Malaysian Defence

10 Comments

1. Put in a TomTom GPS navigator with preloaded Waze/Google Maps and call it a day = Insta Profit!

2. Does this tactical navigation thing have functions like a BMS where everyone or the commander can see the location of every unit?

3. Well, perhaps Elbit had a hand in it…🤭

4. Luqnam – “Does this tactical navigation thing have functions like a BMS”

   At the very least it will show the location of every vehicle in the squadron. Same like the TacNav system on Adnan. The downside is it’s GPS based so it’s not passive and can be jammed.

5. A whooping 7 mil per vehicle !
   Astonishing when the selling price in the home country is a mere 2 mil apiece.

6. To get a true picture we need a complete breakdown. We need to determine how much DEFTECH had to pay the OEM to have assemble/modify the vehicle here; what if any modifications were made; was there a spares and training package; etc.

   I have no doubt it would have been considerably cheaper to have bought them direct from the OEM without going via DEFTECH and having them modified here (due to our self defeating defence policy).

7. @Mike
   It was pointed out previously that the pricetag was grossly expensive, however it could have included the KD assembly line setup cost (which isn’t cheap!), customisations, etc so unless we know either that or the actual per unit cost, its not easily ascertain if the actual unit price is THAT expensive or not.

8. Malaysia defence player should aware that there is ICP Program ( Industrial Collaboration Program) for the government procurement more than RM100 mill.
   Most of the people are lack of awareness what is the aspiration behind the ICP.

   The ICP covered various areas including Malaysia Local Packages, Transfer of Technology up tonTRL9, R&D&C, Human Capital Development, etc. IPR (Intellectual Property Right) , job creation, creation of business opportunities are also part of the project.

   For those who requested for detailed breakdown, the Government policy is to look at activities that add value to a procurement made by the Government of Malaysia. Believed if we are looking at the positive impact, and high impact ICP which benefited Malaysia Government and Malaysians, then definitely we would like to have local company to have our Malaysia projects, instead of giving it direct to the OEMs.

   Anyway, this is just my 2 cents opinion.

   Tq Marhalim. Hope one fine day, we can have a coffee session.

9. This whole business of a involving local companies as go betweens was intended to ensure that it wasn’t only the foreign OEMs which would benefit. According to the plan; local companies would benefit from ToTs and offsets; local jobs would be created, etc – resulting in long term tangible benefits for the nation.

   So went the plan – the reality turned out very differently. The practice of having local companies as go between has been a huge drain on resources; to the detriment of the armed services and taxpayer.

   The bulk of local companies have yet to offer any added value by making the transition from a go between to something else. The bulk of local companies merely keep doing the same thing over and over again and are paid for doing so.

   The Korean training ships and the Little Birds are merely 2 examples of local companies which were paid taxpayer ringgit for services rendered but failed to perform. Take the Light Guns; ADS as the go between handled the programme. It took delivery of the guns in kit form, assembled them and delivered them. Revenues gained benefits the company but how does it benefit the country?

   SME has been licensed manufacturing/assembling ammo for years but it has yet to transition to anything else. It’s reached a stage where where the lack of economics of scale and the fact that all the raw compliments needed have to be ordered from abroad and paid in hard foreign currency; where it’s cheaper to source ammo from abroad. Yet people are still taken in by the “self sufficiency” delusion.

   The interests of the armed services and the taxpayer must always that precedence over the local industry. Spoon feeding or granting local companies a license to make money does not equate with enabling actual long term tangible benefits for the country

10. @Heiden
    What happen with defence industry mirrors the fallacy of our local automotive industry.

    We set it up to prioritise local companies & brands thereby disqualifying foreign direct involvement or via punitive taxation. All in the hopes that we can ‘force’ buyers to ‘choose’ local.

    What really happen is the artificial inflation of prices to cater for local involvement; a Civic here cost 20-30% higher than elsewhere if we’re to buy direct and that with inferior specs. Decades of supporting the local brands and still end up doing rebadges with no real local successes. At the end, taxpayers pays the higher prices, buyers don’t get the products they deserve, local industry doesn’t really benefit, and only the cronies became rich.

    The local APC makers can gloss over AV4 and HMAV calling it ‘local product’ but we know better. Why pay more for a rebadge when direct buys are cheaper and probably better?