The New Straits has a more detail report here. But I note that on 31 August 2011, KD Serang, sustained a small fire from a short-circuit, while minesweeper KD Todak was 'grounded' after a slight mishap with a floating object two months earlier.
Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN) update
- Thread starter Ding
- Start date
The CB-90s, about 12 of the 17 are in East Malaysia, have also had problems with floating objects that can cause hull damage. Further out to shore this less of a problem, but from personal experience, I can say say that in coastal areas, floating pieces of wood that can only be observed from close proximity, can be a hazard to small sized vessels. As I said earlier, the problems with the Jerong class could be related to their age and maybe due to being overtasked and misused. The coastline of eastern Sabah is a few hundred kilometres long and the journey time to Layang Layang and other possesions can take up to several hours in sea states the Lurssen designed hull was not designed to operate in.
Hopefully this latest incident will be used by the RMN to press the government for more assets.
A news item that came up about a week ago. If it came to pass probably somethng after the current LCS project:
Malaysia mulls joint UK warship development
By Lee Wei Lian
Sep 16, 2011
KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 16 — Malaysia is considering a number of defence joint ventures with the UK including the development of navy ships with BAE Systems, reported The Times in London today.
The UK paper reported however that the Malaysian government would want assurances that it would be protected from the type of budget overruns that had hit previous BAE projects.
“Malaysia is considering joining Britain in developing a new generation of navy frigates — but only if it is protected from the sort of budget blowouts that have blighted recent BAE projects,” said The Times.
“Brazil, India, Turkey and Australia have expressed interest in helping to develop the Type 26 frigate, or Global Combat Ship, but BAE’s reputation has made other potential partners nervous and Malaysia would want a guarantee that it would not be liable for budget overruns before it signed up.”
It also quoted Grant Rogan, the chief executive of Blenheim Capital, an apparent adviser to the Malaysian government, as saying that the project had been discussed at the ministerial level in Malaysia as a way to both strengthen bilateral relations with the UK and grow the nation’s industrial base but that the Malaysian government will be “very firm on cost control”.
Rogan was also quoted as saying that the Type 26 frigate is just one of a number of potential defence joint ventures that Malaysia is considering with Britain.
According to The Times, BAE Systems had bust its budget for the Royal Navy’s Type 45 destroyers, which entered service three years late while the cost of the six ships increased from £5 billion (RM24.38 billion) to £6.4 billion.
It added that BAE’s Astute nuclear submarine was delivered five years late and its cost increased from £5.2 billion to £6.7 billion
The proposed Type 26, which will weigh up to 6,000 tonnes, is supposed to replace Type 22 and Type 23 frigates and is expected to form the backbone of the UK Navy’s fleet from about 2020.
BAE, together with Turkey’s Nurol, won a contract last year to supply 250 armoured vehicles to Malaysia, in a deal reportedly worth RM1.72 billion.
The company was also reported in July to be bidding for a tender to replace Malaysia’s MiG-29N with its Eurofighter Typhoon.
The Times said that the MiG-29N replacement deal could be worth £2.4 billion.
The UK based BAE Systems is considered Europe’s largest defence contractor and had 2010 sales of about £22.4 billion.
Malaysia mulls joint UK warship development
By Lee Wei Lian
Sep 16, 2011
KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 16 — Malaysia is considering a number of defence joint ventures with the UK including the development of navy ships with BAE Systems, reported The Times in London today.
The UK paper reported however that the Malaysian government would want assurances that it would be protected from the type of budget overruns that had hit previous BAE projects.
“Malaysia is considering joining Britain in developing a new generation of navy frigates — but only if it is protected from the sort of budget blowouts that have blighted recent BAE projects,” said The Times.
“Brazil, India, Turkey and Australia have expressed interest in helping to develop the Type 26 frigate, or Global Combat Ship, but BAE’s reputation has made other potential partners nervous and Malaysia would want a guarantee that it would not be liable for budget overruns before it signed up.”
It also quoted Grant Rogan, the chief executive of Blenheim Capital, an apparent adviser to the Malaysian government, as saying that the project had been discussed at the ministerial level in Malaysia as a way to both strengthen bilateral relations with the UK and grow the nation’s industrial base but that the Malaysian government will be “very firm on cost control”.
Rogan was also quoted as saying that the Type 26 frigate is just one of a number of potential defence joint ventures that Malaysia is considering with Britain.
According to The Times, BAE Systems had bust its budget for the Royal Navy’s Type 45 destroyers, which entered service three years late while the cost of the six ships increased from £5 billion (RM24.38 billion) to £6.4 billion.
It added that BAE’s Astute nuclear submarine was delivered five years late and its cost increased from £5.2 billion to £6.7 billion
The proposed Type 26, which will weigh up to 6,000 tonnes, is supposed to replace Type 22 and Type 23 frigates and is expected to form the backbone of the UK Navy’s fleet from about 2020.
BAE, together with Turkey’s Nurol, won a contract last year to supply 250 armoured vehicles to Malaysia, in a deal reportedly worth RM1.72 billion.
The company was also reported in July to be bidding for a tender to replace Malaysia’s MiG-29N with its Eurofighter Typhoon.
The Times said that the MiG-29N replacement deal could be worth £2.4 billion.
The UK based BAE Systems is considered Europe’s largest defence contractor and had 2010 sales of about £22.4 billion.
Royal Malaysian Navy selects DCNS' Gowind corvette for its Littoral Combat Ship (LCS)
A bit of news on the RMN's LCS program
"Royal Malaysian Navy selects DCNS' Gowind corvette for its Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) program"
The Gowind frigate, designed by French company DCNS, has been selected for the Royal Malaysian Navy’s Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) programme. However, the contract for building the six ships remains on hold due to disagreements between the builder, Boustead Naval Shipyard Sdn Bhd (BNS), and the end user RMN, according to people familiar with the programme.
One of the key sticking points is BNS and DCNS’s insistence that the ships adopt the SETIS combat management system (CMS) designed by the French company.
RMN instead wants another system developed by Thales, the Tacticos, being integrated into one of its vessels, KD Kasturi.
The navy had hoped to reduce the number of CMS in its fleet to reduce training and support issues. RMN chief Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Jaafar told theSun yesterday that the government had chosen the Gowind design for the LCS programme.
He declined to confirm or deny speculation that the contract would only be signed when the RMN was satisfied that its requirements were met. He, however, confirmed most of the specifications for the ship had been finalised.
BNS managing director Tan Sri Ahmad Ramli Mohd Nor, however, denied the delay was due to disagreement with the end user.
“It is up to the government. We are ready to go forward,” said Ahmad Ramli, a former RMN chief.
Despite the delay, BNS is displaying a model of the Gowind frigate at the Langkawi International Maritime Aerospace exhibition here. The frigate is 107m-long with a displacement of 2,750 tonnes.
It will be armed with a 57mm gun, surface-to-air missiles and torpedoes. With four diesel engines, the ship will have a top speed of 29 knots. theSun had reported on Tuesday that the widely speculated deal for six LCS would be delayed until next year.
A report published in the Janes Defence Weekly stated that the Malaysian government was likely to postpone defence procurement in view of the general election, which could be held early next year.
The LCS contract has been in news since February after Defence Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi announced that the government had awarded BNS a RM6 billion contract to build six LCS or Second Generation Patrols Vessels for the RMN.
Source: Royal Malaysian Navy selects DCNS' Gowind corvette for its Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) program
I am a little curious about this news. While it is nice that the RMN has selected a good, modern design for the next 6 ships, the question is whether there was a need for a change of ship models in the first place? Afterall, the addition of yet another model of ship would add to logistics and maintenance issues.
Furthermore, of the delays and setbacks suffered by the Meko 100 class 'now know as kedah class?' , I was under the impression that most of the problem lay with BNS which is also the shipyard for the LCS program rather than the ship itself. The only thing lacking was that the first 6 ships were not fully armed as they could have, but that hardly constitutes a reason for a change of ships.
Perhaps those more informed could shade some light on these developments?
A bit of news on the RMN's LCS program
"Royal Malaysian Navy selects DCNS' Gowind corvette for its Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) program"
The Gowind frigate, designed by French company DCNS, has been selected for the Royal Malaysian Navy’s Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) programme. However, the contract for building the six ships remains on hold due to disagreements between the builder, Boustead Naval Shipyard Sdn Bhd (BNS), and the end user RMN, according to people familiar with the programme.
One of the key sticking points is BNS and DCNS’s insistence that the ships adopt the SETIS combat management system (CMS) designed by the French company.
RMN instead wants another system developed by Thales, the Tacticos, being integrated into one of its vessels, KD Kasturi.
The navy had hoped to reduce the number of CMS in its fleet to reduce training and support issues. RMN chief Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Jaafar told theSun yesterday that the government had chosen the Gowind design for the LCS programme.
He declined to confirm or deny speculation that the contract would only be signed when the RMN was satisfied that its requirements were met. He, however, confirmed most of the specifications for the ship had been finalised.
BNS managing director Tan Sri Ahmad Ramli Mohd Nor, however, denied the delay was due to disagreement with the end user.
“It is up to the government. We are ready to go forward,” said Ahmad Ramli, a former RMN chief.
Despite the delay, BNS is displaying a model of the Gowind frigate at the Langkawi International Maritime Aerospace exhibition here. The frigate is 107m-long with a displacement of 2,750 tonnes.
It will be armed with a 57mm gun, surface-to-air missiles and torpedoes. With four diesel engines, the ship will have a top speed of 29 knots. theSun had reported on Tuesday that the widely speculated deal for six LCS would be delayed until next year.
A report published in the Janes Defence Weekly stated that the Malaysian government was likely to postpone defence procurement in view of the general election, which could be held early next year.
The LCS contract has been in news since February after Defence Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi announced that the government had awarded BNS a RM6 billion contract to build six LCS or Second Generation Patrols Vessels for the RMN.
Source: Royal Malaysian Navy selects DCNS' Gowind corvette for its Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) program
I am a little curious about this news. While it is nice that the RMN has selected a good, modern design for the next 6 ships, the question is whether there was a need for a change of ship models in the first place? Afterall, the addition of yet another model of ship would add to logistics and maintenance issues.
Furthermore, of the delays and setbacks suffered by the Meko 100 class 'now know as kedah class?' , I was under the impression that most of the problem lay with BNS which is also the shipyard for the LCS program rather than the ship itself. The only thing lacking was that the first 6 ships were not fully armed as they could have, but that hardly constitutes a reason for a change of ships.
Perhaps those more informed could shade some light on these developments?
In a perfect world, the Germans would have been selected to provide a larger and more stealthy version of the Meko100A but politics came into play.
The problem was management issues with the PSC Naval Dockyard which led to them not paying the contractors and vendors in time, leading to delays in the programme and cost overruns. BNS was then selected by the government to take over the programme and deliver the remaining ships. One problem with the design was the decision to do away with a funnel to reduce the ships IR signature. For their proposed design, the Germans included a funnel after receiving feedback from the RMN. The whole issue of choosing DCNS rather than go with the Germans again was mainly political.
Last edited:
RMN newest LCS
is requesting to up-armed her Kedah class OPVs...
What's her weapons choice ?
Interesting situation as South China Sea will be busy with armed vessels due
to Shi Lang pending arrival..
AsianMilitaryReview.com
Any one got info on her weapons and makeup...read somewhere that RMN
is requesting to up-armed her Kedah class OPVs...
What's her weapons choice ?
Interesting situation as South China Sea will be busy with armed vessels due
to Shi Lang pending arrival..
AsianMilitaryReview.com
A model was shown at the recent LIMA exhibition showing it armed with a Bofors 57mm Mk3, a 16 cell VLS [believed to be for ESSM], the usual 8 MM-40s and 2 secondary guns mounted on top the hangar. The 2 triple torp tubes are not visible due to the design.
Already integrated for RAM and the MM-40 but this is unlikely to happen soon.
A 40 minute documentary on the RMNs Scorpenes. The sub-titles are a bit off though and may have been added by the person who uploaded the video. Lots of nice internal footage.
Majalah 3.wmv - YouTube
Footage taken from the bridge of a Scorpene.
[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjQw4k-UmkM&feature=related"]Kapal Selam Scorpene KD Tun Razak Lima Langkawi 2011 - YouTube[/nomedia]
Footage of the galley!
[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THzW_jP1zlc&feature=related"]Temuramah Anak Kapal Scorpene KD Tun Razak - YouTube[/nomedia]
The arrival of the 1st sub in 2009.
KDrahman - YouTube
A Sea Skua launch.
[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRQXbSC0IJo"]Royal Malaysian Navy: Super Lynx & Sea Skua - YouTube[/nomedia]
Majalah 3.wmv - YouTube
Footage taken from the bridge of a Scorpene.
[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjQw4k-UmkM&feature=related"]Kapal Selam Scorpene KD Tun Razak Lima Langkawi 2011 - YouTube[/nomedia]
Footage of the galley!
[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THzW_jP1zlc&feature=related"]Temuramah Anak Kapal Scorpene KD Tun Razak - YouTube[/nomedia]
The arrival of the 1st sub in 2009.
KDrahman - YouTube
A Sea Skua launch.
[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRQXbSC0IJo"]Royal Malaysian Navy: Super Lynx & Sea Skua - YouTube[/nomedia]
Last edited:
i think we need to address gaps in our capability first such as LSD or LST. The reality is malaysia is divided into east and west. Mobility will be critical is addressing external threats. However, we should look into Asean procurement instead of individual procurement to maximise value. Not a political acceptable solution for now because of the social role defence budget plays for local politics...but who knows one day
nfloorl:
nfloorl:i think we need to address gaps in our capability first such as LSD or LST. The reality is malaysia is divided into east and west. Mobility will be critical is addressing external threats. However, we should look into Asean procurement instead of individual procurement to maximise value. Not a political acceptable solution for now because of the social role defence budget plays for local politics...but who knows one day
indeed i agree rmn should look into acquiring more surface vessels as prescribed.
malaysia also should increase her military industrial capability to meet her urgent demands.
check this news about lpd replacement...
what i dont understand is that rmn should look to procure excess western assets..if it is economical since they are combat ready.
DEFENSE STUDIES: MALAYSIA
i think for naval vessels we are capable of construction but lack of cantinuity in policy affects private sector planning for retention and building of capacity. Note the Mustari OPV , the new training vessel, the hydrographic vessel.....hopefully Boustead ND will be allowed constant award of projects to build capability especially design later.
Buying second hand, there must be balance between price, capability and availability. Buy a 20 year ship comes with all the repairs and maintenance issues. And a 20 year old ship comes with a crew of 200 instead of a modern ship using 70. So to me buy new, produce under license, use less manpower. You can however allow less installed weapons. The kedah OPV class with main gun, torpedoes, 2 exocets, and a RAM will be adequate for self protection. throw in some 0.5 brownings. It may not stand up to Chinese navy but its enough contribution to a multi national alied fleet. (lets face it , if the future threat is China, only collectively asean can stand against them).
Buying second hand, there must be balance between price, capability and availability. Buy a 20 year ship comes with all the repairs and maintenance issues. And a 20 year old ship comes with a crew of 200 instead of a modern ship using 70. So to me buy new, produce under license, use less manpower. You can however allow less installed weapons. The kedah OPV class with main gun, torpedoes, 2 exocets, and a RAM will be adequate for self protection. throw in some 0.5 brownings. It may not stand up to Chinese navy but its enough contribution to a multi national alied fleet. (lets face it , if the future threat is China, only collectively asean can stand against them).
are we buying ESSM or MICA. Which is better?
Whats the design advances that gowind have over MEKO?
Who is our perceived future threat? China? if so do we need numbers ie 6 or 3 but more capability or 8 smaller, just south china sea capable......i wonder what is the strategic fit on the design choice.
Whats the design advances that gowind have over MEKO?
Who is our perceived future threat? China? if so do we need numbers ie 6 or 3 but more capability or 8 smaller, just south china sea capable......i wonder what is the strategic fit on the design choice.
The RMN first indentified a need for another LST several years ago, way before the loss of KD Inderapura. The problem here is the size of the defence budget and the need to meet other priorities. Many would argue, with great justification, that the cash spent on the 2 Scorpenes would have been better used on new LSTs and helicopters, as these as far as the RMN operational responsibilities go, have more peacetime utility than SSKs. The RMNs main problem IMO is a shortage of hulls for day to day patrols and sea lift, not its inability to participate in full scale naval engagements in the South China Sea against a foreign country.
On paper, ESSM unlike MICA, has a capability to deal with supersonic threats and has a longer range [very dependent on onboard sensors]. ESSM was originally selected for the Lekiu Batch 2s due to the price tag of ASTER 15, which was reportedly the RMNs preferred choice then. Whether or not ESSM can indeed deal with supersonic missles is another story as only simulations and tests against subsonic missiles have been performed but overall, ESSM would be a better choice for the LCS.
Though Malaysia does not say so publicly, its main concern since the Confrontation has always been Indonesia, due to a number of factors. The great concern now is Ambalat, as an encounter at sea between RMN and TNI-AL ships in the disputed area could rapidly spiral out of control with dangerous consenquences.The good news is both countries recently agreed not to detain fishing trawlers that have crossed the maritime boundaries but to 'chase' them away, doing away with a potential source of conflict.
Malaysia sees China more as a source of concern rather than a direct threat and one thing Malaysia has to its advantage is that of all the reefs that are claimed by China and are occupied by other countries, Malaysia's 5 reefs or islands are the furthest away from the Chinse mainland. Anyhow, irrespective of how larger or capable the RMN is or how much the defence budget is raised, Malaysia will never be able to compete with China militarily. In parallel with maintaining its longstanding ties with Uncle Sam, a country that Malaysia trains more regularly with than any other country [USN visits to Malaysia are now at at all time high], Malaysia will continue to seek good ties with China and will continue to say publicly that it see China sas a partner not a threat.
http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=4298
Last edited:
Thank you for your well informed answers.
I heard however we are going for MICA on the Gowinds. I dont know how good is MICA against SSM's. Nevertheless, are our ships networked with one another. i.e i can see what another ship see??. How does the current Kedah integrate with theGowind when the CMS are of different design.
On the shortage of hull we should buy or develop low cost solutions such as the River class OPV or the NZ Waikato(is it) OPV. A large hull for seakeeping, space for additional landing party and just a small EO assisted gun for self defence. surface and navigation radars. A helideck with hangar for Lynx sized helis. Without any idea of how it cost, logic tells me relative to hull the electronics and sensors do make up a lot. An OPV and a corvette could be the same 1000 MT but the thing that tips the scale are the weapons and sensors.
I heard however we are going for MICA on the Gowinds. I dont know how good is MICA against SSM's. Nevertheless, are our ships networked with one another. i.e i can see what another ship see??. How does the current Kedah integrate with theGowind when the CMS are of different design.
On the shortage of hull we should buy or develop low cost solutions such as the River class OPV or the NZ Waikato(is it) OPV. A large hull for seakeeping, space for additional landing party and just a small EO assisted gun for self defence. surface and navigation radars. A helideck with hangar for Lynx sized helis. Without any idea of how it cost, logic tells me relative to hull the electronics and sensors do make up a lot. An OPV and a corvette could be the same 1000 MT but the thing that tips the scale are the weapons and sensors.
The RMN would like ESSM as the ESSM on paper, is a much more capable missile than MICA but as usual in Malaysia, politics will come into play and the end users who know best as to what they need will be overuled by the politicans. To me it seems a bit pointless to spent all that money on the LCS, to only have it equipped with a short range system that is unable to deal with supersonic threats.
Only the Lekiu and Laksamana class are fitted with Link Y. The Kasturi class, as part of its SLEP, will also receive Link Y. As far as integration and network centric capability goes, the RMN is way behind other navies. It will be safe to assume that the LCS will also receive Link Y.
What you have described would be ideal for the MMEA that in theory is meant to perform a number of day to day, peacetime roles, with the RMN being able to concentrate on other tasks. As for electronics, all that would be needed is a surface search radar, navigation radar and perhaps an elctro-optical sight. The problem again is money, as no cash has been allocated for the MMEA to receive or operate new ships.
VL Mica is only singular in Sylver or Mk41 IIRC and VL Mica isn't compatible with the US VLS. Chances are the model or CGI you're looking at hasn't really gone into a whole amount of detail on the specifics like that.
Thanks Rob. I always thought that too, as the missile fit (ESSM, ASTER, MICA ) has not been finalized to date.Just thought it was strange to fit a US looking VLS system on a French built ship as i think it has never been done before ( i stand to be corrected) and perhaps only because the French were desperate to get the RMN as their launch customer.
Also noticed that the VLS in a recent finalized version comes in a highly elevated "deck" totally different from the earlier "baseline design".
( sorry failed in my attempt to post a picture for comparison)