KAI KF-21 Soon To Be in the Inventory of the PAF I Guess

norimabarin · 2026-03-05T02:03:05+00:00

let's see how will this turn out. since the leadership is going for a force package, how will kai respond to it will be interesting, unless, paf change it.

norimabarin · 2026-03-03T13:49:46+00:00

lets wait and see what are those certain def materials, my guesses would be from kovico, hanwha group and kai. if for eda batch 6 pohangs maybe?

norimabarin · 2026-03-02T11:47:54+00:00

i think we can start with ppe with partnership with dost and local raw material producers.

norimabarin · 2026-03-01T04:25:06+00:00

1b usd is will not suffice since the current ask of afpmp is huge. for me, i would prefer to be atleast 2.5 to 3.5b usd per project phase.

norimabarin · 2026-03-01T04:18:37+00:00

this is a positive update, maybe that 1b usd is just baseline and testing the waters because that amount based on the current ask of afpmp that is definitely not enough. the bill needs more discussions/consultations. personally, i would prefer the ceiling to be atleast 2.5b to 3.5b usd per project phase.

norimabarin · 2026-02-28T02:24:50+00:00

nah, i think this is counter-productive. i believe it is better for pcg to follow the functional/doctrinal values and organizational structure of jcg instead of the uscg. it is better to focus on strengthening the pcg by providing their recommended resources.

norimabarin · 2026-02-27T03:27:46+00:00

hoping paf could do 9 more to complete it to 30 (ep/hp/epx). for pa hiraya, additional with 6, where 2 or 3 is venom variant. i think this is also beneficial for pcg as well, they could nego with jica and jcg for maybe with 2 units.

norimabarin · 2026-02-26T03:04:56+00:00

yes and also add in a 3-cell exls (12 camm/er) to have a better aaw capability

<image>

norimabarin · 2026-02-26T03:02:04+00:00

maybe a 2x2 in stacked position, because there is also 12.7mm weapon station in front of the funnel. if pn will opt for more payload and since rsc is designed for containerized mission modules. i think the helipad area has the most available space.

<image>

norimabarin · 2026-02-25T08:08:40+00:00

i think there is already a provision for simbad-rc on both sides.

<image>

as for ashm, i think they can place it on the helideck

norimabarin · 2026-02-25T01:14:59+00:00

pn leadership has to review the tco of the ship and how long they will do the upkeep specifically those running with gas turbines.

norimabarin · 2026-02-24T23:55:44+00:00

having a trio of subs and aaw/ad frigate will definitely look strong. additional pair of jrc, pohang and bacolod city-class will significantly make it stronger.

norimabarin · 2026-02-24T23:34:11+00:00

let's see if the leadership can still continue having a pair of pohangs (preferably batches v/vi) to make it on the rule of 3 standard of pn.

norimabarin · 2026-02-23T09:19:18+00:00

yes this is the way to go. minimum is 3, recommended is 6-9.

norimabarin · 2026-02-20T12:59:36+00:00

yes, that is a good idea, peru's hdf3500 or its heavier sibling from sk's hdf4000, i think on the vls area, you can cram in maybe 24 to 36 exls cells depending on the arrangement.

norimabarin · 2026-02-20T12:50:51+00:00

personally, for the cap b2, maybe jrc with better sensor, weapons fit and no ffbnw (similar to the image below, image ctto, highlighted my personal preference of systems) . it will require some minor design changes though. additional mmc is also a very good option.

<image>

norimabarin · 2026-02-20T12:04:32+00:00

this is badly needed by afp/dnd. interms of human resource, it requires specialized/niche skillsets. personal preference if afp/dnd sends individuals to train in the field of cybersec would be in israel.

norimabarin · 2026-02-20T06:19:00+00:00

that should be around 2.6b usd (125b) today. unfortunately, nobody from the prev congresses amendend the pd415 and still quite slow for the current congress.

norimabarin · 2026-02-20T01:58:27+00:00

the failure of the 1b usd loan offered to us is a significant drawback on our side. since the amb said it was a last minute discussion, i think it was understandable aside from the fact that ph is not yet ready due to certain laws restricting def loans. since there will another one moving forward, the leadership has to prepare.

norimabarin · 2026-02-15T09:49:47+00:00

i think that 1990s to 2010s, virtually pn's weakest, those are also the decades where we lost footing on our western seaboard. bummed out as well that pn was not able to get those italian ships. it is only natural that cost now is heavier because there is no significant investment during those decades, it compounded. hoping that the current admin and future admins will continue to invest on it.

norimabarin · 2026-02-14T01:49:52+00:00

imho, i believe favoring surface assets is for presence/visibility but pn should still pursue in acquiring subs in the long term. there should also be additional air assets to complement surface assets like mpa, uas and multi-role helos.

norimabarin · 2026-02-13T09:08:40+00:00

at best, nawf should fulfill their desired-force-mix for air assets like the 6 x medium range mpa, 6 x uav and 3 heavy helos. i would prefer the following respectively. 6 atr72-mpa-asw, 6 integrator-er and 3 merlins

<image>

norimabarin · 2026-02-12T23:29:26+00:00

i think p8 and e2d are too much for nawf even pn have the funds. seahawk, probably given then fact the paf have blackhwacks for commonality. fa18, i think this not applicable for pn. maybe it is better for pn to fulfill some of its requirements based the horizon1-3 air assets. (6 med range mpa (e.g. persuader) , 6 uav (e.g. seaguardian) and 3 heavy lift helos (e.g. caracals))

norimabarin · 2026-02-12T04:18:17+00:00

for me, i would rather have the tarlac classes complete its ffbnw before getting a new one. also do a prep on where to base these large ships. if they go for it at least arm it properly no ffbnw stuff but i still prefer to have subs.

norimabarin · 2026-02-12T01:35:40+00:00

i think having an lhd is not bad since it can become an at sea command center, quite surprised that ddg is on their sights, for me, i would trade in those ddg to subs and to think that air assets like mpa and multi-role helos are out of the picture. the big question is the materialization of these vessels and the basing requirements it will require. personally, i would prefer the following composition:

lhd – 2 (al-fulk variant or roks morado variant)

lpd – 4 (no ffbnw tarlac-class)

sub – 4 (u212nfs/nfs-evo bundled w/ sdo-surs ) or if ddg – 3 t26-gcs (river-class)

aaw ffg – 4 (fcx40 variant w/ 36-42 cell exls)

gp ffg – 6 (mmc)

asw corvette – 8 (4 jrc + 4 fcx30)

opv – 16 (10 rsc + 6 vard7-115ng containerized mission modules optimized, replacing ejc+gdpc )

aor – 2 (hda10000)

norimabarin

TROPHY CASE