Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Navy & Maritime

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence


Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN) update

This is a discussion on Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN) update within the Navy & Maritime forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Deleted...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 3 votes, 2.33 average.
Old August 3rd, 2006   #31
Senior Member
Colonel
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,467
Threads:
Re:

Deleted

Last edited by weasel1962; October 18th, 2008 at 11:55 PM.
weasel1962 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 4th, 2006   #32
Defense Aficionado
Lieutenant General
contedicavour's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Paris/Geneva (but I'm Italian)
Posts: 2,901
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Subangite
Press releases from Gov. of Singapore Mindef, quotes that the Vastergotlands are to replace some of current Challenger-class submarines, not be an addition to the current fleet.

Source: Singapore Ministry of Defence.
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/new...4nov05_nr.html

Bear in mind though that these ships will not be operational until 2010 and that the RSS Challenger was built in 1968, which is strikingly odd, since it's a highly old vessel relative to the RSN's new fleet. That said, the Challenger class has been noted as performing well during exercises with the RAN.



The AIP is not for the current Challenger class which used to be known as Sjöormen class in the Swedish service, the AIP conversion is speculated for the new RSN Vastergotlands, which are yet to be inducted into service.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/hts.../20051107.aspx

We will have to see if the Vastergotlands are to be upgraded to the Sodermanland which are Vastergotlands but with the Sterling AIP's and stealth features when transfered to the RSN. As of yet I think it remains speculation, but that it is a possibility the RSN would upgrade these vessels to the Sodermanland specifications, or can do so if or whenever it sees fit.



It is entirely subjective what is a must have, are the 6 La Fayette class stealth frigates a must have?
Other sources confirm the 2 Vastergotlands will be fitted with AIP before transfer (Janes 06-07 for example) and that they will replace the 2 oldest Sjoormen/Challenger SSKs.
What I find even more interesting is that Singapore is likely to participate to the Viking/A26 programme. With Norway and Denmark out of that programme, it will be an entirely Swedish-Singapore affair. I definitively look forward to more news on that.

cheers
contedicavour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 4th, 2006   #33
Defense Aficionado
Lieutenant General
contedicavour's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Paris/Geneva (but I'm Italian)
Posts: 2,901
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by weasel1962
"given the much higher threat from enemy surface vessels"

Actually, I don't see a surface threat to the Malacca straits or territorial waters. The pirates operate more in Indonesian waters rather than Malaysian or Singapore because of the lax state of the Indonesian navy. Some speculate that the military itself is in the piracy business. This has been resolved by joint air-sea cooperation established recently.

State military surface threats can also be countered by air assets such as Harpoon armed F18Ds, F27s, F16s or maverick armed F5s. Both countries have more than adequate air arsenal+munitions to make surface incursions costly. The chinese "threat" is overplayed. Even operating in the Spratleys, the PLAN is going to be a little light on air cover. In any case, China has signed up to a Spratleys treaty that resolve to settle the ownership issue by diplomatic means (thks to Taiwan).

In any case, you don't need missile armed craft to tackle pirates. Both countries have more than sufficient patrol craft to patrol its own waters. If this is insufficient, it doesn't cost much to buy more light patrol boats. Mostly its an identification and deployment issue. The global move in the implementation of AIS has far more impact on identification of illegal vessels.

ASW capability is a little more light in the 90s. It has been boost up esp after the rest of the region has started to concentrate on subs eg China, India, Australia. So the focus on ASW is understandable and probably worth the monies put in.
I agree with what you state. Singapore has got enough air and surface assets to face whatever comes at it, so focusing on ASW makes sense. My point was more on Malaysia : I would complete surface and air assets before investing so massively on SSKs (buying Scorpene costs hugely more than second hand Sjoormen or Vastergotland, even more so in relative terms as Singapore's naval budget is higher than Malaysia's)

cheers
contedicavour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 4th, 2006   #34
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 13
Threads:
The significance of the SSK program is to build a submarine warfare capability, which takes time. RMN has been asking for submarines since the 1980s. Looking at past history, it would be quite some time before the government would agree to buying a next batch of SSK, hence the decision to buy new boats.

Yes, there is still much to do with regard to surface and air assets, but the necessary infrastructure and skills are already there; it's only a matter of expanding existing capabilities.
sevven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 4th, 2006   #35
New Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 29
Threads:
agreed,
we need advance ssk like scorpene as deterrent in facing any conflict in the future.we also want to balance RSN n TNI-AL in term of under surface warfare capability.it will be a huge disadvantage for RMN if she didn't has good under surface warfare capability although maybe has strong surface fleet.
f2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 4th, 2006   #36
Junior Member
Private First Class
Subangite's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 73
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by contedicavour
Other sources confirm the 2 Vastergotlands will be fitted with AIP before transfer (Janes 06-07 for example) and that they will replace the 2 oldest Sjoormen/Challenger SSKs.
What I find even more interesting is that Singapore is likely to participate to the Viking/A26 programme. With Norway and Denmark out of that programme, it will be an entirely Swedish-Singapore affair. I definitively look forward to more news on that.

cheers
exactly, I see it as highly likely that the Vastergotlands would be fitted with AIP, upgraded to a similar standard to that of the Sodermanland class.

Singapore participating in the Viking program? Wow!! this is great news! First I've heard of it. Whats your source contedicavour?
Subangite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 4th, 2006   #37
Senior Member
Colonel
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,467
Threads:
Re:

Deleted

Last edited by weasel1962; October 18th, 2008 at 11:56 PM.
weasel1962 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 5th, 2006   #38
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
renjer's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 212
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by f2000
agreed,
we need advance ssk like scorpene as deterrent in facing any conflict in the future.we also want to balance RSN n TNI-AL in term of under surface warfare capability.it will be a huge disadvantage for RMN if she didn't has good under surface warfare capability although maybe has strong surface fleet.
Developing on the deterrent factor, I would think an SSK like the Scorpene is a potent force-multiplier. Here I thinking of the lone Pakistani submarine that managed to keep the IN at bay in the 1971 (?) war. I don't have the full details so I wouldn't be at all surprised if I were wrong on this. Anyone?

A submarine's stealth also gives it the ability to project power by mining enemy harbours, support raid & recce missions as well as launch land attack weapons. Here, I would be very interested to see if there will be further developments to the SM-39 along the lines of the MM40 Block III in terms of capability.

Its force-multiplier and power projection characteristics make the submarine an ideal weapon-system to carry out the Deterrence and Forward Defence doctrines under Malaysia's National Defence Policy.
renjer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 5th, 2006   #39
Defense Aficionado
Lieutenant General
contedicavour's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Paris/Geneva (but I'm Italian)
Posts: 2,901
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Subangite
exactly, I see it as highly likely that the Vastergotlands would be fitted with AIP, upgraded to a similar standard to that of the Sodermanland class.

Singapore participating in the Viking program? Wow!! this is great news! First I've heard of it. Whats your source contedicavour?
Janes's 2006/07 clearly says that Sweden has offered participation to Singapore on the A26. It is true that Sweden has lost all its other potential partners (Denmark, Norway) and that Singapore could now be Sweden's last hope of getting Viking going...

cheers
contedicavour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 5th, 2006   #40
Defense Aficionado
Lieutenant General
contedicavour's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Paris/Geneva (but I'm Italian)
Posts: 2,901
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by weasel1962
Noted and very interesting. Will take a look at Janes Naval Forces 06/07 when I get the chance.

More info on Viking:
http://www.kockums.se/Submarines/viking.html

I confess I haven't followed the Viking program news. Anyways the viking project has been terminated and the new program is termed as the A26 according to FMV.

http://www.fmv.se/WmTemplates/Page.aspx?id=1242

The annual report does cite consultations with "international partners". It does shed some light on a potential future direction of the RSN sub-surface intentions.
Yep indeed, Viking as such is terminated. Official name is A26.

cheers
contedicavour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 5th, 2006   #41
Defense Aficionado
Lieutenant General
contedicavour's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Paris/Geneva (but I'm Italian)
Posts: 2,901
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by renjer
Developing on the deterrent factor, I would think an SSK like the Scorpene is a potent force-multiplier. Here I thinking of the lone Pakistani submarine that managed to keep the IN at bay in the 1971 (?) war. I don't have the full details so I wouldn't be at all surprised if I were wrong on this. Anyone?

A submarine's stealth also gives it the ability to project power by mining enemy harbours, support raid & recce missions as well as launch land attack weapons. Here, I would be very interested to see if there will be further developments to the SM-39 along the lines of the MM40 Block III in terms of capability.

Its force-multiplier and power projection characteristics make the submarine an ideal weapon-system to carry out the Deterrence and Forward Defence doctrines under Malaysia's National Defence Policy.
AFAIK SM-39 won't be updated since priority is given to a submarine launched version of MBDA Scalp Naval cruise missile.
Still it's quite an asset with its range of 50km.

cheers
contedicavour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 6th, 2006   #42
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
renjer's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 212
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by contedicavour
AFAIK SM-39 won't be updated since priority is given to a submarine launched version of MBDA Scalp Naval cruise missile.
Still it's quite an asset with its range of 50km.

cheers
Yes, it is. Still, it would be good to have some sort land attack capability built into the Scorpenes. Thanks.
renjer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9th, 2006   #43
Junior Member
Private First Class
Subangite's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 73
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreamwarrior73
Malaysian Government is going to place an order for batch 2 of the PV project with the Naval Dockyard sometime maybe end of 2007 or early 2008. the order is up to six ships.

those ex-Dutch submarines are no more there. they have been scrapped.
This is a cut a paste from the brunei corvette thread.

Anyways great news dreamwarrior73! So batch 2 will be a further 6 ships, if its true!! Whats your source?

Will the total order of 20+ ships still be as planned? Or will it be downscaled because of cost blow outs in part of PSC mismanagement?


So I guess, 2 more Lekiu class ships will be added to the fleet,
Apart from further Kedah class OPV's, which further weapons systems could easily added on.

The surface fleet numbers are increasing.
Subangite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 10th, 2006   #44
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 111
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Subangite
This is a cut a paste from the brunei corvette thread.

Anyways great news dreamwarrior73! So batch 2 will be a further 6 ships, if its true!! Whats your source?

Will the total order of 20+ ships still be as planned? Or will it be downscaled because of cost blow outs in part of PSC mismanagement?


So I guess, 2 more Lekiu class ships will be added to the fleet,
Apart from further Kedah class OPV's, which further weapons systems could easily added on.

The surface fleet numbers are increasing.
1. i'm sorry i can't reveal my source.

2. as far as TLDM is concerned they wanted the whole lot of 27 PVs/corvettes.

3. each batch will incorporate what is called "batch improvement" which means that each later batch will be better than the previous batch in terms of platform and onboard systems.

4. as far as cost blow out is concerned. previous management is not only the culprit. you should also consider the fact that the price was derived in 1993(? please correct me if i'm wrong) when PSCND submitted their bid. when was the contract signed? now it is mid 2006. annual inflation did play a part in the cost blow out. so is the recession in 1997 which further exaggerate the cost inflation.

5. a fellow forummer mentioned that the LEKIU batch 2 will also include an option for anither 2. so it is 2 + 2 (optional) LEKIU batch 2. how does that sounds? it sure as hell sounds like music to my ears.
dreamwarrior73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 10th, 2006   #45
Defense Aficionado
Lieutenant General
contedicavour's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Paris/Geneva (but I'm Italian)
Posts: 2,901
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreamwarrior73
1. i'm sorry i can't reveal my source.

2. as far as TLDM is concerned they wanted the whole lot of 27 PVs/corvettes.

3. each batch will incorporate what is called "batch improvement" which means that each later batch will be better than the previous batch in terms of platform and onboard systems.

4. as far as cost blow out is concerned. previous management is not only the culprit. you should also consider the fact that the price was derived in 1993(? please correct me if i'm wrong) when PSCND submitted their bid. when was the contract signed? now it is mid 2006. annual inflation did play a part in the cost blow out. so is the recession in 1997 which further exaggerate the cost inflation.

5. a fellow forummer mentioned that the LEKIU batch 2 will also include an option for anither 2. so it is 2 + 2 (optional) LEKIU batch 2. how does that sounds? it sure as hell sounds like music to my ears.

Do you have information on weapons upgrades in the later batches of Meko100 and Lekius ? I'm curious to know, especially regarding AAW. For the moment mekos do not have any and Lekiu Batch 1 have short range VLS Seawolf. Incorporating Aster 15s or ESSMs would make a significant difference.

cheers
contedicavour is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:37 AM.