafale.2.) Carrying supersonic anti-ship missiles is needed too, because you need a serious navy to bully a huge archipelago with 100M+ inhabitants. Such missiles are BrahMos [Su-30/35, Su-57, Rafale]; BrahMos-NG [Su-30/35, Su-57, Rafale, Tejas], Conventional ASMPA [Rafale] (MBDA proposed this to the French govt to replace the Exocet, so it’s feasible, in fact, they conceived ASMP as an ant-ship missile, it’s French govt that asked them to make a Mach3 nuke cruise missile out of it. The improved ASMPA has a range in excess of 500km and weights only 840kg. The Taiwanese Hsiung Feng III, although being ship-launched, has huge potential for air-launches. Anther valuable thing which is still in test phase in India and would be also valuable for air launches, it’s the SMART : a 600km range cruise missile that delivers a 30km range torpedo. Very nasty asset. AM 39-Exocet can be considered even if it may be less useful against recent main ships with heavy anti missile defences, it will do the job against secondary assets and will do it for cheap.3.) ANTI-STEALTH CAPABILITIES : Since the most potential aggressor owns stealth jet fighters, the jet fighter must have mean to detect and lock-on such asset from outside of the NEZ (no escape zone) of their missiles. Such means are :a.) QWIP aka ROFAR. 101KS-V [Su-57] is a 1st gen QWIP; OSF-IT [Rafale] is a 2nd gen (a 3rd gen is at works). 1st gen outdated OSF could already lock-on a subsonic F-22 from 90–155km and on a Mach1.8 one from 270–455km. Sorry for 2nd gen OSF-IT, data are classified. NOTE that other onboard assets like DDM-NG or the TALIOS and AREOS pods are QWIP, so there is potential for use as a multi-mirror telescope. Note that TALIOS is not only a 70km-ranged laser-targetting device : its electro-optics allow detailed visual identification (roundels too) from more than 50km and in colour.b.) L-band or Sand radar (usually in the wings) [MG-31BM, Su-57]4.) 5th gen ait-to-air missiles (AAM) : Meteor [Gripen-E, Typhoon Rafale]. Note don’t believe any range you read : Meteor’s range is classified. The only things being known : it has the longest no escape one of ANY AAM. Meteor also can re-lock on target. MICA-NG/IR [Mirage-2000, Rafale, Su-30MKI] is the only 5th gen IR missile.Older/cheaper with less range assets can be considered to go after flying targets of lesser value/lower threat : Python, A-Darter, IRIS-T, ASRAAM, R550 Magic II, etc etc etc5.) Super-long range anti-heavies AAMs : The goal is to demolish support aircraft like refuellers, AWACS, EW cargoes and also bombers from further than their escort may intercept you. Examples : Novator KS-172 [Su-27, Su-30, Su-35,[3] Su-30MKI Su-57 (expected). NB: India has the source codes of Su-30MKI and so may help integrating the KS-172 on other platforms]; Vympel R-37M [MiG-31BM, Su-35 and Su-57]. The real maximum range of the Meteor being unknown, maybe can it be used in such a role or not, the fact is that US-Navy would like to have the Meteor in replacement for the AIM-54 Phoenix that was de facto retired when its only carrier, the F-14 Tomcat was retired, and the AIM-54 had such role while being absolutely irrelevant against jet-fighters. Some analysts estimate that the Meteor may have a maximum range up to 300km. Some say that Chinese PL-21 [FC-31, J-16, J-20] and PL-15 [J-10C, J-16, J-11B, JF-17 Block-3, J-20] may do such job, it’s also pretty light (780kg), same for Sea Eagle6.) Serious stand-off/air-to-ground weapons :SCALP-EG : 560km range stealth cruise missile [Mirage-2000, Tornado, Rafale, Typhoon]Apache anti runway stealth cruise missile [Mirage-2000, Rafale]. The range in the article is BS : Apache is a version of the SCALP-EGAASM-Hammer (SBU-38/54/64) : 70km range boosted gliding bomb, nicknamed ‘the magic bomb” in NATO since 2011 [Mirage-2000, Rafale]Spice, especially the 100km range 113kg Spice-250 [F-15, F-16, Panavia Tornado, Gripen, Mirage 2000, Sukhoi-30 MKI, Rafale]SmartGlider Light : similar to Spice-250BAT-120LG : a 35kg laser guided version of the BAP-100, and there are racks for 18 BAP-100. Very interesting for air supportK-LOGIR, just ask the Koreans to fit seekers with a better contrast because with 4 hardpoints fit this way, you can provide tremendous air support.MBDA Zuni-LG : because a Zuni-LG costs the third of a Hellfire with the double warhead and twice the speed. Very interesting for tank-hunting.Spike NLOS : 25km range tank hunter, US-Army is into replacing the Hellfire by this on their AH-64Kh-101 Air-Launched stealth long range Cruise Missile : because a 4500km ranged stealth cruise missile can hurt. [Tu-95MSM, Tu-160M2, Su-34)Kh-55SM/555 : The “Tomahawkski” in 3000km version. cheap and efficient, easy to reverse-engineeretc.7.) Turnaround/Availablity :In intensive use, most of jet fighters aren’t capable to perform more than 3–4 missions per 24h. Only the Snecma M88 allows 5–6 missions per 24h in normal use and for no less than a full week (not tested further) 10–11 missions per 24h in intensive use. This engine is available with 75kN, 91kN and 98kN thrust version and can be delivered in any thrust between 50kN and 115kN within 18 months. This engine being lighter and much smaller than the others, allow to customise many aircraft to fit it and, moreover, it reduces the cost of use of an aircraft fit with it to $5000–6000/hour per engine. Had Saab used M88 for Gripen-E, they wouldn’t had needed to stretch the airframe to stuff 600kg more internal fuel: the engine would have left enough room! To be noted, there are blueprints available to modify the HAL Tejas, the 98kN version of M88 has even been created for Tejas, adding internal fuel, thrust while reinforcing the airframe. Tejas is a project that was abandoned by Dassault and bought by India. M88 would make what Tejas was initially intended to be : a single-engined version of Rafale, just like the Soko Novi Avion. Guess why M88 is my preferred jet-fighter engine : if you can perform 3–4x more missions per 24h, it’s like having a 3–4x bigger air-force. The M88’s exhaust also has stealth feature as well as it has a system significantly reducing the exhausts’ heat in order to lower its IR signature.8.) Stealth :If F-117, B-2, F-22, F-35, J-20 and J-31 all rely on the 70’s 1st gen of stealth technologies with radar absorbing coating and Picasso/Matisse geometry, there is already a 2nd gen stealth also using Ufimtsev’s Theory of Physical diffraction, but in a more limited way, doubled with baked-in radar absorbent materials (RAM) and active cancellation of radar waves. Thales’ SPECTRA suite has such a feature which has proven working great in combat. A standalone version has been created for the Tejas and approved by Defence Research and Development Organisation. Russia seems to have followed the same path while being years late, with Su-35 and Su-57. India accepted the Russian baked-in RAM to reskin its Su-30MKI but rejected the active cancellation (Kibhiny?) and seems to consider fitting a full SPECTRA system in their Super-Flanker upgrade. The Chinese recently renounced to use baked-in radar absorbent materials on their FC-31, returning to coating due to lack of efficient results with their material. A 3rd gen stealth was created by ONERA and is about to be added with the Rafale F4 upgrade : ONERA solved the issues of the use of plasma in stealth, which makes you unable to use you own radar, radio, datalink, satcom etc, but moreover, makes the aircraft glow like a X-mas tree, see Russian or Chinese tests : you can find pictures of these on… UFO sites (!)9.) FORGET AIRBASES, they’ll be the first places to be at the receiving end of massive cruise missile strikes, likely to saturate any air defence system.Go for… Roadworthy jet fighters!Any warehouse can be used as a hangar, and there can be reinforced ones dug under hills, mountains, even using infrastructures like road tunnels with base extentions, having access to several roads, also design it in a way the entries may not be targetted,be imaginative, and do not have all the eggs in the same basketMeanwhile, you can offer fake targets to be hit on classic bases: there are inflatable decoys even simulating the infrared signature and radar cross section (to defeat SAR radars) existing for most of military assets including aircraft, tanks, SAM systems10.) Buddy to buddy refuellingBecause you may not be able to send a defenceless big refueller in a contested areaSO, WHAT JET FIGHTERS TO CHOSE FOR THE PHILIPPINES?1.) As a first line fighter, I’d go for DASSAULT’s RAFALE OVER ANYTHING! It has the capability to perform 5–6 missions every day, can be pushed to 10–11 if in need of intensive use, takes off into 400m and lands in 450m so it can be used from roads or small [concrete] airfields, the cost of use is one of the 3 lowest on market with Gripen or Tejas meaning that a fleet of 180 Rafales would cost $900M a year while having as much F-16 or Super-Hornets would cost $2bn; 180 Su-57, Su-35 or F-15X would cost $2.75bn and when it comes to Typhoon or F-35A, prepare to spend $3.6bn/year; F-35 is the worst case scenario since it won’t fly more than 302h/year, every flight hour needing to spend 28 hours in maintenance. Rafale has serious stealth features, its flyaway cost is similar to F-16V and even cheaper than Gripen-E, F-15EX, F-35A or Su-35S. It has access to many weapons and not only NATO+French ones since India asked for the integration of Israeli, Russian and Indian ones, and, just like with Saab, the open architecture makes integration really cheap, and the terrifying BrahMos anti-ship missile is in the weapons list. Moreover, without even the help of an air-tanker, a Rafale taking off from the small airport on Itbayat island has enough range to deliver two SCALP-EG directly on the Zhongnanhai (CCP HQ) in Beijing.I’d add that since HHIC Philippines can deliver container ships like the CMA CGM Antoine de Saint Exupery for, if I remember well, $158M…It wouldn’t be a great deal to move/pivot the island on the starboard side, double the horsepower, rechannel the chimney to have the exhausts like on the Kaga, put a flat-top with a ski-jump and a 350m+ angled deck. Since land-based Rafales have arresting hooks too and the landing run added with the ship’s speed, you won’t even need Rafale-M’s reinforced landing gear. NB: I’m not telling to build MACs, just that it’s feasible and that the Philippines have shipyards able to build 400m long ships. Since HHIC Philippines had some economical issues, not even speaking about aircraft carriers, they could be put to the job to produce small submarines similar to the Ula-class especially since an US company now can provide small 25MWe nuke reactors the size of a septic tank for $25 millions. Scorpène-class would also be a nice client for such reactors, as well as Austal’s or Incat’s Trimarans/Catamarans: some are damn fast and could easily accommodate 200+ VLS …But let’s go back to aircraft! With a 2% of GDP spent in the military and eventually more to accelerate procurement, at $1.3bn/squadron of 18 and an annual cost of use of about $90M per squadron, the acquisition of 1–2 Rafale squadrons a year is absolutely feasible for the Philippines if they consider having a little more than a Hippie military budget.2.) Since everything is ready in order to create a “Rafalized” HAL Tejas using the M88/98kN engine with a projected $45M flyaway cost per unit and the spending per aircraft wouldn’t be more than an annual$3M, at $810M flyaway cost per squadron and a $54M annual cost of use per squadron, having a fleet made of Rafales for an outer defence circle that would include good offences as form of defence, and having an inner “point defence” circle made of “Super-Tejas” which would be cheaper to use, well, a fleet of 180 Tejas would cost $540M a year. If Tejas is mounted with the RBE2/AESA radar, integrating the MBDA Meteor would be piece of cake. Tejas can receive Rafale’s active stealth.If the Philippines go for a 2% of GDP running military budget of $7.34bn; a fleet of 180 Rafales and 180 Super-Tejas, an all included $1.5bn annual cost of use for a fleet of 360 jet fighters, all able to be pushed to 10–11 missions per 24h if needed, wouldn’t be excessive : 20.5% of a military budget going into the jet-fighter fleet is absolutely OK!How many do they need for them to fight in a major war with their neighbours?Taiwan has a fleet of 56x F-5E/F; 129x AIDC F-CK-1; 55x Mirage 2000 and 141x F-16 to be upgraded as F-16V, and has ordered 66 more brand new F-16V and so will total 447 jet-fighters, although the old F-5s are very likely to retire. The upcoming fleet of 207 F-16s alone will cost about $2.3bn a year. A Rafale does the job of three F-16s.If such custom racks are created to carry 5 Meteors at once (Meteor = 190kg, MICA-NG = 150kg) :as well as racks for 2, 3 and 4 :A Rafale-C/B would be able to carry 32 Meteors under 6 quintuple racks, 4 MICA-NG and 2x 1150L CFTs :While [standard] Tejas has these load limits per weapon station :So, with a 1250L drop-tank, carrying 18 Meteors and two MICA-NG/IR wouldn’t be an issue.A fleet of 180 Rafales and 180 Tejas would be enough to give a warm welcome to the about 4700 aircraft owned by the People's Liberation Army (abut the half being combat aircraft) since, operating in a pure air superiority role, the fleet can carry more than 10,000 devastating AAMs and the average in air combat is 2 launches per kill. If necessary, a Rafale can take off with up to 12t payload and half internal fuel then do the complement from a refueller… Moreover, it may not be necessary anymore with the upcoming F4 version since either M88/9 (91kN) or M88/K9 (98kN) may become the standard (all I know is that more powerful engines will be mounted)… Doing a maritime strike with 2x 1150L CFTs, 12x Meteors, 4x MICA-NG and 2 BrahMos with a 2000L drop-tank is feasible… Enough to attack 360 surface vessels while acting in air-superiority with as much AAMs as the F-15EX can carry, and more efficient ones…The Super-Tejas would be able to carry two BrahMos-NG or two Exocets, 1x 1250L drop-tank, 8x Meteor and 2x MICA-NG/IRWith 405 combat vessels and 245x support/auxiliary ships = 650 vessels, a single flight of such a Rafale+Tejas fleet can launch 720 serious anti-ship missiles while carrying 4680 fifth gen. air-to-air missilesMoreover, a single Rafale can absolutely cay 4 or 5 Apache at once. 5 of such missiles are enough to neutralise the usual 2600m runway of western airbases.And I’m not even considering coastal batteries, SAM systems, attacking enemy bases with cruise missiles from land bases, navy-vessels and submarines…Now, some may think 10 squadrons of each may be overkill, well, better remember you face the 2nd biggest aviation on the planet and the #1 navy… Maybe 8 squadrons of each would be workable, and the annual cost of use would be reduced to $1.16bn, but the interesting point is that with 180 orders of each, you really can consider an aircraft factory, and same for the engines. With a 2.5% of GDP expense=$9.175bn, you can even consider a purchase of 1.5 or 2 squadrons of each a year and go on with order of SAM systems and naval assets.ANOTHER INTERESTING AIRCRAFT well known in the Philippines that would worth starting a domestic building after some improvements have been made : modern composite materials, modern engines and systems, then you have something that can do the COIN job as well as taking over the roles of the AH-64, A-10, Su-25 and even AC-130 : The OV-10 Bronco with a jet engine of about 20–30kN on the back, 2x e.g. 1776hp Adriden 3G turbo-prop, and turret with a GIAT 30M 791 (with 1350 or even 2000 shells) can do this.You may easily expect more than 6 tons payload from such an asset, this would easily allow e.g. a dozen of pods with LOGIR, asking the Koreans to fit seekers with a better contrast. Such assets would also be perfect fits as COIN / attack as well as having enough payload for several anti-ship missiles. Having at least 4, preferably 6 underwing hardpoints would be really useful, even if the wings are a little extended or the aircraft a little stretched, it’d really worth the investment. One can consider wingtip rails and overwing rails (like on the SEPECAT Jaguar) to carry 4 AAMs like the MICA-NG/IRThe Bronco is a real marvel that never received the engines it deserved. The export potential is huge.I’d HIGHLY ADVISE TO RESURRECT A FORGOTTEN AIRCRAFT THAT WAS TOO IN ADVANCE ON ITS TIME, a “NG” version has huge sales potential on both the military and civilian markets :Let me introduce to you the formidable Bréguet Br.941An NG version would easily increase the payload by 50%… So… a 12t payload aircraft taking off in 185m and landing in 120m at only 90km/h, well, you can do ANYTHING with it!!! From creating regional airlines without airport, delivering freight to the most remote areas where even landing a Twin Otter is “hot”, firefighting, then use it from small LHDs like the Mistral-class or even aircraft carriers, doing MarPat, ASW, ASuW, COD, AWACS, gunship, MedEvac,.. Modern technologies would make it even easier to build. I simply cannot believe that only 4 were ordered by our military, it would even be great to reintroduce a forgotten S&R thing that might be spectacular, but ended with a single accident over 30 years use while the S&R helicopter crashes are numerous, it’s the Fulton STARSOTHER USEFUL AERIAL ASSETS :There are many other stuff in need for consideration, like AEW&C (and better have frequencies able to deal with stealth aircraft.The Lockheed Martin 420k aerostat used with the TARS is better, but the EL/M-2083 is a far better radar, India had aerostats made by the Russians to cut costs, but fit with the Israeli radar. LM is working on an 137m long UAV blimp supposed to geostationary obit at 60,000 ft altitude for 4 months.This thing would surely be too heavy for an aerostat and since there is no documentation allowing me to know if it’s feasible, nevertheless, the Thales GS-1000 is one of the very best air defence radars today, so, if there’s a way to fit it on a Br.941 or even a bigger aircraft,Mid-Air Refuelling :The A330-MRTT is very interesting since, despite being an air-tanker, it can absolutely still be used as an air-liner or a freighters. Any A400M can be used as a refueller, there is no specific tanker version, moreover, considering the inflated export price of a C-130J, the A400M having reduced its flyaway cost to $135M, is not so much expensive while having the double payload with access to the same rugged terrains as a C-130…Over-the-horizon radars : Nostradamus is used by France, only 360° OTHR and already used to detect B-2 from 3000km+ while building wasn’t even finishedI have no idea how much a replica would cost, it’s true that this tremendous innovation costed big to tax-payers, thus, IMHO, it was more spent for the R&D than anything els as the Nostradamus OTHR is total innovation in this domain, and goes much further than military applications: monitoring the Arctic ice-pack, survey of Earthquakes in N-Africa, finding boat-peoples rafts, even solar activity or Moon distance have been measured.Stradivarius has been chosen by the EU for EEZ monitoring, this is a surface wave radar (surface + low altitude)NOW YOU SEE THEM A-COMING !!!AIR DEFENCES :The way to go is Multi layered air defences as you may have to intercept aircraft as well as sea-skimming missiles, small or big drones as well as satellites.In terms of theatre SAM systems, I’d highly recommand SAMP/T (little error, batteries are of 6 launchers, except with French AF which uses “squadrons” with 2 batteries of 4 launcher). With the new Aster-30NT (new technology) block.1 and the upcoming 500km range exo-atmospheric block.2, does it better than either Patriot+THAAD as well than S-400 while Patriot costs about $1.1bn per battery, so does S-400, THAAD costs $800M and a battery of 6 SAMP/T launchers+command post+120km range radar costs $191M and it covers 360°, not 120°, moreover, Aster has already proven itself capable of intercepting Mach-3 cruise missiles at only 2m altitude. Usually, SAMP/T is used in team with the Ground Smarter GS-1000 (€96M), the Ground Master GM-400 ($23.3M in non mobile 564km ranged version) or the Sea-Master SM-400. It’s surprising that the land battery is not more widely spread while the Aster is VERY common on navy-vessels, well, it’s true that some countries squat the market for long and EU countries are less known, nevertheless, they come with the best product and for cheaper. Moreover, the Aster missiles can re-engage if dodged and as you’re very likely to load your navy vessels with these since, in terms of navy-vessels, the Italo-French stealth corvettes, frigates or destroyers are the best bang for the buck, now even the US-Navy mass orders the FREMM stealth frigates … Actually, although less capable than SAMP/T (160km range instead of 250km for Aster-30NT block.1 and 500km for the block.2, and no super-low altitude capability), it could be valuable to complete with the David's Sling launchers/command posts networked with the Thales’ radars and AEW&C : David’s Sling Stunner interceptor has very nice qualities : dual radar+EO/IR seeker, re-engages if dodged and, moreover, only $350k/interceptor! IDK the price per battery, but in terms of missile stockpiles, teaming SAMP/T and David’s Sling sounds pretty nice : if a Patriot battery has 96 ready to launch $3M PAC-3MSE ranging 35km only useable in a 120° wide area, at $2M/Aster-30 and $350k/Stunner, you also pack 96 missiles with one battery of each. BTW, the Stunner tests ended with better results than both using the PAC-3MSE and the Patriot’s PAC-2 which also ranges 160km (but you have a max of 24 in a Patriot battery : you have 4 PAC-2 cannisters per launcher whlle there are 16 PAC-3 cannisters that fit)…For exoatmospheric hypersonic anti-ballistic missile, the most interesting is the Israeli Arrow 3, it may not be necessary to buy the $146M EL/M-2080 Green Pine block.C since the Thales GS-1000 is cheaper, more powerful and more accurate, moreover it provides 360° coverage vs. 120° for the Green-Pine. Both will provide anti-stealth capabilities. For super long range targetting-radar, the 4700km X-band AN/TPY-2 is impressive and will provide tremendous LEO/MEO space monitoring. Problems : only 120° and freaking expensive ($200M/radar, and $328M for the stacked version that allows horizontal and vertical watch). I confess that I haven’t closely studied all super-long range targetting-able radars available. It’s not clear what the Dimona Radar is made of, the ELM-2090 Terra looks interesting and talking about such gear with the ONERA ‘s DEMR could be valuable : this research centre is top notch, as well as creating insane radars and also the most advanced stealth systems around… The Arrow-3 has huge anti-satellite potential, and you’d better shoot down any spy-sat promptly.For short range (SHORAD) point defence, Rheinmetall/Oerlikon’s Networked Air Defence is tremendous, as well as using other systems from them : Air Defence Systems. In terms of mobile systems, their SkyRanger rocks, but in terms of mobile missile protection systems, I’d go for Crotale Next Generation (NG) with the Mk.3 missile. Nonetheless it’s effective against aircraft, but also in an Iron-Dome and anti-drone jobs as well as intercepting sea-skimming/terrain hugging missiles. The Mk3 missile’s ceiling enough to deal with UCAVs like the Pterodactyl-II or the TB.2. Another very valuable system is the Centauro Draco : an IFV mounted OTO Melara 76/62 Super-Rapid, the best seller of navy-guns, and it can use both the DART 9km range guided anti-air shell as well as the 40km ranged anti-surface VULCANO guided shell as well as classic artillery and anti-tank ones…When it comes to city-size protection, Iron Dome is long combat proven.COASTAL DEFENCES :Well, I’ve learnt that Dutert was into ordering the BrahMos, it’s a valuable coastal defence asset, good choice, although I’m temptd to consider BrahMo as more interesting if air-launched. Some other stuff available : This system was adopted by Vietnam :And for short range coastal defence agains swarms of speed-boats, landing ships, etc, South Korea’s Bigung Guided Rocket System Passes Pentagon’s Testing … The K-LOGIR costs $5k, the Hydra70 costs $2.8k and it’s fire’n’foget.Spike NLOS : this big 70kg ATGM has huge potential for coastal defence too, as well at being helicopter mounted or under aircraft like the OV-10 or Emb-314…NAVY VESSELS :And in terms of defending well a maritime nation, the #1 asset for ruling the seas is the submarine, and not forcedly big ones, BTW, there are now US made small 25MWe nuclear reactor the size of a septic tank for $25 millions… So, even the small class I pointed can become damn fast, mid-sized AIPs like the Scorpènes would become really freaking SSNs while some catamarans like those built by InCat or Austal and trimarans similar to HSC Condor Liberation could be made with two of such reactors and militarised in a really badass way : you have insane room to likely fit more VLS than a Ticonderoga-class cruiser, the crews are really small, a larger folding ramp could be used as helicopter platform while the chopper could slide into the hull, you can easily fit the 6 turrets of a NBS MANTIS in a 2 lasers/4 guns config as well as 8 C-Dome cannisters, torpedoes can be launched from inside, add the OTO Melara Super Rapido with Strales as a navy gun, and you can have really nasty navy vessels that can move of 2000km+ in 24h… I’d proably consider mixing EU’s SYLVER A70 VLS maybe with Russian (Indian?) ones in order to be able to load BrahMos, Kh-101 or KalibrAlthough it’ll take several years, probably a decade, to build up a valuable military able to deal with PRC, nevertheless, with having a 2% of GDP tunning mil-budget with some procurement boost at 2.5–3% for a few years if having a complete package is wanted (air-defences, submarines, coastal defences), maybe some cuts can be made : an armed force of 125k with 700k reservists means a far too huge reserve, moreover, the land army may be too cosyied with 98k personnels whlle the AF and Navy cummulate only 27k… Consdering the maritime nature of the country, rather than having a Marine Corps of 9500, it would be more clever to consider making the whole ground force made an airborne+amphibious corps. Just think about the gear choices : at €1M/unit, you can get stuff like the impressive EBRC Jaguar and the VBMR Griffon which don’t need $2M of upgrades to deal with 14.5mm machine-guns or mines and these can be air-dropped. The 2S25 Sprut-SD is highly valuable too and could get armour upgrades. In all these case, fitting with APS (active protction system) would make ’em ATGM-proof. The CAESAR self-propelled howitzer is even cheaper than a M777 howitzer towed howitzer and, in 6x6 version, can be air-dropped as well as carried by a Mil Mi-26 helicopter (as well as the Sprut-SD) which BTW has a little more payload than a C-130 Hercules.Even the firearms could be improved : if the Spec-Ops received some F88 Austeyr, be aware that a calibre was created to allow the serious game hunting with a modified AR-15, the .243WSSM, so, it’s simply compatible with the STANAG standard magazines and any 5.56x45 modified rifles. With a bullpup, you can stay compact (about 90cm) while fitting a 620mm barrel… And .243WSSM is commonly used to hunt coyotes at 1km… (5.56x45 was created to hunt coyotes at 300m), the 6mm calibers rule in 1km target shooting too. The shape of the .243WSSM makes it has recoil similar to the AK-47 cartridge while outperforming 5.56x45NATO, 7.62x39R, 5.45x39R, 7.62x51NATO and 7.62x54R, in other terms, a single bullpup rifle becomes able to outperforms a lot of rifles and machineguns in use in the Ph-Army : M16; GA 16; F88 Austeyr, AKM; M4 carbine; Remington R4; SIGM400; HK416; CAR-15; M14 rifle; SDMR; SIG716; SPR; SR-25; M21 Sniper ; M24 Sniper ; Norinco CS/LR4; Norinco Type 85; Daewoo K3; FN Minimi; Ultimax 100; M60 ; M1919 Browning! In fact, one can even consider modifying the XM214 Microgun, which has recently been re-created in a lighter version, the XM556. Having this in .243WSSM would mean that you can put a Gatling more efficient than the Minigun on any vehicle! When it comes to riflemen, I’d prefer having 10,000 with .243WSSM rifles fit with targetting systems like the Tracking Point or the FÉLIN (Putin was into buying this for Russia before the 2014 Crimea crisis induced sanctions) rather than 100,000 with usual rifles. When it comes to high caliber snipers, the Barrett ones weight 11.8 and 13.8 kg. Well, the .408 Chey-Tac has long proven itself more efficient than the .50BMG, in fact, in long range, it has better energy conservation, all the 4km+ target shooting is made with .408CT and a semi-auto rifle of only 7.7kg exists : VR1 PSR. Same stuff with the recent purchase of the Milkor MGL grenade launcher… Well, it’s pretty heavy and it takes long to reload drum magazines… The Alsetex Cougar is much lighter with a box magazine, my 2cts that Alestex would be pleased to make it in 40×46MV (Medium Velocity) instead of 40×46LV (Low Velocity) and even in 40x53HV (High Velocity), allowing a 1500 m (point target) range and 2200 m maximum range.Inviting Murray Neal to recreate Pinnacle Armor in the Philippines so you get the Dragon Skin body armour. If not, the Hexatac NIJ Leve-IV is the best choice : the plates may not look the lighter ones with 2.6kg, but in fact, the trauma plate is integrated! Usually, a NIJ-IV plate weights 2.3kg and a trauma plate 1.7kg, meanwhile, I’d consider buying the helmets from… PRC! Yup! They have an ISO9001 company making NIJ-III+ certified helmets… NIJ-III+ means it takes a point blank Dragunov’s armour piercing bullet! US Army receives a NIJ-III (point blank AK-47 bullet, 750m/s Dragunov’s FMJ bullet = shot from 100m) that costs the double, near all helmets are NIJ-IIIA (pistol rounds up to .44magnum). BTW, you can get pretty nice outdoor (hiking) ultralight equipment from the Chinese, all that stuff, including the NIJ-III+ helmet can even be ordered on AliEx (!) as well as huge purchases of UHMwPE (aka Dyneema!) for freaking cheap, direct from the factory… Oh, well, especally in tems of prces, I’d be perfectly able to purchase Dong-Fengs and Weishi rockets from PRC (!) and have 95% of their explosives replaced by nuclear wastes… A good reason to have several nuke plants providing electricity to the country…In fact, it’s absolutely feasible to become highly relevant even with a limited military budget, just don’t let politics and baksheesh interfere, and go for the most competitive companies, which are often European ones: due to US prominence in NATO, they have to do both better and cheaper than the US arms makers, and decide their own govt. as well as other EU nations out of the stupid assertion that by buying main arms systems from the US will buy the US protection! It won’t, and BTW, you can absolutely buy other stuff where the US gear is cost efficient : JDAM and Paveway guided bombs are cheap, they’re excellent for ELINT/SIGINT, etc, but if you want jet-fighters, you call the French, if you want helicopters or lng range cruise missiles, you call the Russian, for air defences, consider mixing French/Italian with German/Swiss and Israeli systems. For submarines, I’d get the French Scorpènes and the German-Norwegian Ula-class, then fit them with the latest US 25MWe tiny nuke reactor, while considering the Austal/Incat trimarans/catamarans designs are very interesting for surface vessels as they have potential to become impressive arsenal ships (and fitting two 25MWe reactors per unit would be valuable). Some Italo-French stealth frigates/corvettes would be valuable too, in fact, they also make some stealth blue-sea patrol boats that can be used as missile boats. Considering adding C-Dome to protect these and since they’re difficult to detect… Well, the goal is not to be bigger it’s to impose an unsustainable cost : if you have 180 Rafales and 180 Super-Tejas that can carry 720 supersonic anti-ship missiles as well as 2 Meteors per combat aircraft in PLAAF and PLANAF in a single flight, despite being outnumbered, you’re wreaking a freaking havoc in the invasion plan wth a single flight of aircraft that can be pushed to 10–11 missions per 24h each… With tight multi-layered air-fefences, you may ruin a desired “first night” swarm effect, in fact, by acting Israel style, through pre-emptive actions, it’s doable to even perform a fast victory.What is needed is to re-think the strategy and the budget of the Filipino military since, at the present day, there is simply no strategy to ruin the party if some heavily armed rich neighbour comes with hostile intentions.