www.navalnews.com
Much better than those antique 4th hands manually operated Bofors 40mm...
Thank you for sharing.
www.titikomapost.com
You slipped a zero there, 9 billon yen (or 1 trillion IDR) is currently 63-64 million USD - not 660.
Well....then it is a really good deal, $64 million for a large patrol vessel.
The most recent similar contract for five patrol vessels from Japan with the Philippines was valued at 79 billion yen, for comparison - i.e. 15.8 billion yen per ship.
The modified Kunigami/Kunisaki class vessels built by MHI for the Philippines (the 94m MRRVs) would cost around 8.75b yen per ship today adjusted for inflation, so it's not really unlikely it's a variant of the same design.
maritime-executive.com
Yes after looking more on their recent Coast Guard vessels production line, and considering the costs is only slightly bigger at JPY 9 bio. It is more likely will be similar design base what Japanese Coast Guard call Large Patrol Vessels and not Large Patrol Vessels with Helicopter.
I wonder if the surveillance radar and fire control systems are added for the new main gun during the overhaul and modernization.
I hope that the hull of the OPV will be reinforced/strengthened in case the situation becomes more physical during confrontations with the chinese coastguard.Recent contract for 5 Coast Guard vessels for Philippines was valued USD 525 mio overall. This includes 5 vessels and logistics package to support them.
Japan Provides Aid to Philippines for Five New Coast Guard Patrol Boats
The Philippines announced today with the support of the Japanese government they will be undertaking several projects including adding more patrol bo...
Seems it is similar 97m design Coast Guard ships with the first 2 vessels. The difference in costs related with the financing scheme. The first two was base on grant scheme, while the second five was base on credit line. Thus the first two finance through Japanese Government purchase while the second five is actually already calculated as export financing.
Thus the overall package calculated differently. However this is what I have put in my previous post on how Japan ussualy work on G to G financing export in ASEAN. First package ussualy trough grant aid and succeeding packages through export credit lines. However considering the rate of inflation in Japan, the real costs of that ships is still around JPY 7-8 bio.
Yes after looking more on their recent Coast Guard vessels production line, and considering the costs is only slightly bigger at JPY 9 bio. It is more likely will be similar design base what Japanese Coast Guard call Large Patrol Vessels and not Large Patrol Vessels with Helicopter.
Kunigami is Large Patrol Vessel, While Shunkou is Large Patrol Vessel with Helicopter. Seems the difference is Kunigami has helicopter pad while Shunkou has both pad and hangar. Whether the seems bigger price tag on this Indonesian Bakamla deal will make slightly larger ones or not remain to be seen on detail contract later on.
If there's follow on order (as I believe Japan hope in deals), remain to be seen whether will be work on Japanese yard or not.
www.antaranews.com
I do believe the large crew that being told by TNI-AL Hydro-oseographic Center (Pushidrosal) is total crew acomodation capacities to also include crew for overall SRV system operation and potential submariners in rescue.
Is that separate from this one?
www.navalnews.com
news.detik.com
www.facebook.com
Dont forget that PAL also has to build the two additional 123 m LPDs for the Philippine Navy.Watch this video on Facebook
Log into Facebook
Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.
Indonesian MinDef accounts whether FB or X put video on both U214 and Scorpene. The pages also stated TNI-AL chief talk in media, that the decision for next batch of submarine will 'hopefully' soon come out. For sometime U214 and Scorpene is known as leading candidate. However the video also talk on SM39 and A3SM that more likely will equip Scorpene. Could it be sign that Scorpene is the pick?
Could two types going to be pick, as seems in Frigate Babcock Arrowhead derivative and Fincantieri PPA seems going to be the pick for Frigate programs? Question going to be in my opinion depends on political situation. Currently politically there's strong push for domestic industry involvement in manufacturing and production.
However for Submarine and Frigate there's going to be problem on capacity. So far only one yard that have capacity toward involvement in both Frigate and Submarine. Capabilities of other domestic yards seems still limited on Patrol boats and OPV.
View attachment 51053
This is screenshot that I took from recent PT. PAL video on their year company profile. Despite all the talk for PAL in local media and government policy for Naval domestication, it is clear the size of PAL facility is limited.
They are only having 2 graving docks and one floating dock. Two enclose ship building facilities and one Submarine facility. Means if they are already involve in building one type of Frigate or Submarine, they can't involve on others. If they are already involve with Babcock Frigate and NG Submarine for example, then if MinDef want another Frigate or Submarine program to keep up with schedule replacement program, they have to engage overseas yard.
Yes in theory they (MinDef) can ask potential supplier to work with other domestic yards. However again that's means have to build learning curve for Frigate and Submarine. Something that so far PAL as the only yard that shown capabilities on that learning curve process already.
Thus if MinDef able to get approval for Fincantieri frigate size contract (whether FREMM or PPA), most likely it will be build by Fincantieri yard in Italy. Similar thing if they want more Submarine faster then what PAL can produce, some will have come from overseas yard.
Officially they still want 12 Frigate and 8 Submarine by early next decade. Something that current PAL capacity unlikely able to build all. Most likely PAL will stick with Arrowhead derivative design (for Frigate) and NG Scorpene (if they win the pick). Could another type Submarine be 214? Well it also could be DSME 209 build in DSME/Hanwha Ocean (not PAL facility), as the 2nd batch contract has not officially terminated (at least as far as my understanding). Budget wise is is also more fitting to have 6 DSME 209 1400 and 2 NG Scorpene to get that 8 number as plan. So Who knows.
One thing for sure, with current PAL capacity and capabilities, they can't build all the expected number of Frigates and Submarines envisage on MinDef mid-long term plan. This is where the political compromise must be meet.
From what I can see they could expand into the naval base to the East. I presume it's all government land anyway, they'd just need to rearrange the jetties and do some dredging.