Indonesia: 'green water navy'

Ananda

Well-Known Member

Seems the Parliament support the changes on law to let Bakamla weaponize their OPV and Patrol Boats with Military Grade weapon.
The Law at present form forbid any non Naval patrol boats to be weaponize with military grade weapon. The other maritime agencies allowed to have small weapons on board, but no military grade naval weapons.

This can be seen as means to step up Bakamla as proper coast guard.
I suspect Bakamla will try to find 57mm in their OPV or 20 mm in the patrol boats. Perhaps they can used surplus weapon from TNI-AL that being taken from decommission vessels.

Seems TNI-AL still have sufficient surplus of 20mm Bofors or Russian made 57mm guns originated from the 60's and 70's It will be old guns, but their ammo still in production. Considering the size of Bakamla budget, hand me down weapon from Navy also happen with other coast guards.
 
Last edited:

tonnyc

Active Member
All that talk about allowing the Indonesian Coast Guard to buy military grade weapon is pointless if not supported by a major increase in their budget. I have already pointed out that their budget is Rp. 400 billion (US$ 29 million) for this year. We'll assume that it's unchanged this year, but if it's not raised significantly next year (doubling them at least), then all this talk about military grade weapons is bullshit. The Coast Guard has 4 ships and 36 boats. What's the point of putting naval guns on them? The pirates and fish thieves can be dealt with 12.7 mm machine guns. The foreign navy ships and foreign coast guard ships aren't going to get scared.

Anyway, my personal opinion is that the Indonesian Coast Guard does not need 76 mm gun or even 40 mm gun. They can maybe justify 20 mm guns. But what they really need is more of those 110 m 2400 tonnes OPV with high pressure water cannons and a few machine guns. Having big guns for the Indonesian Coast Guard is a distraction from the real need. The moment they engage in a shootout against a foreign navy/coast guard ship, we lose strategically, because it will give them an excuse to escalate. What's needed is ships that can play the shoving match game and water-shooting game instead. And we need them in sufficient number than presence can be maintained at all times.

If they get some old handouts from the navy, that's fine. But no money should be allocated to buy naval guns. They should prioritize new ships and patrol boats instead.
 

Ananda

Well-Known Member
they get some old handouts from the navy, that's fine. But no money should be allocated to buy naval guns. They should prioritize new ships and patrol boats instead.
Agree, that's why I posted for Bakamla to get hand me down weapons from Navy. There's a lot of coast guards that get second hand weapons from their Navy. Don't get new weapons, as this only create unefficient projects again. I put 57mm ex Russian and 40mm Bofors, since from the information that come out, those are weapons that Navy have in surplus. I think putting 40mm Bofors and automated them to work remotely, will be sufficient for those 110m and 80m Bakamla's OPV. Even put them as Manual stations still good enough.

Besides budget, again the essentials to be decided, is to merge most of other maritime agencies to Bakamla. That way all the maritime constabulary and Maritime commercial license management can be handle more effectively.

Increase the budget is one thing, but if this jurisdiction issue not being solves, then Maritime Management will still full of inefficient bureaucratics wrangling. Maritime Management is big business in Indonesia, thus to strip other agencies power will face politicall chalanges.
However if Jokowi is consistent on his target to build large maritime base economy, this (creating Bakamla as efficient maritime agencies) can be his legacy. If he can be proven able to do that.
 
Last edited:

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
Agree, that's why I posted for Bakamla to get hand me down weapons from Navy. There's a lot of coast guards that get second hand weapons from their Navy. Don't get new weapons, as this only create unefficient projects again. I put 57mm ex Russian and 40mm Bofors, since from the information that come out, those are weapons that Navy have in surplus. I think putting 40mm Bofors and automated them to work remotely, will be sufficient for those 110m and 80m Bakamla's OPV. Even put them as Manual stations still good

Increase the budget is one thing, but if this jurisdiction issue not being solves, then Maritime Management will still full of inefficient bureaucratics wrangling. Maritime Management is big business in Indonesia, thus to strip other agencies power will face politicall chalanges.
However if Jokowi is consistent on his target to build large maritime base economy, this (creating Bakamla as efficient maritime agencies) can be his legacy. If he can be proven able to do that.
In my opinion the larger Bakamla ships need indeed a gun at the front, a Oto Melara Marlin 30 mm or something like that should be enough against pirates and large illegal foreign fishingboats. It has also a more deterrend effect than some crewmembers with assault rifles.

But dont expect Jokowi can do anything if the PDI-P top and the "coordinating minister of maritime department and investment" do not allow it. Yes Luhut was a great soldier with an impressive CV, but now he is a politician, and in my feeling he is not always "on our side".


Anyway, on internet the many various sources give different amounts of MLRS in the arsenal of Korps Marinir, But from which i understand Korps Marinir has
- 9 RM70
- 8 RM70 Vampire
- 4 Norinco Type 90B
Is this correctly?

The Type 90B systems have been delivered under a 2015 contract signed between the Indonesian Ministry of Defence and NORINCO. Indonesia is the first known export customer of the Type 90B variant.

It seems that fire control subsystems associated with the Type 90B, such as the HJ-1 mini-computer, have not been included under this contract, and that all firing parameters on the system have to be manually calculated.

Why are these chinese made downgraded things ordered?
For political reasons or was the KorMar indeed interested about this system? How is the performance btw?

As a bonus some nice RM70 videos.

 
Last edited:

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
The old Hoyerswerda-Klasse (Frosch 1 class) LSTs are indeed one of the classes which need to be retired the coming years.
Thanks God everyone of the crew survived. But its still emberassing and not really an environment friendly incident.

From which i understand there are 9 tank landing ships of the Teluk Bintuni class ordered/planned.
Does anyone knows how well they perform? Is the navy satisfied with these ships?
 
Last edited:

Ananda

Well-Known Member
From which i understand there are 9 tank landing ships of the Teluk Bintuni class ordered/planned.
Does anyone knows how well they perform? Is the navy satisfied with these ships?
They are better than those Frosch which build for calmer Baltic sea. They continue the order for that LST design, seems they are quite satisfied with the design.
Those Frosch actually already begin shown natural attrition from TNI-AL operation already. There are 14 original Frosch to begin with, now only around 8 (previously 9 but with KRI Teluk Jakarta accident it's reduce to 8) operational Frosch.
By paper the local design Teluk Bintuni can transport significant margin larger than Frosch or even South Korea build Tacoma LST.

So I guess TNI-AL seems quite satisfied with Bintuni class LST.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
They are better than those Frosch which build for calmer Baltic sea. They continue the order for that LST design, seems they are quite satisfied with the design.
Those Frosch actually already begin shown natural attrition from TNI-AL operation already. There are 14 original Frosch to begin with, now only around 8 (previously 9 but with KRI Teluk Jakarta accident it's reduce to 8) operational Frosch.
By paper the local design Teluk Bintuni can transport significant margin larger than Frosch or even South Korea build Tacoma LST.

So I guess TNI-AL seems quite satisfied with Bintuni class LST.
Thank you

Just found two videos about KRI Teluk Jakarta 541

The fourth of class KRI Lada 521 looks much better than the first of class, but it has no hangar and is unarmed.
KRI Teluk Bintuni 520

KRI Teluk Lada 521

The others do have a hangar, but after the launch of Teluk Palu 523, there is no news anymore about developments of this class.
KRI Teluk Youtefa 522
Airbag System di Peluncuran KRI Teluk Youtefa 522

KRI Teluk Palu 523 (LST AT-6)
##12 Launching Kapal Angkut Tank (LST AT-6) KRI. TELUK PALU oleh PT. DAYA RADAR UTAMA - UNIT LAMPUNG
 

spoz

The Bunker Group
The old Hoyerswerda-Klasse (Frosch 1 class) LSTs are indeed one of the classes which need to be retired the coming years.
Thanks God everyone of the crew survived. But its still emberassing and not really an environment friendly incident.

How very unfortunate. Glad all onboard seem to be OK. How old are the Frosch's now - 45 years or so? - and I'm not sure the East Germans built them all that well.
 

Ananda

Well-Known Member
I don't think even the yard that build them in Eastern Germany still exists. Some of ex East German ships already have MLU maintenance using different engine that's available in market, as their original parts manufacturer are no longer operating in Eastern Germany.

Those ex East German ships are in the end of their operational years. They are all being plan for retirement as replacement coming in. Bintuni class LST are plan to replace them, while local made OPV is plan to replace Parchim Corvettes. Is now back to the speed of replacement program.
 

tonnyc

Active Member
This article that I want to attach from Forbes, is not related to Naval ships, but related to Thorium Reactor from Thorcon. Seems the design of Thorcon reactor with Shipyard related to the intended floating based platform.

ThorCon Advanced Nuclear Reactor -- More Than Worth Its Weight In Salt

So far, Thorium seems promising less radioactive waste, and more efficient heat generation. Thus operated less nuclear fuel. Will see how this going to be developed.
Follow-up.

Signing of MoU between Ministry of Defense's R&D department and Thorcon for the development of thorium fueled molten salt reactor. Technically this is generic research rather than navy stuff, but given that it's the follow-up to the MOU between PT PAL and Thorcon I'll put it here.

Note that this is nuclear power as in electricity.
 

Ananda

Well-Known Member
Signing of MoU between Ministry of Defense's R&D department and Thorcon for the development of thorium fueled molten salt reactor. Technically this is generic research rather than navy stuff, but given that it's the follow-up to the MOU between PT PAL and Thorcon I'll put it here.
Well some local forumers or even media will then speculate the MoU being conducted with MinDef R&D as sign Indonesia will build nuclear power submarine :D
As if, submarine or naval vessels nuclear reactor is the same with power generate nuclear power.

My sense, this agreement with MinDef and not with civilian Ministries is to fasten development. Jokowi seems now delegating several non direct defense project to MinDef like the rice/food crop fields project to MinDef to see if they can overcome civilian bueracracy that usually hold the speedy development.

The nuclear power opposition in Indonesia, eventough being done on ecological and safety issues, but behind that being move by Business interest of Coal that don't want loosing their piece of cake to more efficient nuclear power.

It's ironic those so call environmentalist vehemently oppose nuclear power, but more or less keep silence on Coal that generate much more pollution. In fact the coal power if they invest on clean coal, thus put filtering technology, will have Investment power cost ratio that not much differ than Nuclear ones, but with less generating efficiency.

The new Capital in Kalimantan project in my opinion need Nuclear power, if they want to stay in their goal as green city. The talk of wind power, solar power will not be enough or even efficient to generate needed power by their own.
 
Last edited:

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
Well some local forumers or even media will then speculate the MoU being conducted with MinDef R&D as sign Indonesia will build nuclear power submarine :D
As if, submarine or naval vessels nuclear reactor is the same with power generate nuclear power.

My sense, this agreement with MinDef and not with civilian Ministries is to fasten development. Jokowi seems now delegating several non direct defense project to MinDef like the rice/food crop fields project to MinDef to see if they can overcome civilian bueracracy that usually hold the speedy development.

The nuclear power opposition in Indonesia, eventough being done on ecological and safety issues, but behind that being move by Business interest of Coal that don't want loosing their piece of cake to more efficient nuclear power.

It's ironic those so call environmentalist vehemently oppose nuclear power, but more or less keep silence on Coal that generate much more pollution. In fact the coal power if they invest on clean coal, thus put filtering technology, will have Investment power cost ratio that not much differ than Nuclear ones, but with less generating efficiency.

The new Capital in Kalimantan project in my opinion need Nuclear power, if they want to stay in their goal as green city. The talk of wind power, solar power will not be enough or even efficient to generate needed power by their own.
The whole story that the new capital will be an environment friendly green city is pure bullshit from the start. Enormous amounts of unique rainforests have to be sacrified for this useless prestige project. A project which will get for sure cost overruns. That area is also well known for the coal mines. So again a reason to please china with contracts for infrastructure developments, including coal powered plants, like the one in Palabuhan Ratu.

Real clean powersources, like solarpower, heat of the Earth and waterpower can not be applied everywhere. Biomass is not that environment friendly as many people think.

Using Indonesian coal is very cost effective of course, and you are not dependent from import. But using various sources gives flexibility and reduces risks. Also having a nuclear powerplant gives an enormous source of knowledge.

Besides that a country like Indonesia needs any powersource available for its electricity demand, including the dirty ones.
Plans for nuclear powerplants exist already for decades, but sadly lack of funds and specially political willingness have prevented that these plans became reality.
 

tonnyc

Active Member
Going by the following article, looks like the Ministry of Defense wants 50 MW nuclear power plants.

(Indonesian language article)

This is technically the purview of the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources, but in Indonesia the division between civilian matters and military matters aren't always followed rigidly.

I speculate that they want a powership. PT PAL has been building diesel based power barges lately and PT PAL and Thorcon do have an MOU too. Again, this should be a civilian matter, but PT PAL used to be the Navy shipyard and they still retain the very close relationship.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
Going by the following article, looks like the Ministry of Defense wants 50 MW nuclear power plants.

(Indonesian language article)

This is technically the purview of the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources, but in Indonesia the division between civilian matters and military matters aren't always followed rigidly.

I speculate that they want a powership. PT PAL has been building diesel based power barges lately and PT PAL and Thorcon do have an MOU too. Again, this should be a civilian matter, but PT PAL used to be the Navy shipyard and they still retain the very close relationship.
Just 50 MW!? Thats nothing for a modern nuclear powerplant.
I mean Kerncentrale Borselle in the Netherlands, an old small powerplant with a sinlge reactor, delivers 485 MW, and the 6 reactors from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, have a combined capacity exceeding 4500 MW.

So, is it a journalistic type error (maybe it should be 500MW) or do we really want to spent billions for just 50 MW?
Or is this just a small experimental reqctor because its the first thorium reactor in the world?

Edit: although there are several test reactors in the world, its still not yet fully developed. So yes, my question is actually already answered, it will be an experimental/developmental reactor.
 
Last edited:

Ananda

Well-Known Member
speculate that they want a powership. PT PAL has been building diesel based power barges lately and PT PAL and Thorcon do have an MOU too.
I agree on that. Floating Nuclear Power station, especially in form of power ship will be easier to sell on general public that some still sceptical on safety of nuclear power plant. Floating station can be moved away quickly from populated area, and can be move around Archipelago for area that need electricity generation (until more permanent power generation can be build on that area).

So, is it a journalistic type error (maybe it should be 500MW), do we really want to spent billions for just 50 MW?
I also bit sceptical on 50MW capabilities. That's similar capabilities on a French Rubis SSN, and Rubis SSN is the smallest nuclear subs around.

If they make only that range of power, than it's a miniature Nuclear reactor. Then it can be used on Submarines (which will create wild wet dreams for Indonesian military fanboys in local forums :p)

The conventional power ship like the ones Indonesia rented from Turkey, I believe already have larger power generation than 50MW if not mistaken (must check again).
Also if we're talking power ship with PAL, on that size of power ship it should be larger than 50MW.

Anyhow it's thorium reactor. It's new development on Nuclear reactor which being tounted to be more environment friendly. So involvement on Thorium it self is enough justification for Investment in my opinion.
 

tonnyc

Active Member
Just 50 MW!? Thats nothing for a modern nuclear powerplant.
I mean Kerncentrale Borselle in the Netherlands, an old small powerplant with a sinlge reactor, delivers 485 MW, and the 6 reactors from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, have a combined capacity exceeding 4500 MW.

So, is it a journalistic type error (maybe it should be 500MW) or do we really want to spent billions for just 50 MW?
Or is this just a small experimental reactor because its the first thorium reactor in the world?

Edit: although there are several test reactors in the world, its still not yet fully developed. So yes, my question is actually already answered, it will be an experimental/developmental reactor.
No, it's not a typo. They are two different things. One is the original TSMR 500, which is a 500 MW nuclear power plant. This is still being pitched with Thorcon offering to build a 1:1 test bed platform so regulators can physically check their design safety. But the 500 MW version is big. The floating version is going to be bigger than any ship the Indonesian Navy had. It'll be bigger and heavier than three Iver Huidfelts frigates. It's not very mobile. Litbang Kemhan wants a smaller version to be developed. This is the 50 MW one.

In the aftermath of the 2018 Palu tsunami a 125 MW powership was diverted from Kupang to Palu. The region's total power capacity prior to the tsunami happened to be 125 MW too. A big 500 MW floating power plant is overkill for those kind of HADR mission and will be too slow. There is a proposal to build a 500 MW nuclear power plant in Kalimantan, but if that gets built it will stay put and not move around.

Two different things for two different purposes.

Fifty MW small modular reactor is not a novel concept. US NuScale reactor was a 50 MW reactor too and is intended to be transportable using a 40 feet high bed trailer pulled by a truck. They made improvements to get it up to 60 MW reactors and hope to start commercial operation of a 720 MW nuclear power plant in Utah by 2026. Oklo Inc. of California submitted their license application for their Aurora 1.5 MW nuclear power reactor this year and theirs are even smaller.

There is also a need for small power plants for the medium and small islands. Yes, for the big islands the 500 MW is the economical option, but what about medium-sized islands? Sumbawa for example has a total capacity of 100 MW, mostly diesel. While power demand there is expected to rise, it's not going to reach 500 MW in our lifetime. Adding 50 MW of nuclear power combined with renewable power make more sense there. Note that BATAN's own nuclear power program envision a similar approach, starting with 10 MW experimental power plant in Serpong to be scaled up in stages to 100 MW.
 

kato

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
A big 500 MW floating power plant is overkill for those kind of HADR mission and will be too slow.
In addition with a nuclear power plant you want to make sure you're actually drawing that amount of energy. They don't scale down, at best you'd be heating a whole lot of seawater to get rid of it.

but what about medium-sized islands? Sumbawa for example has a total capacity of 100 MW, mostly diesel.
Flores too, for example. And probably two or three dozen others with similar populations in the 1-2 million range.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
I also bit sceptical on 50MW capabilities. That's similar capabilities on a French Rubis SSN, and Rubis SSN is the smallest nuclear subs around.

If they make only that range of power, than it's a miniature Nuclear reactor. Then it can be used on Submarines (which will create wild wet dreams for Indonesian military fanboys in local forums :p)
....
Anyhow it's thorium reactor. It's new development on Nuclear reactor which being tounted to be more environment friendly. So involvement on Thorium it self is enough justification for Investment in my opinion.
Power output of nuclear power plants is not directly proportional to reactor size. Submarines need physically small reactors, with high energy density. A floating power station doesn't have the same constraints. It may be safer & cheaper to make something bulkier, unsuitable for subs.

As I recall, thorium reactors have not been built or designed in very compact versions suitable for submarines. They're not new: they were around in the 1960s. Development was abandoned in the USA because they didn't fit military requirements for producing plutonium or for powering submarines.

Oddly to me, because I remember there being thorium reactors, & discussions of the US ceasing work on them, when I was at school, a lot of people seem to think they're a completely new idea.
 
Top