The Spike ER and NLOS Missiles of the Philippine Navy

A full scale mock up of a Spike NLOS missile. Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

The Israeli company Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Ltd revealed to the press recently that they will provide the Spike ER missiles for the Philippine Navy (PN) and the Spike NLOS missiles for our Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) Helicopters.[1] The Spike ER will likely be used on our Multi-Purpose Attack Craft (MPAC) Mark Three (Mk3) while the Spike NLOS will be used on our AW159 Wildcat Helicopters.

Both Spike missile versions were bought as part of the packages for the MPAC and AW159, with the MPAC project awarded in February 2016[2] while the AW159 acquisition was awarded in March 2016.[3] These acquisitions are significant because for the Spike ER, it will be the very first missile system ever to officially enter service with our PN ships. The Spike NLOS on the other hand will be the first ever guided missile to enter service for use with the PN’s helicopters.

’The Spike Missiles’
The history of the Spike missile is a little bit hazy and confusing, but from what I can piece together, it started out as the Tamuz missile which entered service with the Israeli armed forces at least as early as the early 1980s. In the late 1990s, the manufacturer Rafael started selling these abroad and renamed the export version as the “Spike”. Several variants of these missiles were produced,[4] with the newest and longest version, the NLOS, being unveiled only in 2009.[5]

The Spike family of missiles as of now consists of at least five different type of models, and since the time they were exported they have become one of the most commercially successful Anti-Tank (AT) missiles in the world with over two dozen countries buying and putting them into service in their armed forces.

The ER and NLOS are the longest ranged versions of the Spike family as of now, with the “ER” standing for “Extended Range” while the “NLOS” meaning “Non-Line of Sight”. The ER is the smaller of the two missiles, weighing 33 kg and having a range of 8 km. The NLOS on the other hand is more than twice weight of the ER at 71 kg, and has almost four times the range of 30 km.[6]

’Unique Guidance System’[7][8]
What makes these Spike missiles unique among small AT missiles (and probably one of the main reasons for their success) are their guidance systems which uses two Electro-Optical (EO) sensors, a Charge Coupled Device (CCD) and an Imaging Infra-Red (IIR) sensor. In simplest terms these are video cameras that allow the missile to operate in Day, Night and even Adverse Weather conditions.

In the case of the bigger Spike missiles like the ER and NLOS, the images taken from the sensors are sent back to the Operator which can then see what the missile sees and have full control of the missile. In the case of the ER, this is accomplished by using a Fiber-Optic wire that unspools from the back of the missile as it flies. In the case of the NLOS, it uses a wireless radio-frequency datalink since it has to operate at a much longer range.

In a way, these missiles are somewhat similar to “Suicide Drones”, giving the Operator the flexibility to do things like conduct short term Surveillance, change targets, abort the missile before it hits the target to prevent Friendly Fire or Collateral Damage, etc. and even have a video record of the operation of the missile as it hits the target.

Bear in mind that these missiles were made as per the requirement of the Israeli armed forces, who thought that these characteristics are important for their operations. And since these missiles has been in combat service for so long, more than three decades now, then the Israelis had a lot of time to improve and perfect them.

The only disadvantage with this type of guidance system is that the Operator can only engage one target at a time, and in the case of the ER, the Operator has to stay in position while guiding the missile. However, both missiles does have a Fire and Forget option also where the Operator can disengage if necessary after firing or designating the target.

’Coastal Defense’
The Spikes are AT missiles, but the PN intends to use them for the Anti-Ship role, and it should do well also in that role because aside from the High Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) warheads, there is also an option to use a Penetration, Blast Fragmentation (PBF) warhead[9] on the Spike which is more suitable against less-armored targets like ships.

The weights of the warheads of the ER and NLOS missiles has never been published, but I previously conservatively estimated them to be at least 6 kg, which gives them the equivalent Explosive and Kinetic Energy of six rounds of 76 mm caliber ammunition fired from an Oto Melara 76 mm Compact cannon, or the equivalent of around three-fourths the energy of a 155 mm caliber ammunition fired from an M114 Howitzer, which seems good enough against ships.[10]

The Finnish Coastal Defense forces are using these missiles for the same anti-ship role, and I think the best way to use the Spike ER on our MPACs will also be mainly for Littoral or Coastal defense. The MPACs on their own are small and sit low in the water, making them harder to detect by radar.[11] They are also fast and maneuverable, making them harder targets to hit.

Now if they operate on coastal areas, that will optimize their capabilities because land clutter and background heat source on their backs will degrade enemy Radar and Infra-Red (IR) sensors. One estimate says that the radar detection of a ship or boat near a beach will be degraded by at least 50%.[12] Hence MPACs will be more survivable and effective in terms of making hit and run tactics against enemy ships if they operate from near the shore.

‘Anti-Ship Role’
As for the NLOS, its decent range will enable our helicopters to have good standoff capability against enemy ships whose Surface to Air Missile (SAM) range are below 30 km, like that of the Chinese Type 056 Corvette,[13] for example, whose HQ-10 SAMs only has a range of 9 km.

Or, if we end up being allies with China, then against the US Navy’s Littoral Combat Ship (LCS),[14] whose RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) has a similar range as a HQ-10, LOL. Just kidding. Of course, the “standoff capability” only allows our helicopters to be able to fire their NLOS missiles without necessarily being shot down.

Whether those missiles actually hit against the ship’s anti-missile defenses is another matter. It all depends on which is better, the missile, or the defenses, and will probably need no less than actual combat to really determine which is which.

’Parting Shot’
Our Navy will finally enter the missile age once the ER and NLOS arrives, and frankly it is long overdue, thanks to the lack of support from the previous Administrations before PNoy. If you look at the Navies around the world right now, not many don’t have missile capability, and we are not just any small country, we are one of the biggest countries in South East Asia (SEA) in terms of the sizes of the economy and population.

I initially had a bit of reservation about these missiles, I felt bigger and longer ranged ones would’ve been better, but in the end I think our Navy made a good choice as these Spike missiles are already combat proven and in use with a lot of other countries. They are some of the best, if not the best in their class, and will serve very well as the first missiles, or the “Beginner’s missiles” for our Navy, LOL.

The MPACs are set to be delivered in 2017 while the Wildcats a year later in 2018, so congratulations to the Philippine Navy for their impending entry into the missile age.

A full scale mock up of a Spike ER missile. Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons


^[1] Rafael aims to expand Philippine presence,

^[2] ADAS 2016: Propmech to deliver first MPAC Mk 3 to the Philippine Navy in mid-2017,

^[3] Philippine navy orders two AW159 Wildcats,

^[4] Analysis: IDF breaks 33-year silence on M48 Tamuz missile launcher,

^[5] Rafael unveils new long-range Spike missile,

^[6] Rafael sharpens Spike missile offering,

^[7] Spike Family,

^[8] Spike NLOS,

^[9] Rafael shows new Spike,

^[10] Uparming the MPACs for the Anti-Ship Role,

^[11] Can other vessels see you on radar?,

^[12] Littoral Warfare,

^[13] Type 056 class Corvette,

^[14] Independence class Littoral combat ship,

34 thoughts on “The Spike ER and NLOS Missiles of the Philippine Navy”

  1. hi rhk, nice to know more about spike ER and NLOS for our PN.
    sana mag-advance na rin yun news about missiles for our PAF.
    it’s about time naman to have air-to-air missiles for our FA-50.
    congrats AFP, more power.

  2. Thanks for the review, rhk111s. You do us all a great service. I’m gratified to see PI-manufactured MPACs, despite the limited versatility of these specific models. I’m also glad to see the introduction of these missiles, though I share your initial concerns regarding their ranges. It was jarring to read your speculation regarding how these would fare against the USN. I laughed along with you, but nervously.

  3. what is more long term if we just re-armed our del pilars with anti-ship or aircraft missiles…this was done before by the u.s. coast guard. the del pilars could serve an effective deterrent than MPACs since it can carry a harpoon, CIWS and even anti-submarine warfare.

    further, the del pilars can patrol in a long endurance even in any weather condition as it was designed.

    arming MPACs for me is just a waste cause it can only hug the shore lines with only a maximum range of 560 kms. vs 24,000 kilometers of the del pilar. and the MPACs although its speed is 40 knot plus, it cannot be launched in rough seas.

    In naval warfare, there is no such thing a battle in a clear weather conditions but naval doctrine utilized an extreme weather conditions to use it as an element of surprise. in a clear sky naval ships are setting ducks even in a missile age. that is the reason why air forces also used all weather attack and fighter aircraft against naval ships.

    1. I think saying that arming MPACs is a waste is only for your lack of understanding of our current situation and tactics of the PN. They did not just do it over night, it started from Mk1 and the Missile Capable MPACs are now Mk3. Armed MPACs are not a waste nor a strategic miscalculation rather it is the best improvement and best strategic move for our inshore capabilities since we cannot just arm the Del Pilar Class Ships (DPCS) with missiles just for the sake of it. Remember that we are not yet upgrading our DPCS for we are still waiting for the final decision of the CMS that we are going to use for our New Frigates. Until the final decision will be made, then we can Upgrade our DPCS for commonality of system, which will be implemented on the 2nd horizon of our modernization and is what, will be implemented/finished 2-3 years from now.

      There are more to it than just arming MPACs with missile system, it is not just for Fun nor arm it with missile capability just for the sake of it, it is a strategic decision.

    2. Guys, guys, if you have been following my page on FB, I posted there an article from the Philfleet Magazine which shows the new organization plan of the Navy, which will be composed of four divisions: The SURFACE ACTION FORCE, LITTORAL COMBAT FORCE, AMPHIBIOUS READY FORCE and GENERAL SUPPORT AND SUSTAINMENT.

      The MPACs will be for the “Littoral Combat Force”, to protect our coasts. The Del Pilars will be with the “Amphibious Ready Force” as escorts for the Tarlac class ships. The Del Pilars will be upgraded to be able to serve its escort role well.

      The “Surface Action Force” will be the ones to engage the main enemy fleets out in the open sea. I will blog about this, but later, in a month or so.

      1. Thanks, but I still haven’t decided between the Russian Mil Helicopters, or the Basler Gunship. It’ll come to me one of these days.

      2. Nice write-up about the NLOS and ER.

        You have covered IMI’s EXTRA before and Delilah GL to some extent. With rumors of the SBMS project igniting, there’s a high chance the EXTRA will be on the AFP’s arsenal.

        What I’d like to read from you are the potential missiles for the AFP. The C-Star for one. The MISTRAL is a given too since, the FAP is getting ’em. And then there’s the question of medium range SAMs, what’s the AFP looking at? I mean you have written about the HAWK before, but lately, PH is looking at Israel. And what about missiles from Russia? How likely will PH gets the Brahmos?

        To sum it-up are we looking at:
        Long range Anti-Ship: C-Star / EXTRA / Brahmos?
        VSHORAD: Mistral
        Medium Range SAM:???
        Air to Air: ???
        Air launched missiles against surface assets:???
        Anti-Tank / Anti-FAC: Spike ER / Spike NLOS

      3. Thanks, neo.

        I sort of have an unwritten policy wherein I will only write about prospective weapons systems if the local or foreign press confirms it, and although my sources have confirmed that we are getting the C-Star and Mistral, I am waiting for the official confirmation of the Frigate Contract Signing before writing about it.

        But I will tell you this much about the C-Star: On paper it looks very, very good, at par with the known Anti-Ship Missiles out there like the Exocet or Harpoon in terms of features. But their last live fire exercise had a low success rate, though, indicating possibly a bad batch.

        As for the SpyDer, yeah, I sort of missed that one. I may write about it, but there are so many good topics now I don’t know which one to do first, LOL. There’s the Mil Helicopters, the Basler Gunship, then the 2016 Navy Desired Force Mix … Anyway, we’ll see.

  4. ok as a start. but as a matter of discussion those 30kms range missiles cannot defend our shoreline. missile guided destroyers and frigates today have anti ship missiles with a range from 150kms to 200 plus kms. maybe helos with anti ship missiles armed NLOS but still short of its 30 kms range without air cover it can be easily be shot down by anti-aircraft missiles armed ships.

    again, littoral ships are only effective if you have already missile armed major warships such as destroyer or frigates ..since littoral ships is last line of defense. again, the philippines have a coastline longer than the united states it needs to prioritized more of patrol ships that can be armed with anti-ships missiles like harpoon and the del pilar is most suited for it.

    since MPACS cannot patrol the length of WPS, it may not serve for the best purpose for our defense. we have to spend wisely or else what every military doctrine we have in mind will also be a waste.

    i rather spend a real missile boat that can carry anti-ship missiles with a range of at least 150kms and longer endurance than the MPACS such as helsinki, clurit, saar, gumdoksori and etc.

    that is my opinion.

    1. Yes of course, that is your opinion. It is yours and no one is taking it from you.

      Yes please don’t point out the obvious. We already know that 30 Km range missiles are not enough nor MPACs are not as capable, etc etc (All of the things that you said above). You are smart enough to know all of those things you mentioned above but yet you forgot to include or understand other factors which is important when discussing and giving perspective or stating your opinion to others. Those factors that will affect major decisions that is significant on how the PN will decide to achieve their goals with precision for less mistake.

      Then Again, PN are not YET upgrading our DPCS because of the CMS. Until the PN and HHI finalize the CMS and what not for our new Frigates that is where we can start upgrading our Offshore Combat Ships for commonality of the system used. and not overlooked.

      Please do not forget that the minds of our Navy who’s time was dedicated and spent years to plan and execute all of these projects is not just approving and listing projected schedule by flipping coins. I promise you jmcenabre, before you ever think of those things, they already had a thought of it.

      1. yes i do believed the navy has already in mind about those things. but if we keep on thinking we can upgrade our navy in a piece meal basis we cannot achieved as we thought to be. if the first consideration to have a budget for upgrading and re-arming our del pilars at the time we acquired them in 2011 we could have a guided missile frigate by now.
        by the way the U.S Cyclone class boats (Alvarez Class in the Phils) has served well in the persian gulf armed with a SAM stinger missiles and Griffin B missiles by guarding its U.S. destroyers and frigates from small attack boats.

        again what i am imparting here. we have a working weapon systems such as del pilars, jacinto, alvarez and the future pohang that can be easily upgraded to missile capable. i know it is also worth we have the MPACs but i rather have them in Sulu and within the boundaries of indonesia chasing smugglers, pirates and abu sayaf. the del pilars, jacinto, alvarez and the future pohang and brand new missile frigates in the WPS.

        I’m still optimistic we can have the 2 brand new missile frigates but the way it looks it is still a long way. Thats why we have to make used of the
        weapon system at hand and slowly upgrade it.

      2. jmcenabre, You are smart but it seems you have no understanding of things to consider other than arming ships with missiles and point out the obvious.

        I suggest that you should try to read more and understand the system integration, support, logistics and what not besides just reading weapon’s capability, data and/or specs.

  5. the jacinto corvette could have a better option to be armed with a light missile system than MPACs since it is bigger and have long endurance. these are opportunities that is overlooked. or if the pohang will arrived, i rather reserved it for these boats. and we have also the cyclone class boat which is bigger than the MPACS. the jacinto, pohang and cyclone are more effective because they are more flexible. they can served as littoral or surface action force or patrol.

    i hope next time main objective is for the del pilars, jacinto, pohang and cyclone to be missile armed.

  6. Ive read, things to consider about missile are range, warhead, speed, and guidance/survivability techniques. Mainly, range/speed depend on its total weight (propellant,warhead and etc), and guidance/survivability on how effective on-board mechanics and electronics (detection, flight controls, etc) are to deliver the necessary warhead to its intended target. A 30kg missile warhead like in Sea skua/Sea venom missiles are good for corvette up to 1000 tonnage. Having said these, greater range/warhead mean heavier missiles. Sea venom will be in service come 2020 with same 30 kg warhead but with great increase in range than the 25km of sea skua. AW159 helos can carry up to 4 sea venom and with lucks to deliver them could knock down a frigate…so they say. If budget permits, i hope the Navy will opt for heavier helos like AW101 and NFH90 that can handle heavier missile with range 100km like the Marte and Exocet AM39.

    1. You may want to read my conversation with jmcenabre so you know what is the topic and point that we/I am getting at.

      But I think that is a start, good job. I would just want to remind you that what you have said above, is just a part of the whole picture. I’m sure you are old enough to know that assets and weapons capability and specs are not just all in all factors that affects our strategy and or plan for procurement and what not.

      1. ok. at present without a missile guided frigate, corvette or SSV where will you put the missile guided MPACs? as escorts with these major ships i mentioned or just a coastal assignment. if used as escorts a gas guzzler MPACs will only used the major ships as its tanker a very costly investment. if it is for coastal assignment there are more of used in the special operations or coast guard assets to run against insurgents, smugglers and pirates or rescue operations.

        I can already see its future as guided missile MPACs all the time moored in our harbors.

        i dont mitigate the importance of our MPACs but with the long overdue missile guided frigates, i know even the light missile system to be armed on the EMPAcs such as the Spike missiles could be better served if these can be installed in the bigger ships and boats such as del pilar, jacinto, pohang and cyclone which have very much longer endurance than EMPACs. .

      2. Here is the thing jmcenabre. Let me say this, All of the things that you mentioned so far is what we/PN wanted it to be, Even me. I Love having those for our PN, that is our “Ideal scenario”, but why not, if we can do that why not? right. If it’s all that there is, why not? If we can arm those combat ships why not? Why not now? Why aren’t our PN do what is the ideal scenario for our own good? why not? You have to ask yourself those questions for you yourself search for the answer. and maybe just maybe you will get a hint of what hinders us to implement these projects before approving the New Frigates. If you have the answer for those, please share it to us.

        If you are to ask that question “where will you put the missile guided MPACs?”. What will you answer?
        For me that is an asinine question. Of course I will use an asset where it is intended and designed to do. I mean you can only do so much with ones capability. correct? So maybe try to analyze first before asking.

        Again, you have to understand that there is more to it than arming our existing assets. If you have not yet understand what I am saying, Now with the New Frigates Approval and Formal signing Today (October 24, 2016) it is more likely that the Missiles, Radars, CMS (Combat Management System), Sensors and what not, used to our NEW FRIGATES will be the same armament, Radar, CMS, etc. when upgrading our existing assets. Keyword “more likely” (still subjected for compatibility). If you still do not understand the correlation of what I am pointing out since the first response to you with respect to the topic, then there is nothing I can do for you. You can have your ideal Scenario all day long. Daydream kumbaga. Thinking without regarding Reality.

      3. mammongrogi, i never argued with you…all the things you said is true. again, we are here to give our views. but these is my view. i also read your article and appreciate it. there is no need for us here to debate about the issues we stand on. our topics here are all educational and i always appreciate all contributors.

        thats why i also appreciate rhk111 who was able to manage this blog well, so long we dont hurt other feelings it is open for everybody. so long we respect each other views.

        again, im open for discussion and not to debate.

      4. jmcenabre, I know you are not arguing. But the thing about letting your views publicly announced is always subjected for argument. I’m just pointing out what I think you do not understand, and try to tell you the “why”.

        You are smart, you just need to exercise the what, how and why. I recommend that you read and understand the system integration, support and logistics of weapons, ships, equipment, armament, etc. I hope by then you’ll understand the correlation between hardware and its system. So called “Technical Stuff”.

  7. Hi rhk, I’m at a point where I believe that the JCPV class, the GDP class and the Tarlac class will not have missiles.

    Let me explain:

    The GDP class is taking a long time to complete installation of the Mk 38 Mod 2 guns. How much long will it take to have them ready to fire missiles? The GDP class will have to be upgraded to fire ’em anti-ship missiles and those upgrades will take a long time.

    The JCPV class upgrades do not specify that it can fire anti-ship missiles and is reportedly top heavy. And I also do not know if their Compact Guns will be replaced by super Rapid (maybe you have the answer for this).

    For these two ships which do not have anti-ship capabilities, at least, the PN should arm them with Spike NLOS. Yes these little missiles can’t do enough damage to larger ships, but even an upgraded GDP class which can fire C-Star missiles will still be of a disadvantage with big modern Chinese ships. So the NLOS isn’t for those big ships, it’s for smaller ones. Yes, the GDP class has the Compact Guns and the Mk 38 mod 2, but even if the Oto-Melara 76mm Compact Gun can fire the Vulcano and DART ammo (I’m not sure if only the Super rapid can), it’s better to have redundancy.

    The Tarlac class as the PN puts it, would only have defensive weapons, so the Super Rapid, a Simbad Mistral, a CIWS and a secondary gun should be enough. The PN should get the DART, SAPOMER, HE and possibly the Vulcano rounds later on aside from the standard munitions. The 76mm gun should cover a lot of air and surface defense. The Tarlac class isn’t supposed to go toe to toe with corvettes or frigates so these SSVs wouldn’t be armed with anti-ship missiles. But I’m hoping these SSVs can be armed with at least the NLOS. It’s AW109s can later be armed with ERs but with just 8km of range, the NLOS organic to the Tarlac class will be better. Just like what I said of the GDP class and the JCPV class, the NLOS will be against smaller and faster targets. The PN shouldn’t stick with only one weapon option for use against OPFOR, machines do malfunction, and when they do, it’s better they have a backup weapon.

    To sum it up:
    If the PN has no real plans to have the JCPV class, the GDP class and the Tarlac class armed with anti-ship missiles, let them have the NLOS. At the very least, the threat of small vessels will be minimized because the GDP class, JCPV, and Tarlac class have the the 76mm, the secondary guns and the NLOS to be used against those.

  8. upgrades will always depend on the priorities and when such budget will be released, the schedule of purchase and lastly the schedule of its installation.

    at first it was proposed that the del pilars will be installed with missiles system and CIWS but these was abandoned but instead MK 38 mod 2 gun was installed.

    Actually when the decision was to install the Mark 38 for me the processing was fast and it was installed just on time. it really depends what priorities to be taken.

    but at this time govt should understand they must decide the clear cut priorities or else we might appropriate a commodity that cannot be of used in the present time.

    again MPACs are very important in a littoral combat but we need first a frigates and corvettes with missiles even with only the Spikes.

  9. I’m interested of how you appreciated/dissect the Basler. I read the IHS Jane about their offer to the PH and I admit I am kind of interested. While the plane looks ugly, it’s features are kind of cool…

    1. Looks promising. Large payload, low operating cost, long range. But kinda late, I think, now that we have an anti-American as President in Malacanang. But we’ll see.

  10. All, just try to be polite and civil as much as possible when doing discussions. And respect other people’s opinions. I, too, sometimes see opinions I don’t really like or agree, but in a democracy everyone is entitled to their opinion. So just live and let live, if you can.

  11. if you are in blog it is always public but we are professionals here. the only bad thing that happens in the blog if we started insinuating. if we discuss issues or subject matter do no make it personal. we should stick in the subject matter. after all the truth of the matter not only we get information here but through our discussions we can gain friends in these blog even we are not in the same level of acceptance of our views.

    thanks rhk111 for the reminder. mamongrogi, i do respect the level of your understanding, but i will stand on my views.

    1. Yes I am insinuating/suggesting you something that you will help you to know better. Is that bad? Do I look angry? Am I scaring you?
      I’m being polite actually, Did I bad mouth you? I’m not being personal either if I sounds like I did then I am sorry. My English is not perfect and maybe, sometimes I’m using the wrong term/word. I do apologize. But I am sure that I’m sticking on the subject matter.

      Your view is your view, and no one is taking it away from you, but do not expect that everyone to agree. Much more if the views that you are expressing on public has holes in it.

  12. mamongri, do you not see in my response..i was directing to the government, not you or to anybody else. nope do not apologized about grammar all of us here specially we are filipinos certainly we will commit mistakes in our grammar. i do commit mistakes.

    again, what i mean insinuating here is when you will address or to impress to someone that “you have no idea” kumbaga. i do read on system integration but i did not take on that subject matter because i just feel it is a long way. my apprehension, what happen today if a hostile destroyer or frigate from another nation missile lock in our del pilars in any of our ships in WPS. same scenario happens in japan when a hostile chinese fighter intrude to japanese territory and for several time was warned by japanese fighters and the chinese fighters did not heed the warning, the japanese fighter lock his missiles on the chinese fighter, thats the only time the chinese fighter keep away from the japanese airspace. just recently in indonesia, chinese vessels who intrude indonesia were fired upon by the indonesia navy. then later, indonesia conduct a military exercise of all its forcers showing to china they will repel any intruders and invaders at all cost.

    going back to the scenario, today a foreign naval vessel lock on our naval ships in the WPS. if we have the capability to lock on theirs then this is DETERRENT.

    while we are still a long way to system integration. we know very well, we still have to comply with the wish list of the philippine navy of number of frigates, corvettes, patrol ships, patrol boats, air assets, communication system, radars and etc in order such system will be effective. plus, our political system that makes our armed forces bleed before it can get a trickle of its request and after six years you dont know the agenda of the next administration.

    we must have first, DETERRENT next system integration if we have already the funds. these nations that surrounds as in the WPS has been testing us and they know we have no capability to confront them. my heart bleeds on our soldiers for a longtime they been a laughing stock. we have even hard time to send supplies to our marines in siera madre.

    mamongrogi, what i meant with my response is DETERRENT. look what happen to our 2 FA-50s. i hope by now they should be armed at least with sidewinder or maverick. i dont think the chinese will just laugh on 2 FA-50s with sidewinder or maverick patrolling the WPS. they will take that seriously. do you thinks that also?

    do you know, that on the 70’s or early 80’s when we have still the american bases we blasted the chinese when they intrude in the WPS.
    FVR can relate that in clarity. that is the reason at that time we have an air and naval base in pag-asa island. naval ships and f-8 fighters were base in the island.

    1. It did not matter if you are addressing it to the government to me or who else..You are saying that our PN is making a mistake and even said that “Arming MPACs is just a waste” and PN somehow “overlooked” arming Jacinto, Alvarez and Del Pilar Ships and proceeded to say: “we have to arm this and that rather than a boat cause we have xxx of miles of water to cover and we have hostiles from this area here and there”, I am para phrasing but again our PN knows that, you see you even know those things of course they know it before you do. They even have more access of critical information than you do and to imply that you know better, that is what I am disagreeing the whole time. PN knows better than you do.

      Of course I will address it to you because you are the one who is claiming that our PN is miscalculating things. Alangan kay admin ko ipaliwanag, syempre sayo. If you are not ready to be corrected and critized then do not talk about it. Thank you, I am saying Sorry incase if there has been feelings hurt.

      I am sure you already red the revised PN “wishlist” yah? if you do. Ask yourself these.
      Why did PN schedule the upgrades of Existing PN ships that includes Tarlac class on Horizon 2 and 3? cause clearly we have the money and the PN has this set up and even revised it once or twice. Nai-revised na lahat lahat nasa Horizon 2 at 3 padin ang upgrading, Why?
      Why not now or before we even got into the bidding of the New Frigates? Clearly missile, CIWS, Torpedo, sonar, Radars at etc, Yan mga kailangan ng PN natin ngayon. bida? bakit hind? Bakit kaya?

      Regarding the things you said above, You are correct, but mind you that our PN has more obstacle to get rid off to work their way into what we are in the future. If it is that easy to have these capabilities why not. I’m very sure it is not the lack off effort nor a lack of will, but we have limitations, Limitations that our AFP has since ever since, but still work their way to be competent somehow. They have planned this, not just for today but looking beyond now. It may not be the best and reasonable for you today but I assure you jmcenabre there are more obstacle that our PN has to solve other than arming our ships with missiles, sonars, whatever it is. Because if it is all that we need, arming ships. then why not?

  13. actually, kaya yan kahit noon pang una…problema kahit un mga senador at congressmen natin di nga pinag abalahan yun concern sa territorial disputes kaya mahina ang proseso dahil lagi ang executive ang nag action.
    e kung maingay lang yun mga conressmen at senado baka bumilis yun mga proseso sa armed acquisition. talaga kaya ng pilipinas. kaya nga ng bangladesh at sri lanka e tayo dami nating natural resources di nga natin ma pa itakbo ekonomiya natin.

    so ang ginigiit ko kung ganun na lang kahina ang proseso ng acquisition at modernization natin buti pa yun mga existing weapon system un muna ang e upgrade. un del pilar, jacinto, alvarez at yun SSV na wala pa talagang weapon system. nandyan naman yan SSV di unahin na. baka ma abutan pa yan ng suicide boat di nya ipagtanggol ang sarili.

    yes, there is already signing of the missile frigate. but i am still cautious of it. we dont know by this time what u.s. have in mind and south korea is also an ally of the u.s. we know the fact if u.s. have tantrums it can influence his allies it could delay the construction or whatever. is it one reason why we are not able to get the necessary acquisition of the sidewinder, maverick and other weapon system for our fa-50 because it needs the nod of the u.s.? i hope this is only a rumor or wild imagination. the first priority should be DETERRENCE.

    the acquisition of the EMPACs what i said is for the future but it could not answer the needs of the present. what i said it is a mistake because if EMPACs can carry a light missiles system, the more del pilars, jacinto, alvarez and tarlacs can carry it becase they have bigger tonnage at the same time long endurance.

    thats why countries have been encroaching our territories because we cannot put patrol ships in the high seas not even the coast guards because we cannot afford to rammed our ships with their ships. thats why they got scarborough shoals. and scarborough shoals to the nearest shoreline in luzon we are defenseless. actually, if could get the minimum defense requirements for the navy and airforce we are already short of territories. what this means? our modern ships and air force is too late the hero. because by this time the only way to evict intruders is through war. and even by that time we cannot afford to go to war and the u.s. will always declare they cannot commit there military in the WPS unless only if there is a direct attack of the philippine mainland.

    i still believe patrol frigate ships such as the del pilar to be upgraded to missile system, if were not that ambitious with the harpoon, then light anti ship missiles or a phalanx well do. at least 3 upgraded del pilars patrolling the WPS is a DETERRENT that they cannot move closer to our shoreline.

    further, we are told that the fa-50 can be integrated with harpoon, then hope the next batch can already carry the harpoons or any anti ship missiles.

    1. We cannot do anything anymore for the past, What we can do now is to plan for the future and that is what our AFP is trying to fix in the best way possible to have a credible Military. But the problem is that you think you know better than those who spent and dedicated their time and lives to study and plan AFP’s Modernization project.

      I already told you why our existing ships is not yet upgraded. Eventually 2 or 3 years (or earlier) time, it will be upgraded since we already know the system, armament, radar, sonar, etc. to buy based on the New Frigate for commonality. In layman’s term “Less Complication, Less Trouble”. It is all about Integration, Support and Logistics. And those missiles na sinasabi mo, that is only a small fraction na consideration na sinasabi ko. Kaya nga kung pagkakarga/pagbili lang ng Bomba, Missiles, Radar, at kung anu pa ang kailangan gawin, hindi problema yun. But in reality tulad ng sabi mo, may pagbabawal sa pagbenta satin ng gamit, yan ang reyalidad natin. Hindi lang iyan, madami pang bagay na kailangan gawin, punahin at isipin para malutas kung anuman ang kinakaharap ng AFP.

      Again, do not point what is obvious. If we know these things you said above, what more the people operating our AFP/DND?
      It does not matter if you used the wrong term or not. The fact of the matter is that you are implying that you know better than our AFP and that is why I am explaining things to you.

      I agree with you that we should have those capabilities for us not to be bullied, but then again we have limitations. Our AFP cannot do or have anything and everything, we are on this situation already and being unrealistic won’t help us. Kung isang wasiwas lang ng tingting ng walis ni Aling Dorya matutupad lahat, bakit hindi diba.

      1. kaya nga dahil meron tayong limitations dapat gamitin natin un praktikal. buti nga ang condition ngayon dyan sa WPS medyo bumaba ang tension. hindi natin alam, ngayon lang ito, pero bukas nag iiba naman ang condition, kaya ba ng EMPAcs na meron misssiles na ma bully cya ng isang coast guard vessel. ang liit nun tapos un tsino mas malaki ang barko hindi naman yan takot e ram nila un barko nila dun sa maliit na vessel.

        remember, nun una nag enkwentro un navy natin at yun sa tsino nag stand-off. kasi un del pilar stood its ground at tingin nila malaki at armed ng 75mm. na intimidate sila sa del pilar. pero sa mali na decision ng presidente natin instead suportahan un del pilar kasi gray is gray and white is white daw, the rest is history bini bully un coast guard natin at na paalis. hindi nga makalapit. pero alam mo our men in uniform are brave. political decision lang hinintay nila.

        we never learned that lesson. pano un del pilar is missile capable kahit light missile system lang di lalo sila ma intimidate. in war, you must read the mind of your enemies. at the present, di pa rin natin ma basa pag iisip nang ating kalaban.

        mag pa hi-tech tayo pero very delayed. dalawa dapat ang isipin natin. first, pano natin ma upgrade mga exisiting weapon system natin na maging deterrent para magamit when the need arises, ito dapat ang sagot sa present condition. second a separate program at ito na un new advance equipment. dapat sabay yan kasi di pwede mag isip ka ng magandang future sa AFP 20 years for 40 years from now tapos NGAYON wala kang pang laban. at kung meron digmaan NGAYON ano pa gamit sa advance system mo na wala pa.

        kahit sa basketball sometimes yun coach kung nakikinig lang sa mga fans baka marami kang naging panalo hehehe. i tell you, sometimes military minds should listen to civilians just like us. alam mo there are great battle won not only by professional military commanders but also by civilians. name them, gen. nguyen giap who architect the defeat of the americans in the vietnam war. mao tse tong defeated chiang kai shek, gen. joshua lawrence chamberlain in his brilliant defense at little round top at marami pa. war is not only won by men and machines but PRINCIPLE.

        alam mo, we can defeat china in a limited war in the WPS. pero kung all-out yan kailangan natin mga allies. but i dont think china is that crazy to go to war against the philippines. mas malaki ang mawala nyan kaysa atin. if the world opinion is with us through our case in the international tribunal we will always win in a limited war against china. kay un mga tsino hindi loko yan. na basa nila ang pag iisip natin. kaya nga nakuha nila un portion nang territory natin.

        kaya our best defense is DETERRENT walay tayo nyan ngayon. ganito, wild na pag iisip. un mga oil tanker natin pintahan mo ng coast guard at manned by coast guards e standby mo yan sa WPS e rammed ba yan ng mga coast guard vessel ng tsino? pano kung oil tanker na yan meron missiles system?

        mamongrogi i appreciate a lot in our discussion. i rest my case now. but i admire you my friend. keep that fighting spirit inside you.

Leave a Reply


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

Google photo


Twitter picture


Facebook photo


Connecting to %s
