PETALING JAYA: With a budget of RM232.2 billion for 2012, the Government has allocated RM13.714 billion for defence, a reduction of some RM100 million compared to the RM13.823 billion which was spent in 2011.
To read the full planned 2012 expenditure, go Here
Although exact procurement plans were not mentioned, this was the first time that a more detailed expenditure, estimated or actual, was released. Such detailed expenditure had been published before but not in the planned budget document but in the Ministry’s’ annual report.
From the RM13.7 billion, some RM10.945 billion is for the management expenditure(salary, operations, logistics) and RM2.7 billion is for development costs(procurement). The administration allocation for 2012 is an increase of some RM400 million compared to last year while development see a reduction of around RM400 million.
Can we assume the RM400 million slashed for development had gone to pay for the increase in the soldiers salary as there is an increase of RM400 million for emolument cost in 2012?
It is interesting to note that for the development allocation, funds for asset allocation was reduced to RM2.6 billion in 2012 compared to RM3.292 billion last year while services and supply is set to increase in 2012 to RM309 million compared to some RM281 million last year.
Apart from that the operation allocation to all the services including the Joint Command for next year have been reduced although the number of personnel remained constant.
Another interesting number one need to see is the huge deficit in planned expenditure compared to the cost of the development projects. For example the Army projects (asset and construction) is RM8.18 billion while the planned expenditure for 2012-2013 is only RM1.44 billion. Its the same with the RMN, RM10.3 billion (cost of the project) while the allocation for next two years is only RM4.4 billion while for the RMAF its RM5.03 bilion and RM2.52 billion.
I guess they need to fund those deficit until the next Malaysian Plan to ensure the planned procurements can go through!
Based on the document, I am assuming that for the 10th Malaysian Plan the Armed Forces wish list cost RM24.748 billion. And for the next two years only RM8.837 billion is being planned to be spend on wish list. This year its RM2.768 billion (last year it was RM3.232 billion) so technically for next year budget the allocation should be around another RM2.8 billion to ensure that the planned projects will go ahead on time.
That said, they also need another RM15 billion or so to ensure that all projects planned under RMK10 can be completed within the next four years or otherwise, we may end up having something that was planned in 2010, being put into service in 2020 or further down road. Will Windows 7 still be the OS by that time?
By the way, the Home Ministry gets some RM10.7 billion. No figures for MMEA though.
–Malaysian Defence
If you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment
Marhalim
See the budget for MMEA under the budget for the PM’s Office.
drop on military budget? I think isn’t good news for malaysian army despite is just slightly reduction. So is very important for mindef person to reconstruct their procurement plant.
What i am writing is just a satire, please do not take it seriously. With only RM2.7 billion development budget, what can we buy hmmmm
Here are some ideas-
a)scrap the 257 AV8 and buy 257 BTR3E, same version as the Thai. Cost approximately USD270 million or RM810 million
b) Scrap the manufacturing of Colt M4 here, buy direct AK101. My guestimate for 50,000 rifles would be around US150 million or RM450 million
c)Scrap the MIG29 replacement program, just upgrade all 14 fighters to SMT standard (as done by india) at around USD15 million each or USD160 million or RM480 million
d) UP ARMED all the 6 Kedah OPV, with Exocet, RIM Missile, towed sonar and light torpedo. Estimated USD330 million or RM1 billion
But than again i just day dreaming, smoked too much
Underfunding project development and procurement from the beginning is a sure way to end up with cancelled programs, a lot of money wasted and nothing to show for it. All of this bluster about SGPV, MMRCA, AV8 and the end result will likely be what it has been for the past decade – wait for the next Malaysian Plan, insya Allah.
This is likely what the RMAF will look like in 10 years:
15 Su-30MKMs (3 lost to crashes or other incidents)
8 Hornets (with only enough flying hours left for LIMA)
5 MiG-29s (the rest cannabilized to keep the surviving ones flying)
1 F-5 (parked at an airbase entrance for show)
3 Hawks (the rest crashed, cannibalized or so on)
7 MB-339CMs (1 lost to ground accident)
20 PC-7s (flying coffins suitable for only the bravest recruits)
4 A400M (shiny new airplanes with constant maintenance problems keeping them out of service)
10 C-130s (still soldiering on)
10 EC725 (other 2 lost in incidents connected with overuse)
And so on…
This is likely what the army will look like in 10 years:
46 PT-91M (2 lost in fratricide incident during live fire exercise)
250 Adnans (serviceable, but constant problems)
Still inadequate logistics vehicles. And various other vehicles in dilapidated states, occasionally scene on the parade grounds. Everything else unsuitable for even target practice. Oh, and I almost forgot, 4 helicopters left.
This is likely what the navy will look like in 10 years:
2 Lekiu class (same old weapons and systems, no upgrades)
1 Kasturi class (KD Lekir ran aground in the Spratlys in pursuit of Chinese fishing trawler)
2 Laksamana class (1 lost in fire, 1 in collision with commercial vessel)
6 Kedah OPV (still no missiles)
1 Scorpene class (1 laid up in port with undisclosed technical problems – rahsia (state secrets))
A few other ships occasionally in service, but never far from port.
Reply
And yet they want reservists in all parliamentary constituencies…
basing on FareedLHS’s comment…wow by 2021 we have quite an antique ATM operating 1970-1990’s technologies. I bet by that time a captain of TDM starting tangga gaji is equal to a senior engineer in a MNC operation on our shores
Current procurement policy result in high prices and sub-optimised solutions. A typical example is SGPV-LCS. The first step is that BNS is assigned as the prime contractor. A logical step but it rules out all competition and any tendency to have a critical view on the costs of the prime contractor.
The result is that BNS is fully in control of sub-contracting the design, the systems and the weapons. Here arises a conflict between RMN interests and “business” interest.
The battle between Operational Interests, political interests and business interests has been fought numerous times in Malaysia in the past resulting in either a too high price for the required assets or an asset that doesn’t comply with the interests of the armed forces.
The current budgets can be very well spent and can supply the armed forces with the required capabilities. The problem is that budgets are dictated by political and business interests and the actual assets are nothing more than a carriage to serve the poltical and business interests.
Reply
They have to give it to BNS. After spending billions to save the dockyard after the Amin Shah debacle what do you expect? And the fact that the people who are supposed to fight, simply bend down and let the other rest trampled over the services….
Fareed
That is just tragically funny.
Fareed ,thats sad. Either ur so used to our military and its drama or u missed ur caffeine intake.
It’s high time for an affordable malaysian to find a second country as a back-up plan. The politicians couldn’t care less about the country’s defense nor they understand other than money in for their pockets. It’s sad but it’s true. Malaysia is good only for a one nite stand. Malaysia is like pant’s down from any military aggression. We’re ill equipped and people are least informed on military matters. It’s better to surrender than die standing if there’s a war. Malaysia Boleh!
1 Fennec ditched off the coast of Somalia after receiving 2 RPG hits from a group of crack Somalian pirates…
Fareed, that is just bizarre and scary. I can see that the next move by the parliament is to abolish totally our fighters like NZ did.
Farred, Fird, Ashraf,
If you guys have had your fun perhaps we can get back to actually discussing facts??
Marhalim,
Wasn’t the RMAF Hercules and Nuri upgrade originally meant to be funded under the 10th Malaysia Plan? Also, if indeed the MRCA programme has been put on hold and the Fulcrums are to fly for another 4-5 years minimum, that would mean their engines have to be sent back to Russia for an overhaul.
Reply
Yes the Hercules and Nuri upgrades are supposed to be funded in 2014-2015 time frame. As for the Fulcrum engines, sending them back to Russia is probably the logical step.
In all seriousness, if defence is going to be so underfunded then it would be better for the ATM to scale back its responsibilities and retain proficiency in the most vital areas only, and not attempt to overreach.
With that in mind, the TUDM IMO should look like this in 10 years (all jokes aside):
~36 MMRCAs (Gripen, Super Hornet, take your pick)
18 Su-30MKMs (significantly upgraded)
~8 ‘advanced trainers’ (Hawk, M-346, take your pick)
8 MB-339CMs (plus former RNZAF’s MB-339Cs if possible)
~18 PC-7 Mk IIs (combination of new aircraft and remanufactured)
~18 ‘basic trainer’ (PC-21, KT-1, take your pick)
4 A400Ms
12 C-130s (overhauled and upgraded)
12 CN-235s (overhauled and upgraded)
~12 ‘ISR, special missions, transports’ (King Air 350s, for example)
~24 EC725s (12 on order plus 12 more)
~24 EC645s (similar to UH-72A Lakota)
11 AW109 LOH (overhauled and upgraded)
And for the army:
48 PT-91M (upgraded)
~48 ‘light tanks’ (based on ASCOD 2, CV90, or other ‘common base platform’)
~18 ‘AEVs, ARVs, etc’ (based on ASCOD 2, CV90, or other ‘common base platform’)
267 Adnans (overhauled and upgraded)
~100 ‘IFVs’ (based on ASCOD 2, CV90, or other ‘common base platform’)
111 K200s (in reserve)
~250 Pars 8×8
459 Condors (overhauled and in reserve)
– ‘new logistics vehicles’
– ‘new tactical vehicles’
36 Astros II systems
~24 ‘self-propelled artillery systems’ (based on ASCOD 2, CV90, or other ‘common base platform’, with Donar or other artillery module)
~48 M777s (or other 155mm towed howitzer, preferably lightweight)
~48 ‘105mm towed howitzer’ (preferably lightweight)
12 FH-70s (in reserve)
22 G5 Mk IIIs (in reserve)
– air defence systems such as ASRAD-R, RBS 23 BAMSE, and so on.
– anti-armor weapons, such as Kornet-E, Bill 2, and so on.
– crew-served weapons, mortars, etc.
– infantry weapons, in addition to the M4s, FN SCAR, FN Minimi, FN Mag, and so on.
And for the navy:
2 Lekiu class (refit, overhauled and upgraded)
6 Kedah class (upgraded)
6 SGPV class
2 Scorpene class
~20-30 ‘patrol vessels’ (~500 tons displacement, Gumdoksuri class for example)
~12 ‘multi-mission naval helicopters’ (AW159 Lynx Wildcat for example)
6 Super Lynx Mk 100s (overhauled)
6 AS555SNs (overhauled)
I know that I’m leaving out some things, and I know that it still sounds like a lot, but at least it is more thought than apparently the government and opposition have put into defence matters.
Reply
Even the addition you mentioned will cost the same as the wish-list by the Armed Forces. With around Rm3 billion for procurement available, we should be able to buy new missiles and bombs, ATGMs and such but no new systems.
Indons have decided to buy 3 attack class subs from Korea and at the same time stoke anti Malaysia feelings.
Interesting.Bully on the move.
Reply
The sub purchase has been on the cards for sometime now, they will only be ready for service within the next two years.
Just lost my post… urgh! Well, here again, in different form:
re: Even the addition you mentioned will cost the same as the wish-list by the Armed Forces.
Not mentioned in my original post…
IMO in order to fund procurements we need to cut back on operations. To do so, I would recommend the immediate retiring of the MiG-29s, F-5s, Hawks and some other aircraft. With the exception of the PT-91Ms, Adnans and a few of the other vehicles mentioned in my post above, I would also retire a lot of the army’s equipment. The same for the Navy. The Kasturi and Laksamana classes, as well as every other ship with ~20 years in the water, should be put to dock. Any item that is not likely to be a useful addition to the inventory in 10 years time should not get another cent. We must sacrifice short term capabilities for long term gain. Lastly, it is close to impossible to outline in a post what would need a defence white paper to fully describe. I hope the intent of my ideas are not lost.
Reply
Just some me a gist of the paper of you think, I will use it as a guest post…
Considering the dire straits that the country is going through, the future does not look good for defence.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203633104576624570334832018.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Key points:
– GDP growth fell below 5% in year-on-year terms for the last two quarters.
– The government is running an annual deficit roughly equivalent to the entire defence budget (13 billion ringgit).
Maybe my first post isn’t too far from the truth.
Marhalim, does the MYR 13.714 billion include all defence spending? Or are some operations and procurements funded through supplemental budget items as they are in some other countries?
Reply
Yes thats the whole budget for next year although they can call for additional as supplemental budget within six months which happened every year but its mostly to top up the operational (as happened this year), not for new toys.
FareedLHS,
1. The FH-70’s are not operable because the barrels have worn out.
2. Very curious as to what army equpment you suggest we retire?
3. When you mentioned ”put to dock” I assume you mean going into drydock for maintainance? Every single ship in the RMN has gone through this process more than once. KD Lekir is currently undergoing a SLEP and after that it will be the turn of KD Kasturi. The Laksamana class, which have also been in drydock before at Lumut, have an upgrade to the CMS [2 ships] and a new jammers and ESM, and despite their age, havestill plenty of life left in their hulls and machinery.
4. Why would you advocate getting the ASCOD or CV90 as a ”common base plafform” when there is already a ”common base plafform” in service, the Adnan??
5. The Fennces have already been overhauled.
6. Why go for light tanks and introduce another vehicle into service? Are they meant to perform any roles that the MBTs can’t??
@FareedLHS
in 10 years time it will be 2021… And dread to think that we still use some of those stuff in Wawasan2020 +1…
My choice of affordable MAF Orbat in 2016… IMO 2021 is too far in the future to think about.
TUDM
– 18 SU30MKM + 4 2ndhand SU27UB for training/tanker/ECM role. Some MKM (4) on permanent rotation detachment to labuan. 1x Skn
– 8 F/A-18D + 6 F/A-18B 2ndhand from aus? canada? 1x Skn
– 13 hawk200 + 11 2ndhand hawk200 fr Oman. 6 hawk100 + 4 2ndhand hawk100 fr Oman. 2x Skn
– 8 MB339 + 12 2ndhand MB339 fr NZ. 1x Skn
– 34 PC-7 refurbish for COIN/ISR/heli intercept/Border patrol in borneo. 1/2 equipped with MX-10 FLIR/Laser turret. Refit with Martin Baker Mk16 Lightweight Ejection seats. with gun pods, laser guided 70mm rockets, igla AAM. 2x Skn
– 17 PC7 MkII + 10 new PC7 MkII for training
– 8 new Kingair B350 + 8 new PC-12 for transport/medivac/VIP/ISR/SF support. 1x Skn
– 14 C-130 Herc + 4 2ndhand C-130 from UAE. 2 converted to MC-130 config for SF support/Cougar Heli tanker. 6 conv MPA by Airbus Military with RoRo shelter, equipment similar to Brasil P3 Orion upgrade. 3x Skn
– 8 CN235. 1x Skn
– 4 CN235 AEW with Saab Erieye radar. 1x Skn
– 4 A400M + 4 Airbus 310 MRTT (similar to luftwaffe). 1x Skn
– 1 737BBJ + 2 2ndhand 737BBJ. Sell off all other vip jets.
– 12 EC725 Cougar CSAR. 1x Skn
– 26 Mi-171. 2x Skn
– 2 Blackhawk VIP + 2 AS-61N-1 VIP + 2 2ndhand Saudi AS-61N-1 + 12 S-61A4 Nuri Modernised to S-61T standard and with foldable rotor for amphibious deployment on TLDM ships. 1x Skn
TDM
– 11 A109 + 12 2ndhand commercial A109 heli
– 12 Z-19 attack helo (yes, very controversial choice, but with high common parts with eurocopter dauphins)
– 48 PT-91M upgraded + 24 2ndhand PT-91 ( 12 conv to BMPT for urban combat in support of the PT-91M; 12 conv to SP Arty with Denel Turret)
– 267 ACV300 Adnan IFV
– 111 MIFV + 200 2ndhand south korean army KIFV. All MIFV/KIFV rebuilt/modernised to same standard. 120 fitted with modernised CSE90 90mm turret canibalised from the SIBMAS as the SIBMAS replacement. 24 modded into ARISGATOR for amphibious landing.
– 260 AV8 (don’t like it but…)
– 36 ASTROSS II MLRS
– 22 Denel G5 155mm
– 60+ ? Oto Melara Pack 105mm. Heavily modernised with new barrels, ballistic computers. (105mm is now in again with the asymetric warefare these days)
– Current ATGMS with added numbers (esp bakhtar shikans, metis-m)
– Current manpads with added numbers.
– Army Battlefield Information Network Systems.
– Soldier body armors.
TLDM
– 2 Lekiu Frigate
– 2 Kasturi Corvette
– 4 Laksamana Corvette
– 3 2ndhand Nakhoda Ragam Corvette
– 3 new Austal MRV 80 Corvette (LCS)
– 6 Kedah + 6 New Kedah (SGPV)
– 16 new Gumdoksuri PKX FAC
– 2 2ndhand San Giusto LST/LPD
– 3 new Makassar LPD. 2 conv to MPCSS like Mahawangsa with no stern dock, smaller helipad, hangar at rear and container/cargo/CB90 space at center. Can serve as replenishment tanker. 1 in LPD mode.
– 2 Scorpene SSK
– 6 Lynx + 3 2ndhand Pak Navy Lynx + 3 2ndhand Royal Navy Lynx
– 6 Fennec + 6 2ndhand commercial twin ercuils
– 12 scheibel camcopter UAV
APMM
– 2 Langkawi OPV
– 4 new STX 85 OPV (like new zealand navy HMZS Otago)
– 12 new Austal 57 medium OPV (like Aussie Armidale)
– 15 PZ class
– 15 2ndhand PKM chamsuri with SLEP, to replace old ex TLDM ships
Marhalim,
If I have time to put together an honest and well-thought out paper, you’ll be the first to know. đ
Azlan,
Thanks for the information. I definitely do not know everything. I appreciate the corrections. I was unaware that the FH-70s were not operable. Unfortunately the serviceability of much of the ATM’s equipment is ‘rahsia’.
As for the army equipment, I’m basically talking anything that will not be around in 10 years. The PT-91Ms, the Adnans, and some other equipment should be retained, but we shouldn’t spend another cent on the upkeep or use of much else. Stow the Scorpions and Stormers, along with the K200s, Condors, etc. Short-term loss, for long-term gain.
By ‘put into dock’, I actually mean retire. Yes, they may still have life left in them, but current operations need to be scaled back to fund procurements. The end result of which should be a better equipped TLDM in the future.
I advocate the ASCOD 2 or CV90 as a ‘common base platform’ because both are capable of mounting 120mm tank guns and artillery gun modules. The Adnans are not ‘heavy’ enough to do so. See, for examples:
http://www.baesystems.com/ProductsServices/landa_hagg_product_cv90120.html
http://www.gdels.com/brochures/artillery_donar.pdf
How many hours do the Fennecs have?
Why go for the new armored vehicles? Simple: there is not enough armor in service at the moment. 48 MBTs and 267 Adnans are insufficient. As I mentioned above, a vehicle capable of handling a variety of turrets and systems such as a 120mm compact tank gun and an artillery gun module is needed. An IFV with a 30mm or 40mm gun is also needed. If the stretched version of the Adnan (ACV-S) could handle those needs, then it would be obvious to stick with a common platform, but unfortunately it can not. I also don’t like the idea of going with more MBTs. The ‘light’ MBT options out there are limited, while the ‘heavy’ IFV options are numerous. Lastly, if we went with just the PT-91Ms, a ‘common base platform’ and the Adnans that would actually be a reduction in tracked armored vehicle types from 5 to 3. And we’d be adding significant capability, particularly with the self-propelled artillery.
seeing the discussion now turning to supposed inventory list (I do not think what is listed is considered as orbat), it looks pretty miserable that the future of M’sia depends on lots of 2nd hand hardware. I hope to M’sia prosper and therefore can afford newer hardware but those buffoons in power should stop their mismanagement of public funds to buy what is affordable….not the most expensive weaponary just so that their cut of the commission is higher. Also, no wastage with so much padding that will allow the likes of Razak Baginda to acquire riches so that he can go jet setting screwing Mongolian girls and give them jewellery
I wonder anyone compared the “shadow budget” with the official one. Its a joy to see how the ruling party eventually managed to defeat their counter part in the stupidity scale. After 30yrs of effort pushing privatization, they actually came up with stupid (or brilliant if you are associated to “bumiputra enterprise”) plan to disrupt the already fragile economy. I hope more ppl understand they true reason to support the opposition, not because they are any better, but because it is a chance for change.
anon,
Why should depending on 2nd hand hardware be miserable? If it’s what you can afford, for the capabilities that you need/want, then that’s what you get. It’s called living within your means.
The dollars you save on upfront cost will then go into keeping the assets running and capabilities trained. That’s better than brand new assets that slowly fall apart and less than optimal operational capabilities because no training is done.
You only need to look to your neighbours to the south to see how hand me downs aren’t all that miserable and actually allows you to slowly improve on it incrementally.
reduce the army from 80k to 50k. The savings can be used for better maintenance and development budegt. BTW can’t the FH70 be rebarrelled or it is not cost effective? relying on 22 G2 and 90 M56 105 mm which is more than 50 years old a bit on the thin side IMO though we do have the kris
FareedLHS,
The FH-70s have been stored because their barrels have been worn out. Buying surlus FH-70’s would have been cheaper than re-barelling the FH-70’s. In 2002 Saudi offered us surplus FH-70s but we got G-5s instead.
The Condor is going to be replaced by the AV8.
If we retire the Kasturis and Lakasamanas, what else would the RMN have – just 6 Kedah class, 2 Lekiu class and 13 FACs? Assuming the LCS contract is signed this LIMA it will still take a minimum of 3-4 years before the first LCS is comissioned. The plain fact is that the RMN is very short of assets to meet ts peacetime responsibilitis. As the Kasturi and Lakasamana have plenty of life left, can still be supported and make up the bulk of the RMNs fleet of frontlinr combatants, it makes no sense at all to retire them
The ASCOD and CV-90 [which was offered as a cheaper alternative to an MBT and was trialed here] can be mounted with 120mm guns, but then yet another vehicle and calibre would be added… And both are only protected up to 12.7mm…….
The Fennec have flown more than 1,000 hours. The fact that we only have 6 means that they are over utilised. They are used for training, have to juggle Ops Fajar deployments with the Super Lynxs and 2 are based at Teluk Sepanngar. They have all been overhauled at the Eurocopter facility at Subang.
Hui,
Everyone is entiltled to their opinion……..
The opposition can’t even get their house in order, can’t even agree on a common strategy on how to rule the country if they occupy Putra Jaya, and have so far offered f**k all for defence. The very least they could do would be to offer us an alternative, e.g, as to how the MAF could do its job better with the same budget. You can spin it anyway you like, the plain fact is that the opposition is just as clueless when it comes to defence. So no offence, but save the political talk for other forums.
kamal,
Artillery is one of the many weak points of the army. The 105mm pack howitzers as you mentioned are very old, and lack the range and lethality needed for anything more than counterinsurgency warfare (which is how they were originally deployed). As Azlan mentioned the FH-70s are ‘worn out’. That leaves 22 G-5s from South Africa. The ‘Keris’ are great systems, but are not ‘standard’ artillery, in that it is easier to run out of rockets than shells for howitzers. As above, I recommend:
~24 âself-propelled artillery systemsâ (based on ASCOD 2, CV90, or other âcommon base platformâ, with Donar or other artillery module)
~48 M777s (or other 155mm towed howitzer, preferably lightweight)
~48 â105mm towed howitzerâ (preferably lightweight)
22 G5 Mk IIIs (in reserve)
The purchase price of the these systems varies widely. But it will cost millions to recapitalize the artillery regiment. (If I were to drop anything from the above list it would be the 105mms.)
Then as interim measures either buy surplus FH70 from saudi, uk or surplus US SP (i think M195 A5). For the navy, try to get surplus frigate from uk, italy or greece. At least it would not break our debt level which is currently 53.5% GDP
Azlan,
Just a few points:
Re: Condors to be replaced by AV8s. With 400+ Condors in the inventory, it would make sense to keep some for reserve, cannibalize and/or scrap the rest. The only active wheeled armor, once (or if) they come into service, should be the AV8.
RE: Retiring the Kasturis, Laksamanas, etc. Are we short on hulls? Absolutely. Will be even shorter by retiring some ships? Absolutely. My only point here is that money being spent on operations today needs to be cut, in order to fund procurement. If money is not saved in the interim, the navy will likely end up in 10 years with no money for new ships and old ships that will have to be retired, leaving them in even worse shape than now.
Re: ASCOD, CV90 – another vehicle, caliber and light armor. As I mentioned above… If we eliminate the Scorpions, the Stormers and the K200s, leaving only the PT-91Ms and Adnans, and then add a ‘common base platform’ somewhere between an MBT and a light tracked armored vehicle, we will actually reduce the number of vehicles from 5 to 3. Also, imagine in the future if we procure a self-propelled artillery system and other specialist vehicles. A ‘common base platform’ would consolidate all of those vehicle types into one. As for a different caliber, I see your point, but I also see that with the elimination of the old 90mm guns on the SIBMAS, Scorpion, et al, that should be a big issue. IMO it was a big mistake going with the PT-91Ms. Apparently that was the ‘best deal’ for the pockets of our esteemed government officials. As for the light armor; for many reasons we are unable to operate ‘heavy’ armor in most areas of the country. I also question whether there really is much difference in protection between a PT-91M or an ASCOD/CV90. A laser guided missile from a fighter aircraft will take out both. Also keep in mind the triumvirate of armor, firepower and mobility.
Anyway, it’s all good discussion and food for thought. Not the ‘powers that be’ care much.
Any credible government, or opposition fr that matter should be able to put forth a solid ‘defence white paper’.
Here’s a good example of one:
http://www.defence.gov.au/whitepaper/docs/defence_white_paper_2009.pdf
Ean100, there is no comparison between the gomen of MY and SG, its like comparing the moon with the sun!
Just see how frugal the SG gomen is, no VIP planes, all official trips are on commercial aircraft. No one stays at the Istana, its the office of the PM and the President. Both President and PM stays in their own home.
Now look at how many VIP planes we have ?
How many palaces for the royalty ?
To add to that, how many Sultans do we have ?
MY certainly can afford a better equipped MAF without resorting to too many 2nd hands items if only the gomen is able prioritise the available funds properly.
FareedLHS,
How exactly do you propose cutting down funding for peacetime ops to fund procurement – it doesn’t make sense at all. If the government does as you suggest, you seriously think the RMN can mantain patrols in the Melaka Straits, Sulu Sea, Spratleys and other tasks with just 2 Lekiu class, 6 NGOPVs and 14 FACs?
There is a big difference in terms of protection between the PT-91M and the ASCOD or C-90. I agree that the PT-91 should not have been bought but that’s water under the bridge now. The PT-91M was chosen simply because Bumar Laberdy and the Polish government offered us a better transfer of technology and off set package [these tend to give the powers that be a hard on] than the Russians and the decision was very political – not because of bribes…….. Also, I keep hearing references to ”heavy armour” not being able to be operated in our terrain. In the first place, any future use of MBTs in Malaysia will be restricted to urban areas, highways, secondary roads, etc, no one is going to operate armour in jungles or swamps, nor will there be a requirement for heavy armour in the jungle. The successful use of armour by the Vietnamese, Australians, the U.S. in Vietnam, in terrain that is very similar to ours, proves my point. The rapid urbanisation that has taken place in this country the past 3 decades, has meant that our terrain is more conduicive now for the employment of armour. And think about it, if ”heavy” armour could not be operated in our terrain, you seriously think the SAF would have gotten its Leo 2s?? Their Leo 2s are meant to be operated in ”Thunder Run” engagements, in urban areas, using our highways, in conjunction with Apaches, artillery, UAVs, etc, all networked.
Anon,
What 2nd hand items are you referring to????
How many Sultans we have is irrelevant to the discussion and is due to historical and cultural factors that go back hundreds of years. Pls do not compare apples and oranges.
maybe we could score some leopard 2s or typhoons from Germany…
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=8002237&c=EUR&s=TOP
Reply
Yes, but probably Singapore has the first option for the Leo 2s while the Typhoons as I mentioned before they will not allow second hand Typhoons to be sold to other countries fearing it will kill new built sales…
If you reduce the amount of money being spent on active operations that money can then be used to fund procurement programs.
I do not think that the RMN can adequately patrol “the Melaka Straits, Sulu Sea, Spratleys and [perform] other tasks” even now! The fact is that the RMN needs to rely more on cooperation with the navies of our neighbors to adequately cover these areas. We should be working more closely with the RSN, RAN, USN, et al. So, yes, by cutting the number of hulls, we will be stretching the RMN even thinner, but I do not suggest that they continue the same operational intensity. ‘Soft’ power (diplomacy, etc.) will need to be employed while we rebuild our forces. I hear your concerns.
‘Heavy’ armor is quite capable of operating in many areas. The problem is it does ‘heavy’ damage to roadways, bridges, etc. This may be acceptable during wartime, but not so during peacetime. My concern with ‘heavy’ armor is the transport and training limits it places on the army. ‘medium’ and ‘light’ armor is more easily transported. And of course, Singapore is not contrained by concerns for Malaysia’s infrastructure.
I do not think that the RMN can adequately patrol âthe Melaka Straits, Sulu Sea, Spratleys and [perform] other tasksâ even now! – FareedLHS.
And what do you think it has been doing for so many years??? And what other tasks do we have that are more important than securing our sea lanes and maintaining our SLOCs?? It would be impossible to reduce our operational workload for the plain and simple reasons that these tasks are vital for the every day well being of the country.
The point I was trying to make is eventhough we don’t have wide open plains that allow the depoloyment of massed armour, armour can be emplyed successfully in our terrain. ”Light” armour may more be easily transported but they DO NOT do way with the need for heavy armour.
FYI used Eurofighter Typhoons have recently been offered to Czech air force. So we might hear used Typhoons offered to Malaysia after this…
Reply
For Nato/Europe AFs the three countries wont make noise, outside Europe is a no-no…
Let’s go for schiebel camcorders s100 for our military usage,
Seen them flying during Lima 2011.
Magnificent
Reply
No lah the still want the Aludras