Indonesia: 'green water navy'

Ananda

Well-Known Member
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
Last year, when this Thorium talk with Thorcon come in media, I have discussion with a high school friend of mine which work with Indonesian Nuclear Agency (BATAN). He says that eventough Thorium is not a new idea, but what Thorcon doing can be considered new approach on Thorium Tech.
This what I mean with new development.

Anyway in local media MinDef already stated why they're attracted to work on Thorium with Thorcon:
1. Thorium is more available in Indonesia compared to Uranium,
2. The promise of Thorium Nuclear reactor will produce less radio active waste, which means less Investment cost on waste management compare to Uranium based Reactor.

For me, it's time for Indonesia to work with Nuclear Reactor for power generation, It's overdue. We are depends much with coal, and it's cost us on pollution problem already, especially in large cities like Jakarta and Surabaya.


This is the media statement from MinDef R&D Department on what they are doing with Thorcon. In the end, they want to improve Power Generating capabilities on outlier regions. One of problem in developing Natuna for defense base and sustain economics development is power generation. At the moment out side Islands depend on Diesel. It's costly to transport thus put this reactors on power ships or barges will improve the power generation and cost efficiency.
 
Last edited:

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Thorium is also found in India which explains India’s interest in developing this technology. As others have stated, uranium reactors produce plutonium which is needed for military reactors and bombs. North America (mainly Canada) and Russia have substantial uranium reserves so commercial uranium reactors were deemed to be more economical. If waste considerations were factored in back in the day, perhaps thorium reactors would have been seen as a better approach.
 

tonnyc

Active Member
By the way, if any of Indonesia's thorium nuclear power initiatives actually succeeds, expect an initial order for a largish amount of low-enriched uranium (LEU). This is because a. thorium isn't fissile, so it can't start a nuclear fission by itself. One needs to start the process first with U-235, and b. No one has pure thorium or thorium dioxide in the tonnage needed. The existing facilities worldwide make them in gram or at most kilogram quantities for labs and no one will scale up until the demand actually exists. So it's guaranteed that the first thorium fueled nuclear power plant will actually be uranium fueled and the thorium will be added later to replace consumed uranium.

Once the thorium fuel industry is established it will be possible to start with a mostly thorium fuel with just a bit of U-235 to jumpstart it, but the first few reactors have to be made first to establish a demand for thorium.
 
Last edited:

Ananda

Well-Known Member

The talk of 2nd hand Frigates seems related for interim readiness frigate. Simply said, because the procurement for 6 Van Speijk replacement taking so long, there's need to get 'stop gap' before New Frigates projects build by local shipyards can be ready.

Well if they (MinDef) provide details plan like that, to coincide the interim need as stop gap for domestic building projects, then perhaps they can sell it politically. However if they don't provide this without detail time table on domestic projects, then it can end up as another political bickering that already costs Indonesia Defense so far.

Similar thing with that EF ex Austria, it can only be sell toward Domestic political consumption if it's also being package with other follow on projects that shown involvement of DI.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member

The talk of 2nd hand Frigates seems related for interim readiness frigate. Simply said, because the procurement for 6 Van Speijk replacement taking so long, there's need to get 'stop gap' before New Frigates projects build by local shipyards can be ready.

Well if they (MinDef) provide details plan like that, to coincide the interim need as stop gap for domestic building projects, then perhaps they can sell it politically. However if they don't provide this without detail time table on domestic projects, then it can end up as another political bickering that already costs Indonesia Defense so far.

Similar thing with that EF ex Austria, it can only be sell toward Domestic political consumption if it's also being package with other follow on projects that shown involvement of DI.
What a ridiculous plan, a single second hand frigate with an age exceeding the 30 years. With a different CMS, sensor and weapon package, it does not fit in the Indonesian Navy.
Big chance that the majority of the (american) weaponsystems will be strip-off before export to Indonesia, like the Harpoon, Mk 29 Sea Sparrow and Mk 49 launchers for the RIM-116 missiles.
This emergency-move of a plan shows the level of management and visionary planning of the current administration: since 2014 there have been no acquisitions of new corvettes/frigates.
If they had continue with SIGMA 10514 nr 3-6, then the Van Speijks could have been retired soon.

Maybe its even better to wait for the retirement of the last two of newer Karel Doorman (M-klasse) frigates.
 

Ananda

Well-Known Member
Van Speijk time should ended four years ago. This from the time they got their engine replacement from steam boilers to all diesels in at aroumd half time of last decade. My understanding is that at time in SBY era, the overhaul will only give Van Speijk time for another decade.

The talk of 8 Frigates that being circulated on local media and forums actually not new number. I have mentioned before in the 90's the Six Van Speijk supposedly follow by 2 Tromp Frigates. This is why in there's photos of Navy delegates inspecting both Iver in Denmark and DZP in Netherlands.

Still with only 2 PKR being build, there's rationale for have to wait at least 8 years to a decade to get 4-6 Frigates build by Domestic shipyards. Depending on Van Speijk condition at this moment, I don't how long they can last. 2 of them supposed being replaced by 2 PKR already. Thus I don't know how long the last four can last.

I have put this few years ago in this thread that the previous administration plan actually was just replacing the Frigate/Corvettes on one by one based. The four Dipenogoro Sigma Corvettes is to replace 4 Claud Jones Frigates. The three ex Nahkoda Ragam Corvettes replacing 3 ex RAN Tribal, and 6 PKR replacing the Van Speijks.

All this being tossed around by previous MinDef in this administration first term. Like it or not, this term MinDef has to come out with solution on how to maintain # of Frigates/Corvettes hulls let alone how to improve the capabilities.

For me, all this are part of their (MinDef) assessment. But they're desperate all right to keep the MEF schedules and at the same time keep the 'pretext' that current administration care on National Defense and not bungling it like many begin to see it.
 

kato

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Big chance that the majority of the (american) weaponsystems will be strip-off before export to Indonesia, like the Harpoon, Mk 29 Sea Sparrow and Mk 49 launchers for the RIM-116 missiles.
With the units sold through VEBEG so far (exactly) the Mk29 Sea Sparrow launcher and the torpedo tubes stayed onboard, since both are considered obsolete and are not reusable for any other present and future ship in the Navy. Everything else is stripped and goes in the stockpile for reuse.

Was generally noted by VEBEG since the buying scrapyard would have to have the destruction of these items observed by officials.
 

Ananda

Well-Known Member
@kato how many actually of F122 that still keep in seaworthy currently after being redrawn ? I know the last one still operational but will be retired soon, but the other last two retirement conducted if not mistaken in 2017 and 19. Based on your know how on German practice, could those two still keep in seaworthy conditions after some time being retired ?

Before taking 3 ex Brunai Nahkoda Ragam Corvettes, being put in media that TNI-AL also being offered 3 of the last Type 22 batch 3 as alternative. They're rejecting it as Indonesian Navy seems not really in to CODAG power plant.

Actually this is the thing I'm bit sceptical on taking 2nd hand Frigates for Indonesian Navy, especially from Euro even US sources. Currently most of 2nd Frigates that available or will be available soon all have CODAG configuration. TNI-AL choices of PKR (Sigma 10414) Light Frigates or Iver Based Frigates all are CODAD and so does all their recent procurement like Sigma Corvettes and Ex Ragam Corvettes.

They have been offered before from US for some surplus OHP and from what I gather they also being rejected for Interim solution due to (one of reasons) CODAG arrangements.

Thus unless there're some Frigates asside German F122, or Italian Maerstrale, or Brits Type 23 that going to be retired soon, and those are CODAG, I'm bit sceptical TNI-AL actually want to take any of them as Interim solution. Unless the seaworthiness conditions of Van Speijk really in dire situation already.
 
Last edited:

kato

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
@kato how many actually of F122 that still keep in seaworthy currently after being redrawn ? I know the last one still operational but will be retired soon, but the other last two retirement conducted if not mistaken in 2017 and 19. Based on your know how on German practice, could those two still keep in seaworthy conditions after some time being retired ?
F211 Köln was sold for scrapping in 2015 after retirement 2012.
F209 Rheinland-Pfalz was sold for scrapping in 2017 after retirement 2013.
F207 Bremen was sold off in June this year (VEBEG offer sheet, German and English) for scrapping, after the sale was postponed for two months due to Covid. She was retired in 2014.

As an example: Bremen has been stripped of literally all reusable parts; whoever buys her has to tow her - the sale is "as floating at her current quay in Wilhelmshaven", with a note that the propulsion no longer works (parts of the gas turbine have been removed, making the whole propulsion probably unsafe to operate). VEBEG does not list her sales price publicly, although it was probably somewhere around 100,000 Euro.

The other four retired ships are still around.

For their assumed state: If you look at satellite imagery of Marinearsenal Wilhelmshaven you'll see four F122 there in various states of stripping. The four ships were retired 53, 45, 41 and 26 months before the images were taken, and the one furthest stripped (in about the same state as Bremen above) was sold off six weeks later. Note that the other three despite all this time in the yard all still carry both their RAM launchers and their 76mm. Some parts here and there have been removed though, and you can see plenty of rust.

F213 Augsburg should still be relatively complete, she was only retired in December last year. The last three ships retired were explicitly not used as spare parts hulks like those above.

F212 Karlsruhe, retired in 2017, was planned to be used as a target ship for maritime explosions tests in multiple series between 2018 and 2020. This has been postponed indefinitely due to environmental lobby groups. The ship is stripped similarly (e.g.: Sea Sparrow remains, 76mm OTO removed), but is generally seaworthy and "complete". As preparation for the tests it was equipped with additional sensors, with sensor-equipped dummy sailors also placed at workplaces on the ship in various states of protection.

Thus unless there're some Frigates asside German F122, or Italian Maerstrale, or Brits Type 23 that going to be retired soon, and those are CODAG, I'm bit sceptical TNI-AL actually want to take any of them as Interim solution.
Actually the Turkish Yavuz class of four ships springs to mind - TKMS Meko 200 TN Track I model. There were rumours they wanted to sell them to Egypt, otherwise retire them within the next 2-3 years. Should still have up to 10 years in them despite their age. They're even CODAD.
 
Last edited:

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
F-122 Lübeck is planned for retirement in 2021, and after that it needs some repair, inspections, testing, removal of weaponsystems and modifications to the airconditioning systems. Then sea trials and training of Indonesian crew. So, maybe we can expect the arrival in Indonesia at the earliest in 2023.

And then after waiting so long we only get a stripped toothless 33 years old ship.
Maybe a stupid suggestion, but as an interim solution, wouldn't it be better to order an enlarged KCR-60 from PAL or something?

This is such a sudden move, like the MV-22B and EF2000 newsreports/announcements.....
 

Ananda

Well-Known Member
Actually the Turkish Yavuz class of four ships springs to mind - TKMS Meko 200 TN Track I model. There were rumours they wanted to sell them to Egypt, otherwise retire them within the next 2-3 years. Should still have up to 10 years in them despite their age. They're even CODAD.
Yes, I'm missed those Frigates on looking for potential this 'interim Frigates'. One of them I think can be acquired soon as those four should be replace by Istanbul Class (Milgem Frigates). The first of Istanbul will be finish soon.

Still whether this interim Frigates will be take as part of Fleet Sustainment strategy will be back to condition of the last four of Van Speijk in my opinion. If the Navy think they can maintain the last four Van Speijk until new hulls available, then I think they prefer to keep the Van Speijk rather then using this interim Frigates strategy.

There's seems more 'suport' for Iver based Frigates then PKR Light Frigates. The contract for two Iver based should be in parallel with PKR 3&4. Damen already talk their preparedness for continuing PKR 3&4, however the talk that I got from source from Ministry of Finance saying MinDef so far only ask Budget preparation for contract on Iver Based Frigates.

There's rumours that I heard, based on manufacturing cost for 'empty' ship (minus weapons and sensors) from PAL. Iver based Frigates will only cost around USD 50+ Mio more then PKR Light Frigates. Some talk from PAL stating that Damen tech support cost more than what Odense ask.

So, I just speculate based on some signals like that, new hulls for Van Speijk will be likely more on Iver Based project, rather than continuation on PKR. Still it will all depends on how PAL capabilities on time table building Iver based Frigates. They already have proven capabilities to produce PKR, while Iver based Frigates will be a new project which still have risk on teething problem in production.
 
Last edited:

Ananda

Well-Known Member
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.

This is an example why I always point out on jurisdiction Maritime Management that not really being solved for decades. This talk on Indonesian Coast Guard system, the talk of Bakamla should handle Management of Indonesian sea lane especially the archipelago lines, seems continue got opposition from other agencies.

Take a look on that Patrol Boats the Navy just procured. That kind of patrol boats should be left to Coast Guard. The Navy supposedly handle more strategic assets and don't waste resources on relative smaller patrol duties. However does kind smaller patrol duties on the area near ports are the ones that are lucrative enough that other maritime agencies like Navy still want to cling on.

I'm putting my previous comment on this, just continuously pointing out this administration plan for strong Coast Guard still have internal opposition from other agencies that continue building their own patrolling assets. Wasting resources and continues to make maritime Management bueracracy as tangle web with unnecessary complexity.

This is what the Jokowi's administration put as focus maritime strategy ??
I know there's problematic situation under Bakamla own management. However that's not an excuse to straighten out maritime Management. Personally I don't really care which agencies that the administration wants to put to oversight maritime Management. However if they already choose Bakamla as Indonesian Coast Guard that oversight maritime Management, then consistent with the agenda to support that.

Liquidate other agencies, consolidated all patrolling assets, and create more stream line management.
Well this is they're really 'serious' on revamped Indonesian maritime Management.
 
Last edited:

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member

This is an example why I always point out on jurisdiction Maritime Management that not really being solved for decades. This talk on Indonesian Coast Guard system, the talk of Bakamla should handle Management of Indonesian sea lane especially the archipelago lines, seems continue got opposition from other agencies.

Take a look on that Patrol Boats the Navy just procured. That kind of patrol boats should be left to Coast Guard. The Navy supposedly handle more strategic assets and don't waste resources on relative smaller patrol duties. However does kind smaller patrol duties on the area near ports are the ones that are lucrative enough that other maritime agencies like Navy still want to cling on.

I'm putting my previous comment on this, just continuously pointing out this administration plan for strong Coast Guard still have internal opposition from other agencies that continue building their own patrolling assets. Wasting resources and continues to make maritime Management bueracracy as tangle web with unnecessary complexity.

This is what the Jokowi's administration put as focus maritime strategy ??
I know there's problematic situation under Bakamla own management. However that's not an excuse to straighten out maritime Management. Personally I don't really care which agencies that the administration wants to put to oversight maritime Management. However if they already choose Bakamla as Indonesian Coast Guard that oversight maritime Management, then consistent with the agenda to support that.

Liquidate other agencies, consolidated all patrolling assets, and create more stream line management.
Well this is they're really 'serious' on revamped Indonesian maritime Management.
Totally agree.
But it seems that they're not really 'serious' on revamped Indonesian maritime Management.


The PC-40 Pari class are nice compact modern patrol boats, if im not wrong these are the ones armed with the Oto Melara 30 mm RCWS and 2 × 12,7 mm machine guns.
Their maximum speed is 28 knots at full load, thats enough to chase any fishing boat or cargo ship. But their endurance is just six days, not enough for the navy to patrol the outer corners of the largest archipelago in the world.

One thing is confusing, it looks like there are three kinds of PC-40 classes.....

The first one is the Pari class
( KRI numbers 849-855 + 827), 43 meters long, top speed between 24-28 kts and seems to be the most advanced class of this three.

Second PC-40 class is the Torani class (856, 860, 861, 867-871) 45,5 m long, top speed 24 kts also with an endurance of just six days and unarmed. This one is described in Ananda's post.



And this class
Viper-class patrol craft - Wikipedia , with numbers KAL 820-824, which is older (2006), made of glass fibre and, very remarkable, two out of six are already retired. This PC-40 40 m long, is armed with one antique Soviet-made twin 25 mm naval gun and two 12.7mm heavy machine guns.
 
Last edited:

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
I dont know if this video is already posted before.
The sound effects are horrible, the Millennium CIWS and specially the helicopterdeck needs more space, but the design in general is not bad.
This can be a suitable candidate for the Parchim I / Kapitan Pattimura Class corvettes.
 

Ananda

Well-Known Member
There're several local Shipyards that already put their design for this OPV projects. Asside DRU, PAL also already provide their own design. I think already posted their design sometime ago in this thread.

Attached is the picture I got from local media on Tesco Indomaritim design for OPV projects.
I don't know about the progress on this OPV projects, but seems it's design to replace Parchim as you've mentioned before.
 

Attachments

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
For a long time it is very quiet around the replacement KRI Klewang trimaran.
From a reliable source ive heard that progres of the ship is 50% now and that from september "full speed production" will start. Well lets hope that the production will go smoothly without incidents and accidents.

The photos are made by Google Street. Actually i am against that a foreign company can map whole Indonesia this way, a full 3D world of every part of our country, including the environment and entrances of strategic industry and military installations. I wonder if such things is also allowed in countries like china, Greece, Iran, Russia, Taiwan, Turkey and other countries who dislike exposure of their strategic assets.
 

Attachments

kato

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I wonder if such things is also allowed in countries like china, Greece, Iran, Russia, Taiwan, Turkey and other countries who dislike exposure of their strategic assets.
Pretty complicated topic, and depends on the country concerned.

The complication does not only concern censoring per se, but also the method of censoring - South Korea for example doesn't like that Google tends to only blur military sites heavily (on request), they want them photoshopped out of existance like domestic providers there do it. This is largely up to local policy with regard to this. In France for example you'll see large blanket blurs across entire bases, in Germany you won't see blurs - but "for some reason" they all seem fully devoid of vehicles or aircraft.
 

Ananda

Well-Known Member
I think about the same in Indonesia. If we see Google Map of Halim AB in Jakarta for example, there will be detail description on Civilian Parts (since the AB is dual used by Civil Aviation and TNI-AU AB). However the TNI-AU part is in Grey and some photos on there are more or less harmless photo. They will not shown the detail lay out of AF parts.
 

Toptob

Active Member
Hmmm interesting. I use google maps and I can see all of Halim AB (just checked) and nothing is blocked out. I can also see Korean bases as well as Chinese and Russian ones. Dutch Bases used to be blocked out for me but now I can see them just fine. The only bases I can't see are the French ones, other than that I haven't found others that are blocked. And I like to peek around in the gmaps every now and then.

But I see where you're coming from Sandhi. Just with Google maps you van get some hardcore intelligence, you'd think that mid 20'th century Soviet and NATO commanders would give a lot for this capability. I mean it gets so detailed you can see the trench lines between Nagorno-Karabach and Azerbaijan!
 

kato

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
The only bases I can't see are the French ones, other than that I haven't found others that are blocked.
There are some places where a simple blur isn't considered efficient enough, but the image is instead altered more considerably by e.g. replacing a base with just forest or a mountain. In some cases this may also only hide certain parts of a base, protecting particular equipment. For example i know of a former NATO HQ base where exactly the area where SATCOM trailers were parked outside had a properly photoshopped "roof" in Google Maps.

In France most (not all) Air Force and certain (not all - only in l'hexagone) Navy bases are blurred, whereas Army bases are visible by default. And in general the wider the blur goes beyond just the base itself the more that particular base has to do with a certain type of weapon starting with N.

In general in Europe it's pretty relaxed due to the Open Skies Agreement - which means that if someone (as a state) wanted they could just do official aerial reconnaissance over whatever they're interested in anyway.
 
Last edited:
Top