SHAH ALAM: The Home Ministry has awarded the Letter of Award of US$68.8 million (some RM304 million) to Turkish firm, Desan Shipyard for the procurement of the Multi-Purpose Mission Ship (MPMS) for the MMEA in Istanbul, Turkiye, on March 21. The Home Ministry in a release today stated that its secretary-general Awang Alik Jeman signed the LOA with a representative of the company at a ceremony conducted at the shipyard. Also present at the ceremony was MMEA director-general Rosli Abdullah.
The release said the 99-meter ship has an endurance of thirty days and a crew of seventy and capable of carrying thirty passengers. The ship will be equipped with four interceptors, two UAV drones, a helo deck, medical and detention facilities. The MOU for the MPMS was signed on February 11.
It did not say whether the ship will be armed but from the CGI and model of the MPMS, we know that it will feature a single 30mm RWS, forward and two 12.7mm RWS aft. The release did not reveal the expected delivery date, but I am assuming it will be mid-2028, at the earliest.
Do note that the LOA amount (RM304 million) to Desan is some RM46 million short of the amount for the MPMS announced in the 2025 budget. The RM46 million is likely the money allocated for the government-furnished equipment (GFE) which may include the drones, guns, radios, and interceptors.
The release from the Home Ministry:
MAJLIS PENANDATANGANAN SURAT SETUJU TERIMA (SST) PEROLEHAN KAPAL MISI PELBAGAI GUNA (MPMS)
ISTANBUL, 22 Mac 2025 -YBhg. Datuk Awang Alik bin Jeman, Ketua Setiausaha Kementerian Dalam Negeri (KDN) telah menyempurnakan majlis penandatanganan Surat Setuju Terima (SST) bagi perolehan Kapal Misi Pelbagai Guna yang berlangsung di Desan Shipyard, Turkiye, semalam. Majlis penandatanganan perjanjian perolehan Multi Purpose Mission Ship (MPMS) ini adalah untuk Agensi Penguatkuasaan Maritim Malaysia selaras dengan usaha meningkatkan keupayaan operasi Maritim Malaysia bagi memastikan keselamatan maritim negara, khususnya di Laut China Selatan.
Kapal canggih bernilai USD68.8 juta ini bakal menjadi aset penting untuk memperkukuhkan keupayaan operasi Maritim Malaysia, khususnya di kawasan strategik Laut China Selatan. Kapal sepanjang 99 meter ini mampu beroperasi selama 30 hari tanpa henti, membawa sehingga 70 orang kru dan 30 orang penumpang serta dilengkapi kemudahan moden seperti empat bot pemintas pantas, dua dron UAV, dek pendaratan helikopter, fasiliti perubatan dan pusat tahanan.
Perolehan ini bukan sahaja mencerminkan hubungan erat antara Malaysia dengan Turkiye dalam sektor pertahanan dan pembinaan kapal, malah membuktikan komitmen kedua-dua negara untuk menangani ancaman keselamatan maritim seperti pencerobohan vesel asing, aktiviti penangkapan ikan haram, penyeludupan dan pemerdagangan manusia.
Majlis pemeteraian perjanjian ini ialah sebahagian daripada rentetan sesi pertukaran dokumen rasmi yang disaksikan oleh YAB Datuk Seri Anwar bin Ibrahim, Perdana Menteri Malaysia dan TYT Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Presiden Turkiye ketika lawatan rasmi pemimpin Turkiye itu ke Malaysia pada 11 Februari lalu.
Delegasi Malaysia yang turut disertai oleh YBhg. Laksamana Maritim Datuk Haji Mohd Rosli bin Abdullah, Ketua Pengarah Maritim Malaysia turut mengadakan lawatan ke ibu pejabat dan limbungan selenggara Desan Shipyard, bagi melihat keupayaan dan kemampuan syarikat berkenaan dalam pembinaan kapal.
— Malaysian Defence If you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment
Long overdue but a step in the right direction. The MMEA has to get past its hand me down aged and worn out expensive and troublesome to sustain assets quandary. Looking at the design it should have the space to operate more than a pair of UASs. The problem might be stowage space.
Thought they are able to get the MPMS because sometimes ago they said the ad hoc innovation that is the PETRONAS gifted seabase is expensive to run and not flexible enough
At the end nothing beat off the shelf proven platform in term of cost and operational capabilities.
Any idea on the tonnage?
Zaft – “they said the ad hoc innovation that is the PETRONAS gifted seabase is expensive to run and not flexible enough”
But the assets acquired from Petronas serve slightly diffrent purpose.
Zaft – “At the end nothing beat off the shelf proven platform in term of cost and operational capabilities”
In general yes but only if the said kit meets actual requirements. No point getting something off the shelf and “proven” [itself a subjective term which has become cliche] if it does not meet requirements or causes grief to maintain]. There is a tendency to assume what works for others will with for us, variables to consider.
I think around 3000 tonnes.
Hope we actually procure several more not just this one only
” Hope we actually procure several more not just this one only ”
The current plan is for 3
This single example is paid for with the budget within RMK12 2021-2025
Another 2 ships will be paid for in RMK13 2026-2030 budget
IMO another 3 more should also be bought in RMK14 2031-2035 that could replace ships such as the ex-USCG WMEC Reliance class ships (that we still haven’t gotten as of now)
The cost of 3 MPMS is actually similar to 1 of TLDM new LMS B2 STM Turkiye Corvette.
Securing our maritime zones from the incursions of foreign Coast Guard vessels should be the main task of our own Coast Guard, not our navy like what we prioritise right now.
https://www.malaysiandefence.com/lms-batch-2-is-the-result-of-chinas-intrusion-into-malaysias-eez/
When we actually empower our own Coast Guard to counter foreign Coast Guards, using proper ships such as the MPMS instead of missile armed corvettes, the costs are much more cheaper, while diplomatically and within international law this is a much more proper response.
As i have listed out in other articles here, the cost to properly equip APMM to properly do its primary task is not high at all. In all it probably cost less than half a billion dollars to buy new large OPVs for APMM from now up till 2040 to properly undertake its primary tasks.
Somewhat confusing at first, but a quick Google check confirms there is Desan and there is Dearsan. Dearsan has a nice 142m frigate design in their catalogue.
Yes there is the Dearsan shipyard as well which is more active than Desan actually in shipbuilding. Dearsan also has various ship designs compared to Desan.
Is there any news on the 2 remaining Tun Fatimah class ships that aren’t finished yet? Is it canceled?
… – “Securing our maritime zones from the incursions of foreign Coast Guard vessels”
It’s not only Chinese ships buy fishing ships from other countries in areas apart from the Spratlys. Amidst all the sensationalism over China its often overlooked we also have unresolved over lapping maritime boundaries with others.
Wasn’t Chinese fisherman who overpowered a MMEA man and brought him to the mainland. Wasn’t the Chinese who rammed a ship, came close to opening fire on a FAC, pointed guns at a Lynx [was shown on national TV] or who asked that a CO of a MCMV be extradited. China is a major concern isn’t the only one. For the past few decades threat perceptions have been driven by one particular neighbour. Ask any retired or serving senior official.
As I reported previously, they are waiting to tender to complete the two ships. Do not think they have the funds for this year though.
Azlan “For the past few decades threat perceptions have been driven by one particular neighbour. Ask any retired or serving senior official.”
Just because some time ago in the post cold war peace dividend era a certain state is perceived as the main threat doesn’t mean they continue to be so currently or going forward. afterall A lot had happened in that few decades. They had gone through democratization and had reorganizing their governance and economy through that period
Hulu “When we actually empower our own Coast Guard to counter foreign Coast Guards, using proper ships such as the MPMS instead of missile armed corvettes, the costs are much more cheaper, while diplomatically and within international law this is a much more proper response.”
Do you even read the link you yourself posted? It’s says so right there
“LMS Batch 1 currently deployed in the Eastern Fleet are small and are capable as a Patrol Vessel only (no full capability combatants), as well as less suitable for operating in the open sea.”
And you grand idea is to double down on a failed concept that is LMS1? For what? To safe enough money only to throw it away (in RAN experience a bottomless pit of black hole) to pay for R&D for some paper subs with paper aip and paper li-iOn battery?
Here’s a better idea. Wait a few years until some sucker had paid fully the R&D for the various sub they are actively building then have them compete to supplies its to you and get yourself something off the shelf at much lower cost and risk while not having to sacrifice your surface combatants capabilities in the process.
Even if the MMEA had 500 OPVs the RMN like most navies would still have certain peacetime constabulary type roles. Also, until the MMEA can totally assume the burden the RMN is the only entity which can assist.
As it stands the reality is that the MMEA is under resourced and also needs to expand or improve its shore support infrastructure. It also needs various other things in addition to ships. The C4ISR thing is a good step.
Zaft – “Just because some time ago in the post cold war peace dividend era a certain state is perceived as the main threat”
Thanks for the update but some things don’t change and we may not see it as a threat but a challenge or a concern. Note the nuance.
Let me ask you this, which is the 1st country or one of the 1st which newly elected PMs visit? Which country is the largest in the region, the one with a big economy and one which borders us to the west, south westwards, south eastwards and eastwards? Which country has a EEZ which bulges into the South China Sea between the sea lanes separating West and East Malaysia? Why are we in private not really bothered or too concerned about a strong SAF? Answer: as a check against a certain country. Also, do you really believe that all the focus we are giving ESSCOM or Sabah, including the rasing of a new division is driven by concerns over the Royal Sulu Army?
If still in doubt do make the effort to ask around.
Another thing, that country was a concern even before the “post Cold War dividend” [your quote]. Who were the 1st countries in ASEAN to have naval exercises, followed by tri service ones? Why did we see the need to have confidence building measures.
On the LMS Batch 1s they may only be armed with guns and have other limitations but are an improvement over the FACs when it comes to sea keeping.
” RMN is the only entity which can assist ”
Keyword here is assist
Right now TLDM is the leading service assigned by the government to counter the chinese coast guard and other constabulary duties, with it many new boats in the past few years are bought / refitted-upgraded primarily for that mission.
The proper way is to actually buy stuff for APMM in the 1st place to counter the Chinese Coast Guard.
azlan “Thanks for the update but some things don’t change and we may not see it as a threat but a challenge or a concern. Note the nuance”
Considering we were in an undeclared war with them half a century ago they currently being seen as a challenge or a concern and not a threat is quite an upgrade.
Also you forgot to add that we along with SG and AUS also see them as opportunity be it for security and economic prosperity. Which is why political and military engagement are quite high.
Anyway if you think they got us surrounded geographically, they too think they are surrounded by FPDA members geographically. Guess you can add the Chinese too for feeling being boxes in.
Azlan “Even if the MMEA had 500 OPVs the RMN like most navies would still have certain peacetime constabulary type roles.”
Doing peacetime constabulary roles with asset they have available is one thing, acquiring asset like LMS1 which has no military role but purely to perform peacetime constabulary roles is another.
The idea that a single hull to perform variety of operation was quite an old one while they borne the USN LCS,arafura,river class and and our LMS1 program. Most of these programs objective had more or less be abandoned in favor of a purpose build ships.
Azlan “LMS Batch 1s they may only be armed with guns and have other limitations but are an improvement over the FACs when it comes to sea keeping.”
The likelihood of bean counter or politicians approving a replacement for the recently rehulled and repowered FAC is low to none. Unless they like Hulu are for some odd reasons convinced that land invasion in the foreseeable future have a high risk of happening that is.
As of now their eyes is glued towards a more immediate threat of potentially losing our O&G revenue along with potentially losing our export base economic model if our SLCs is denied in the SCS.
Fortunately for us there’s plenty of willing partner who are in the same boat and would be screwed if the Chinese can perform sea denial or sea control in the SCS.
Obviously from the Chinese perspective if the other side collectively can perform sea denial then they would be screwed.
“private not really bothered or too concerned about a strong SAF”
Privately we have reached a maturity level of not antagonising each other and ramping up tensions or trying to one upmanship in defence capability anymore, but it is disconcerting they maintain a First Strike doctrine & occupy Johore bulwark strategy…
Even if one eye is looking at China, the other eye remains gazing at SAF.
@Hulu
“buy stuff for APMM in the 1st place to counter the Chinese Coast Guard.”
My idiom; no matter how much armour you clad an ant it will still be trampled by the elephant.
… – “Keyword here is assist”
OK then I’ll lay it out it less aambigious terms: “the RMN is the only entity which can help shoulder the burden until such a time comes when the MMEA is able”.
… “Right now TLDM is the leading service assigned by the government to counter the chinese coast”
The RMN has more ships which are capable of deploying for weeks on end in an area which can experience adverse sea/weather conditions and I wouldn’t go so far as saying the RMN is the “leading service”…
… – “bought / refitted-upgraded primarily for that mission”
Even if the MMEA had 1,000 ships the RMN would still have a peacetime constabulary role. I can’t say this often especially given your reluctance or inability to factor this in.
… – “The proper way is to actually buy stuff for APMM in the 1st place to counter the Chinese Coast Guard”
No joke. Who would have thought.
The thing is what the politicians are supposed to do and what they actually do are two profoundly different things. Also the MMEA has various challenges, not just the Chinese Coast Guard. The bulk of trawkers intruding into our waters aren’t Chinese and in addition to the Chinese we also have long unresolved over overlapping maritime boundaries with others in the Straits of Melaka, South China Sea and Celebes Sea.
… – “The proper way is to actually buy stuff for APMM in the 1st place to counter the Chinese Coast Guard”
No joke. Who would have thought.
The thing is what the politicians are supposed to do and what they actually do are two profoundly different things. Also the MMEA has various challenges, not just the Chinese Coast Guard. The bulk of trawkers intruding into our waters aren’t Chinese and in addition to the Chinese we also have long unresolved over overlapping maritime boundaries with others in the Straits of Melaka, South China Sea and Celebes Sea.
“by the elephant”
The “by the elephant” which causes the likes of the U.S, Japan and a Australia so much worry and which has a far larger population, economy and defence budget, the largest industrial capacity in the world, the largest military, a very high tech engineering base, which has an economy which others are very tied into, etc.
“Even if one eye is looking at China, the other eye remains gazing at SAF”.
And elsewhere too.
“& occupy Johore bulwark strategy”
The so called Gemas line. During the 1980’s when there was so much worry over the Vietnamese in Kampuchea and when we and Singapore contributed to a ammo stockpile in Thailand, there were informal plans for the SAF to move northwards on case the Vietnamese crossed into Thailand. During the period they were in Kampuchea the Vietnamese were involved in several clashes with the Thais along the common border.
“Privately we have reached a maturity level of not antagonising each other”
Behind the scenes diplomacy has always been a major thing. As a serving officer once told me, at times certain countries [not referring to Singapore] do certain well publicised things and fan boys and prophets of doom start getting excited but this is due to domestic reasons and to make a point to 3rd countries. Certain actions at sea are normally followed up with a call to assure and explain things.
Zaft – “they too think they are surrounded by FPDA members geographically”
The FPDA is not a binding agreement and Britain, Australia and New Zealand are quite a distance away…
Zaft – “The likelihood of bean counter or politicians approving a replacement for the recently rehulled and repowered FAC is low to none”
You do understand or not, that the FACs are intended to be replaced by the LMSs and they the repowering/rehulling was only to keep them in service until they could be retired…
Zaft – “if the other side collectively can perform sea denial then they would be screwed”
Incorrect. If others put aside their differences and have a common policy with dealing with China and have the mechanism in place in order for diffrent militaries to work seemlessly together…
Zaft – “Which is why political and military engagement are quite high”
No shit. If you recall I have pointed out that as part of our national strategy we place emphasis on diplomacy, trade, defence and other factors to engage with others. Why do you think we participate in the Shangri-la Dialogue, ASEAN Defence Minister’s Meeting, bilateral and multilateral exercises, etc.
“The so called Gemas line.”
Even if back then we were ‘okay-ish’ with it in order to stem the tide of communist invasion, the Plan still remains as they had seen us a threat once communism subsided.
” I can’t say this often especially given your reluctance or inability to factor this in ”
As usuall, you like to paint wrong pictures of others.
I have ALWAYS factor this in. Whatever it is APMM should be the PRIMARY SERVICE for constabulary duties, not TLDM, and budget should be approved for APMM to do its proper tasks, which will be more cost effective than asking TLDM to do the same thing.
This is my proposed plan, and what part of this at least 30 large ships for peacetime patrol that i don’t factor TLDM in?????
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GmZDvvhaUAAjR7M?format=jpg&name=4096×4096
It is you azlan that does not understand that TLDM should not waste its limited resources buy assets that their PRIMARY TASK is constabulary duties like the LMS 68 or G2000 FIC. LMS 68 is as expensive as the Kedah class OPV sized Tun Fatimah OPV for APMM. The G2000 FIC for TLDM is more than double the cost of DMS Icarus Marine FICs for APMM.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Gmyw6w0bkAAY_h9.jpg
Ships such as ARROWHEAD 140, GOWIND 3100, ADA class with full warfighting capability is what TLDM need. Primarily missionised for warfighting but can be used for secondary constabulary duties together with APMM OPVs.
Joe “Privately we have reached a maturity level of not antagonising each other and ramping up tensions or trying to one upmanship in defence capability anymore”
Economically speaking both are no longer each other competitors trying to attract MNC as both had somewhat specialized and currently are somewhat complementary to one another.
Politically speaking both LKY & Mahathir strongman politicians relying on nationalisms to stay in power are gone and so are the baggage from the 60s. Also HDI of both has grown and such both society are quite mature. You can see the same blind overpride nationalisms that we use to do in certain neighboring country right now. Even then, that’s too is changing.
Security wise SG does have an edge in quality but we have an edge in quantity. So it kinda balances out thought having said that and despite them paying an arms and a leg for a 3% defence spending on GDP (I.e. no universal healthcare and subsidies) it’s just buy them 10 years of qualitative edge.
Math wise assumed low level of political hanky panky and MY& SG grow at around the same rate. let say 5%, compound it by 10 years and adjusted to PPP (2x). MAF can afford whatever SAF can afford today in 10 years time. Basically if SAF can afford a destroyer,subs and F35 today it’s just mean MAF can afford it in 10 years time and you can kinda see it in the cap55 & 15to5 plans.
What quantity are you talking about?
Coming back to the ship. Its ironic that we have money for new MPMS but no money for half done 2units OPV boats. LOL
“Security wise SG does have an edge in quality but we have an edge in quantity.”
Hamas also had an ‘edge’ in quantity, which is why IDF kill ratio is 29 to 1. You sure you want to sacrifice a whole generation leaning on that ‘quantity edge’?
“MAF can afford whatever SAF can afford today in 10 years time”
And in 10 years time they could leverage AI & Terminator robots to better kill more efficiently than today. Human wave tactics doesnt work well against an unyielding metal wall of killer robots.
“What quantity are you talking about?”
I think he meant the number of people we can feed into a war meat grinder like Hamas tried to do. Too late they found that IDF has an unending source of bombs & bullets.
“still remains as they had seen us a threat once communism subsided”
They saw us a threat way way before that for factors such as delays in relocating the Malay Regiment, insisting they ban the barter trade with Indonesia, certain things our leaders said, certain things Malay nationalists said, etc. Keep in mind one reason for the FPDA in 1971 was because there was so much distrust between both countries. It was intended to act as a confidence building measure between both and as a platform for cooperation.
Zaft – “Security wise SG does have an edge in quality but we have an edge in quantity”
What? “Quantity” has a quality of its own and fully mobilised the SAF has almost the same or more manpower than the MAF. The SAF also has tertiary capabilities, namely the ability to work as part of a fully integrated networked environment and jointly.
Zaft – “Politically speaking both LKY & Mahathir strongman politicians relying on nationalism”
Which “strongman” didn’t rely on nationalism. Castro? Tito? Example: Stalin appealed to the nationalism of ordinary Soviets, not communism to fight the invading Germans.
” Its ironic that we have money for new MPMS but no money for half done 2units OPV boats ”
The money has been requested, and will be factored into RMK13 2026-2030 budget for APMM
https://www.hmetro.com.my/mutakhir/2024/04/1076296/rm200-juta-untuk-siapkan-opv2-opv3
Budget for MPMS number 2 & 3 will also be allocated in RMK13 2026-2030.
So from now to 2030 APMM will receive
– 2x ex USCG WMEC Reliance class
– 2x Tun Fatimah class OPV
– 3x MPMS class OPV
It is cheaper because the turkish lira was depreciated . So that’s was an unexpected added advantage
“Human wave tactics doesnt work well against an unyielding metal wall of killer robots”
As demonstrated in WW2, the Korean war, the Iran/Iraqi war [the Iranians were told they’d go straight to heaven] and Ukraine, human wave tactics don’t work if one has well prepared elastic defences in depth, backed by heavy and accurate firepower. Just as important is the need for a mobile defence to rapidly retake lost ground. Of course there are exceptions like how the Glosters were overunned by the Chinese at the Imjin River.
“Too late they found that IDF has an unending source of bombs & bullets”.
They knew that ages ago having been in conflict with Israel for a long time now.
“They saw us a threat way way before that”
Back then they didnt have that, to put in Zaft words, qualitative edge, to make good that tactic. Now they do. This is also why we wanted to do away with Causeway and the exact reason why SG doesnt want remove a permanent landbridge.
Azlan,
“Wasn’t Chinese fisherman who overpowered a MMEA man and brought him to the mainland. Wasn’t the Chinese who rammed a ship, came close to opening fire on a FAC, pointed guns at a Lynx [was shown on national TV] or who asked that a CO of a MCMV be extradited”
Could you provide more clues? Are they from Ko–ha?
IDF kill ratio of 29:1 is against civilians. I don’t think we have the numbers of the actual Hamas/IDF killed in the conflict
“The so called Gemas line.”
Even if back then we were ‘okay-ish’ with it in order to stem the tide of communist invasion, the Plan still remains as they had seen us a threat once communism subsided.
Invading is difficult enough but what comes after that is even worse, administrating the invaded land and people, dont think the Singaporeans have the resources or manpower to administer area many times larger than Singapore unless they have the help of local Traitors ..
“This is also why we wanted to do away with Causeway and the exact reason why SG doesnt want remove a permanent land bridge”
Did we want to totally remove the causeway? Also, how can we. We do a massive amount of trade with the island and the bulk of it goes via the causeway. Not to mention the tens of thousands who cross daily for employment.
… – “30 large ships for peacetime patrol that i don’t factor TLDM in?????”
So many question marks, keypad stuck? For the 99th time, even if the MMEA had 1000 ships the RMN like most navies would still perform certain peacetime roles. Period/full stop. An objective and sobered minded analysis entails the pros and the cons, plus the ability to realise that what looks good on paper can be different in really.
Also, the number of ships on paper is great but the number that will be operational or ready can be different. Yes the 1/3rd rule as you will harp but the projected number is not the optimum but the bare minimum – like the 3 to 1 ratio for an attacking force. “Depending” on the terrain and other things a 5 to 1 ratio might be needed
… – “tasks, which will be more cost effective than asking TLDM”
Stick to the script rather than go off tangent. All I said in a simple to fathom manner is that until the MMEA is ready the RMN is the only entity able to fill in the gap. Never said anything about what was “cost effective” or wasn’t…
” All I said in a simple to fathom manner is that until the MMEA is ready the RMN is the only entity able to fill in the gap ”
APMM can never be ready if the government keep on putting money into TLDM to do APMM tasks with inefficient expensive ships equipped to primarily do constabulary duties.
Mofaz – “Even if back then we were ‘okay-ish’ with it in order to stem the tide of communist invasion”
The so called Gemas Line was apparently the limit they’d go to secure a buffer in the event of trouble with us. If I’m not mistaken Tim Huxley in his well known book which ruffled so much feathers here mentioned this line.
They planning to go further northwards was in case the Vietnamese crossed into Thailand from Cambodia. The idea was to help Thailand keep the Vietnamese as far away from the Malay peninsula as far as possible in order to defend Singapore.
… – “Right now TLDM is the leading service assigned by the government to counter the chinese coast”
No it clearly isn’t…
It’s the RMN which has the needed
ships capable of deploying for weeks on end in an area which can experience adverse sea/weather conditions. In contrast the MMEA only has a handful – wouldn’t go so far as claiming the RMN is the “leading service.
… – “So from now to 2030 APMM will receive
– 2x ex USCG WMEC Reliance class
– 2x Tun Fatimah class OPV
– 3x MPMS class OPV”
And we hope that the MMEA will able to cut down on the many types operated which entails follow on OPVs, NGPC and MSMSs rather than aged and worn out hulls with little or no commonality and which will not only increase the support footprint but will also be resource extensive.
… – “APMM can never be ready if the government keep on putting money into TLDM to do APMM”
That is a different discussion. In reference to you “as usuals” and claiming others “don’t understand”, all I said in an easy to fathom manner is that the RMN is the only entity able to fill in the gap and that you overlooked the part where even if the MMEA had 30 OPVs the RMN like most navies would still have certain peacetime roles. I also said the MMEA is not the USCG and needs to reduce its support footprint.
I never said anything about what’s ideal or isn’t or what’s cost effective or isn’t. That is another discussion. Even if the MMEA was flushed with resources the RMN would still be patrolling the EEZ and BTW work done on the FACs and Laksamanas was out of sheer necessity. Doesn’t meant that after they are retired the RMN would still insist on gun only armed hulls or what some not accurately refer to as “gunboats” primarily for the constabulary role…
You have a issue with the government being unable to fulfil its obligations to the MMEA, take it up with your MP or launch a nationwide pertition but as I’ve said before, don’t maje it sound like the RMN is reluctant to relinquish certain roles to the MMEA or that having gun only armed hulls was out of choice.
” And we hope that the MMEA will able to cut down on the many types operated which entails follow on OPVs, NGPC and MSMSs rather than aged and worn out hulls with little or no commonality and which will not only increase the support footprint but will also be resource extensive ”
That is the long term plan
But for short term, they need every ship they can get their hands on. Something like the Lekiu, Kedah, and Keris LMS with their still young age can be a great addition to APMM fleet.
Consolidating the myriad old 20-25m and 30-40m boats will be the main cost reduction drive for APMM to 2040.
The many types of RIBs replaced by the superb RHFB design would also be the best move forward.
Simple dedicated Coast Guard OPVs with no complex electronics and engines is not resource intensive as compared to complex armed frigates or corvettes that needs constant updates not to be obsolete.
This is my alternative APMM PPSMM2040 plan, that ties in to my alternative TLDM Force Structure 2040 plan
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Gm30ifhbYAAjlr4.jpg
The NGPC2 is based on the DAMEN FCS4008 Patrol design, with 2,800nm range at max speed. Long range, with hull designed for unlimited sailing area means it can be used for offshore patrol if for any reasons the OPVs are unavailable.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GlQmGGXa4AM_m3a.jpg
@mofaz
“unless they have the help of local Traitors ..”
They dont, and arent, targeting full occupation of Johor. Just enough miles in to create an effective bulwark to station their forces over and to repel incoming opposing force. As for administering the land & people, well.. Crimea after Russian invasion was doing relatively well by the locals, with new infra right until Ukraine war started.
“Did we want to totally remove the causeway?”
Yes. The intention was to replace it with a flying bridge but it was the refusal of SG which caused the sensational proposal to built the well publicised ‘crooked bridge’ to connect their half of Causeway. We have Tuas crossing & upcoming RTS way but both are bridges so Causeway is the only sole land crossing between us.
“They knew that ages ago having been in conflict with Israel for a long time now.”
If they knew then their also partial to the genocide by subjecting their civvies & children as human meat shields and sacrificial offerings thru prolonging the one-sided ‘war’ for nearly 2 years. Optimistically I believe they expected IDF to run out of bombs & munitions in a few months after an intensive opening campaign, then withdrawing back after they ran out.
“2x ex USCG WMEC Reliance class”
IINM were only getting a single ship.
@ASM
“IDF kill ratio of 29:1 is against civilians.”
Once you ran out of combatants or not willing to commit them in a fight, who else are you going to use? The population obviously.
” Even if the MMEA was flushed with resources the RMN would still be patrolling the EEZ ”
I dont know how many times i need to remind you, nobody said otherwise. Why you keep repeating this when I did not even raise this issue.
GOWINDs and STM Turkiye Corvettes will still do peacetime constabulary patrols together with APMM, but as a secondary duty to its primary warfighting tasks.
… – “Why you keep repeating this when I did not even raise this issue”
Coming from you that’s very rich..
BTW I see fit to mention it because they way you make it sound is as if the RMN has no business patrolling the EEZ and I will repeat it again when you go off tangent and say things which are off…
… – “but as a secondary duty to its primary warfighting tasks”
Dear me, talk about obfuscation and shooting the wrong calibre. Earlier you brought on the cost effectiveness part when mention was on something else. Now you bring this up? Nobody says otherwise. What I have stressed repeatedly is that the RMN has both war and peace time roles, like most navies.
… – “Something like the Lekiu, Kedah, and Keris LMS with their still young age can be a great addition to APMM fleet”
“Great” for you but have you ever asked anyone in the MMEA on their thoughts, have you looked into the cons, have to factored in that the RMN is already facing ages related issues yet the magical thinking is that the MMEA won’t, etc, etc. Have it ever occurs to you that the MMEA if it has a choice will say “No” to more aged and worn out ships. If you bring up the issue of the decades old ex USCG hull again it was out of sheer necessity and just because the USCG with its resources has no issues with even older ships doesn’t mean it will be the same with the MMEA. Or will you self seervingly say again that “as, usual” others “don’t understand”..
“If they knew then their also partial to the genocide by subjecting their civvies & children as human meat shields and sacrificial offerings”
Same with Hezobollah, PLO, PFLP, PFLP-GC, Amal, Houthis, LTTE etc, etc.
“The intention was to replace it with a flying bridge but it was the refusal of SG which caused the sensational”
Im aware of that. My comments were in reference to your “This is also why we wanted to do away with Causeway”.
… – “That is the long term plan”
That is the cutrent plan which there’re trying to implement now and which will take a while. That’s why it is reluctant to get more aged and worn out maintenance extensive ships which will only place more strain on an already strained and limited shore support infrastructure. Things don’t with in a vacuum and what looks and sounds great on paper can differ in reality…
Yes I’m case you say the government should do this and that, every mothers son and his dog know that. Alas what the government says it will do and actually does can be profoundly diffrent. Perhaps write to your MP or launch a nationwide petition.
… – “As usual”
Touched a wrong nerve have I? Yes despite your denials, cherry picking, inumerable links and upper cases you have [you know it] a penchant for only looking at things from a very subjective perspective. Focusing as always on the pros as you see them but never the cons.
The “…” pot should not call the “Azlan” kettle black and claim that those who disagree “don’t understand”. Address the issue rather than engaging in yet more obfuscation. Play the ball, not the man.
ASM – “Could you provide more clues”
All a matter of public record. Thailand, Vietnam and Indonesia. Various other incidents which happened but were not made to the press.
Remind me again why i cannot speak up my mind about military matters here?
Why are you always keep replying no on behalf of the military here?
Just consider what i am writing here is totally of no concern at all to you, so you don’t have to bother replying.
” because they way you make it sound is as if the RMN has no business patrolling the EEZ ”
Where did i say so?
As always you keep putting your words in other peoples mouths.
… – “Simple dedicated Coast Guard OPVs with no complex electronics and engines is not resource intensive as compared to complex armed frigates or corvettes that needs constant updates not to be obsolete”
We’ve gone through this before, like many things. The picture you sell is overly optimistic. As stated before, even with the combat systems removed, aged and worn out ships will still require extra looking after so to speak. They have engines, generators, shafts, props, electrical systems, ventilation systems, etc, etc, which can and do break down. The MMEA is not the USCG and Father Christmas does not pay its bills.
In another post you spoke of “reality” well the “reality” is that the RMN is already having aged related issues which are not related to combat systems. Thus the notion that the MMEA will have no issues ls gagaland magical thinking. You claimed you look at both the pros and the cons. Well, not once have you ever addressed them, the modus operandi is to perienally gloss on all the plus points as you see them.
… – “Remind me again why i cannot speak up my mind about military matters here”
Save the rhetorics and sarcasm. Nobody and you damn well know it, ever said you can’t speak your “mind”. The issue is you taking exception to others who disagree and point out why…
Only last week you in a state of frustration said you won’t reply, now others shouldn’t reply because they don’t agree with you? If I recall some time ago you huffed and puffed and stated you were going into send exile after supposedly having comments blocked… Dear me, high opinion you have of yourself.
… – “Why are you always keep replying no on behalf of the military here”
You’re really the regurgitation king aren’t you? Nothing else to sing I suppose but the same tune. If you bothered to ask around or indulged on objective research you d know I’m not speaking on “behalf” of anyone. If anything they way you go on about things in a very subjective fevered minded manner without liking at things in totality and also the pros and cons [which you’d off course claim otherwise] once gets the impression you are the one talking on “behalf”.
Rich.
… – “As always you keep putting your words in other peoples mouths”
The “…” pot should not be calling the Azlan kettle black. As usual you obfuscate, go off tangent and have selective amnesia. BTW I could numerous examples going back years on you giving the impression that the RMN has no business patrolling the EEZ or performing other peacetime constabulary duties.
Joe “I think he meant the number of people we can feed into a war meat grinder like Hamas tried to do. Too late they found that IDF has an unending source of bombs & bullets.”
Well if it’s is a existential crisis war then yes we have plenty to throw into the meat grinder.
Also it’s not fair to compare SAF with IDF, IDF has a strong powerful lobbies on US congress, SAF don’t.
Also we are no hamas or iranian here. We aren’t anti American per say. America is afterall our largest export market. Nor we are poorfag as hulu seems to imply. SAF qualitative advantage that they pay through the nose is only a 10 years lead. Unless hulu get his way, MAF ain’t gonna fight with container mounted on civilians patrol boat nor gun mounted on a Hilux aren’t they?
Anyway just like with Greece and turkeye. No one really thinks that MY & SG gonna duke it out. Both got nothing to gain but plenty too lose particularly their export orientated economy.
” BTW I could numerous examples going back years on you giving the impression that the RMN has no business patrolling the EEZ or performing other peacetime constabulary duties ”
Then list them
I am not the one here who twists and turns other people statements.
You can say ” a little bit of everything and not enough of anything” on one topic, but immediately bash people that proposes enough submarines TLDM, or more OPVs for APMM for example.
I am pretty consistent over decades on what i want to see for malaysian defence on plenty of topics.
My only purpose to post here is to put out as many ideas as possible, no matter if it is taken or not, to improve the capability of malaysian armed forces. Also to highlight the wastes and inconsistencies like the helicopter leases.
Azlan on the other hand tries his utmost best to hinder it. So why is he here?
If i am not welcomed here, then tell me so.
Azlan,
I am aware we had clashes against boats from these countries, but the 2 cases you mentioned earlier on (1) Coastie got overpowered and kidnapped to the mainland (2) Guns pointed at Lynx weren’t covered, IIRC. The Vietnamese is taking a page from its Chinese counterpart on encroaching tactics it seems.
ASM.
1 Thailand.
2 Indonesia.
Zaft – “Anyway just like with Greece and turkeye. No one really thinks that MY & SG gonna duke it out”
FYI Greece and Turkey have come close to “ducking” it out and things at certain periods went very tense between Malaysia and Singapore.
… – “Azlan on the other hand tries his utmost best to hinder it. So why is he here”
Err. Disagreeing with what you say and explaining in detail means “hinder”? Since when? And who are you to ask why I’m here or anyone else for that matter?
… “My only purpose to post here is to put out as many ideas as possible”..
And the rest of us? We have neferious agendas? It’s fine to have opinions and proposals but they have to be line with reality, not just from a very subjective lens which overlooks the inconvenient parts. The purpose is to debate/discuss things and diagree when we have to, whilst also giving examples why we disagree. What most of us don’t do is to regurgigate things, have selected amnesia and give the impression others “don’t understand” because they diagree with certain things.
Just in case “…” indulges in selective amnesia, for his benefit I’ll lay it out again.
Subs are great and we should get more. They are not however a panacea or a wunderwaffe. Despite being “invisible” they can be effectively countered. Others have subs and they can deploy surface and air ASW assets along with mines, under water sensors and UUVs. The key lesson learnt from WW2 and exercises is that one doesnt need to physically destroy them but to prevent them from carrying out their tasks. It’s also often not subs alone but subs with other asset which deliver the results. As for fanboy gaga land notions of fighting China, in the event of troubles we might not even deploy our subs to the Spratlys as it will be crowded with other subs and like other assets subs need to be deployed in conditions as advantageous as possible.
Simplistic comparison were made with Vietnam and Singapore but it was explained why the RMN is in a different position. Also unless one indulges in magical thinking subs don’t operate in a vacum. They are resource extensive to support and require submariners who are resource and time extensive to train, plus wash rates can be high. Last but not least the number of subs we plan to buy is driven not just by funding but also the RMN to man and support them. The RMN lest it’s overlooked is a small and resourced strapped navy which also has other areas which need addressing.
Or am I “as usual” not “understanding” and “hindering”, as well as speaking on “behalf” again?
… – “My only purpose to post here is to put out as many ideas as possible”
No shit. And the rest of us : nefarious agendas? Again for the 100th time, an accurate view of things includes an objective, sobered, non fevered and realistic assessment of both the pros and cons. Not just the parts you like or the ones which fit in your narrative. Naturally you’ll deny this and claim otherwise.
… – “immediately bash people that proposes enough submarines TLDM, or more OPVs for APMM for example” ”
Something wrong with you? Nobody said we don’t need more subs or they have no utility. What I did say is that subs are not the wonder weapon you make them out to be. Others can counter them – examples were given. This has all be discussed to death, you have actual or selected self serving amnesia? On the
the MMEA, time and again I’ve explained in detail why it won’t want aged and worn out assets which even the RMN is having issues with and those issues are not confined to combat systems. You on the other hand will overlook the not so nice facts and only deal with the pros – despite your denials. And you have the gall to say others are putting words in your mouth?
… – “I am pretty consistent over decades”
Heavens forbid anyone here will not realise that. Want a part on the back or a song of praise?
Hulu “Azlan on the other hand tries his utmost best to hinder it. So why is he here?”
You are the one that wanted to play defence planners. Do you think in real life a defence planners just draw up his shopping list then send it and everyone else pat him at the back and says jobs well done, then praise them for being a genius?
Supposedly they have to justify it to plenty of others people be it at the services level, organizations level, mindef then MOF which then would seek approval from Min of Econ and then PMO. Then there’s always a possibility of other organisations, services or ministry apposing it.
That’s is how bureaucracy works and that how people insured any decisions made are the best decision they could make.
Zaft – ” SAF qualitative advantage that they pay through the nose is only a 10 years lead. Unless hulu get his way”
How did you gee that figure? It took years of planning, training, experimenting and other things to achieve what they have.
Zaft – “MAF ain’t gonna fight with container mounted on civilians patrol boat nor gun mounted on a Hilux aren’t they”
Unless you have a crystal ball [apparently some do given assumptions made], never say never. Prior to 2013 who would have thought that the MAF would have to deploy thousands of troops backed by airpower, arty and armour to deal with a small force of non state actors?
What can be done on paper and what actually will be done are very different things. Lots of things look good on spreadsheets and slides and links. Not to say that the MAF is infallible but by virtue of being the ones who do for a living what we discuss in the cyber world, know what they need and what works. As also pointed out, the MAF and decision makers also have to factor in a whole list of things which might not be apparent to us.
Also often overlooked is that the government drives policy, not the armed services. The government which decides what gets registered and approved for procurement and funding, the government which also changes priorities.
Azlan ”How did you gee that figure? It took years of planning, training, experimenting and other things to achieve what they have”
That’s like saying US has more planning, training, experimenting and experience then PLA. That’s maybe true but it’s not monetary in nature nor something you can put a dollar figures on.
Azlan “Unless you have a crystal ball [apparently some do given assumptions made], never say never”
You are the one that said we can’t plans for every single thing. What happened if tomorrow gojira appears?
@Zaft
“Well if it’s is a existential crisis war then yes”
Even if its existential, it behooves the powers & the military to evacuate civvies and help make them a passage thru as refugees or exiles to other countries/islands even to the destruction of themselves while defending the rakyat. This is what I expect from our military even if against a vastly superior superpower intending to destroy Malaysia. It is galling that Hamas who should be their protector, ran away and let Gazans take the bombs and killings.
“strong powerful lobbies on US congress, SAF don’t.”
Are you sure about that? SAF didnt become the region sole F35 operator by being cold neutral party as we had done so far. Yes its not to the extend as close as IDF with limitless supply of munitions and weapons, but their a preferred ally of USA.
“only a 10 years lead”
A constant 10 year lead is a lot if war between us were to break out anytime. Easily we have no chance of winning any battles if their plan comes well preplanned.
“Greece and turkeye. No one really thinks that MY & SG gonna duke it out”
Incomparable. Greece & Turk are NATO members with well known consequences if both were to ‘duke it out’. Thats why its also improbable they have invasion plans for each other. At most another proxy war in Cyprus.
We otoh dont have such policing, and afaik they still have their invasion plans for Johor.
Zaft – “You are the one that said we can’t plans for every single thing. What happened if tomorrow gojira appears?”
Whether it’s you falling in love with Calamity Jane or Elvis doing a concert in Genting, we can’t deal with every single threat. As explained to “…” there are threats we can realistically seal with and those we can’t.
This however has zero to do with my :
“never say never. Prior to 2013 who would have thought that the MAF would have to deploy thousands of troops backed by airpower, arty and armour to deal with a small force of non state actors”…
Zaft – “That’s like saying US has more planning, training, experimenting and experience then PLA”
Of tangent. All I said was that it took the SAF a long while to get to where it is now and I asked you where you got the 10 year figure.
Azlan “Of tangent. All I said was that it took the SAF a long while to get to where it is now and I asked you where you got the 10 year figure”
If you had bothered to check I already said it was in monetary figure through compounding of growth and then adjusting to PPP.
You are the one that goes around comparing apple with oranges by giving non monetary examples.
Joe “Are you sure about that? SAF didnt become the region sole F35 operator by being cold neutral party as we had done so far. Yes its not to the extend as close as IDF with limitless supply of munitions and weapons, but their a preferred ally of USA.”
Israel has a lobbies so powerful that US is supporting them at the cost of their own national interests. Would they do the same with SG? I hardly think so.
And SG is not US preferred allies, they the one that hold their hand up in the air and said notice me American senpai when Americans senpai clashed with Philippines chan. In general they have to be useful to the US for US to consider them in their calculation. Which was great for them then but now they have to pay the piper and have to follow US policy against China despite China is their main trading partner. If SG is unwilling there plenty other willing partners nowadays.
Also I won’t called a country who house Aussie only foreign military camp as being cold hard neutral party.
Plan is one thing having the equipment to do so is another. neither us or SG have the asset needed to hold an existential crisis protracted war. The numbers of asset one need to pull that off is along the line of SK or Poland. 50 Vs 100 tanks isn’t exactly enough. If anything in Ukraine those are the amount of assets destroyed in a monthly basis.
Zaft – “If you had bothered to check I already”
Hard to check many things you write because you’re all over the place and not coherent. I suspect I’m not the only one who thinks so.
Zaft – “Also I won’t called a country who house Aussie only foreign military camp as being cold hard neutral party”
We house the only permanent ADF presence abroad. Yet we are non aligned. The FPDA gives us some level of strategic ambiguity, meaning an aggressor has no way of knowing if an attack on us will lead to FPDA involvement irrespective that it’s not a bindibg pact.
Zaft – “You are the one that goes around”
Really now. I guess I should learn from you then.
Zaft – “And SG is not US preferred allies”
I don’t know where you get your information, the things you come up at times. Singapore officialy like us has no allies but since the 1990’s it has positioned itself and has been accepted as a major U.S. partner. Its the only one in the region cleared for the F-35, the only military which has almost full Interoperability with the U.S. military, was unenthusiastic about the pull out from Subic and Clark and offered to play host, spied alongside the U.S. and Australia on us and others, etc, etc. You really should look it up.
“Israel has a lobbies so powerful that US is supporting them”
Not Israel per se but the American Jewish lobby. Naturally they in turn would support the defence of Israel, but more than that this lobby is outsized financially influential as you know the Jews control global finances (Soros et al). SG has their own lobby too but more than that SG has proven to be a trustworthy partner to USA in this region and friendly relationship to Israel with close military/defence cooperation. Pinoy & Thai had too much instability with wild politico swings internally, and seasonal overtures to China (DU30 being latest) that made them less reliable to USA. Their also much poorer & susceptible to Chinese money influence.
While culturally SG is rather close to China, they & USA knows China cannot politically or economically influence SG politics to swing their way, they arent poor enough for Chinese infra projects (ie like Belt & Road) or risking to sell strategic assets to China (ie ports like Panama did), neither are they overtly supporting Chinas tech espionage (that shell company exporting Nvidia chips to them notwithstanding as it was done privately), with their unbroken stability unlikely to be changed (as we did) USA remains assured that SG politics are firmly with USA/Israel/Western for the foreseeable future. With regular stopovers, partnerships, exercises, as counterpart having training bases in USA, having 1st access to topline US weaponry, SG is clearly their preferred regional ally.
“who house Aussie only foreign military camp as being cold hard neutral”
That was an arrangement done prior to our neutrality stance as part of ASEAN. Mind you that base has little relations as they do their own things without seeking our cooperation and only share intel to us at their own discretion. We have friendly relationship with Aussie but just because were friends doesnt mean we will go to war for them. Some will say vice versa as well, esp if we do fight with SG.
“Plan is one thing having the equipment to do so is another”
You can betcha, unlike us, if SG has a plan they have the means to commit to it or at least have a solid plan & timeline to acquire such means. As I said, neither of us are looking to destroy each other, however they do have a first strike plan to “protect themselves” which includes invasion of Johor. This doctrine goes beyond reasonable self defence.
“That was an arrangement done prior to our neutrality stance as part of ASEAN”
It wasn’t. The non aligned part and the ASEAN connection came later.
“Mind you that base has little relations as they do their own things without seeking our cooperation”
The base is the home of HQ IADS which is the only permanent structure in the FPDA. It also support FPDA related stuff, i.e. exercises. What they do on their own, i.e. the base as transit stops, to support HADR and evacuation efforts [Tsunami and Cambodia], is all cleared with as part of the arrangement. Even upgrade works carried out on ADF facilities require our approval. As for Gateway, yes, a lot of stuff gained is shared only with the Five Eyes partners, but we do benefit from it too which is precisely why we’re happy with it.
“We have friendly relationship with Aussie but just because were friends doesnt mean we will go to war for them”.
Quite obviously but the FPDA gives strategic ambiguity, one reason we and Singapore are still more than happy with jt. Its not a binding pact but aggressors will have to factor in that other partners [one NATO and both AUKUS] might back us, directly or indirectly for the simple reason that it’s within their national interests.
“Not Israel per se but the American Jewish lobby”
Both.. The special relationship cane after the 1967 war and was driven by Cold War sttrafegic expediency plus realpolitik. Not only did the Jewish lobby in America played a part but also Cold War calculations. Israel was a Western democtstic western nation in a region where the Soviets had a presence and various Arab socialist stages were Soviet friendly.
“Pinoy & Thai had too much instability with wild politico”
Maybe but never underestimate the America and Philippines relationship. It’s written in blood, part of the nation and collective pysche. American and Filipino troops shed blood together in WW2 and Korea. During the Cold War quite a few Air America pilots which flew ops over Taiwan and Indonesia [at one point rebels received American aid], were Filipino. Today there are VA facilities in the Philippines.
Azlan “was unenthusiastic about the pull out from Subic and Clark and offered to play host, spied alongside the U.S. and Australia on us and others, etc, etc. You really should look it up.”
unenthusiastic? More like they got a boner when they saw that opportunity and they took advantage of it in a heartbeat. Which was great deal for them back then. Not so much now.
Joe “You can betcha, unlike us, if SG has a plan they have the means to commit to it or at least have a solid plan & timeline to acquire such means.”
They don’t have the number of ground assets needed for it. One cannot realistically occupied another country by force with just 100 tanks. I mean both the Russians and Ukrainians are losing hundred of tanks per month.
Not to mention like the situation Ukraine currently face. SG kinda needed the “OTP” from uncle Sam to use their jet.
Joe “Pinoy & Thai had too much instability with wild politico swings internally, and seasonal overtures to China”
Again There’s no such thing as permanent friends just permanent interest. Technically Thai and pinoy are the more stable one here as They act in honest to their own national interest.
For example. Th don’t have any beef with china, in fact they kinda enjoyed the rise of the Chinese. PH meanwhile has a territorial problem with china, even during the peak of du30 period the relationship still are very strong.
Meanwhile We like ID are worried if the Chinese can control the SLC then well be cut off from the oil rig revenues. Thus The idea that we even ID would stay cold hard neutral at the risk of losing our O&G revenues is laughable really. I’m not saying we gonna go and gain capabilities to work alongside uncle Sam on a highly undeniable situation. All I’m saying we are we gonna do our best to make sure USN capable of operating in this region.
The fact that both SG close neighbour are useful for Uncle Sam’s china agenda is why I think the likelihood of SG getting the OTP to wage war against their closest neighbour is pretty much zero to none.
Zaft – “More like they got a boner when they saw that opportunity”
Nosense. It was because they were worried that the pull out would affect the regional status quo. It came from Lee Kuan Yew himself..
Zaft – “They don’t have the number of ground assets needed for it. One cannot realistically occupied another country by force with just 100 tanks”
? They don’t have the “number of ground assets”? The SAF probably has more armour and heavy arty than the MAF and TNI combined. Also they don’t seek to occupy anyone – what they seek is buffer zones if they have to and even than it’s not permanent. Lastly comparisons with Ukraine are silly. Ukraine is the 2nd largest in Europe. The front is about 1500knm long so obviously force density levels will be much less in comparison to the Malay peninsular which is much smaller and narrower.
Zaft – ” Technically Thai and pinoy are the more stable one here as They act in honest to their own national interest”
?
Zaft – “Meanwhile We like ID are worried if the Chinese can control the SLC then well be cut off from the oil rig revenues”
What? Both countries are dependent on free access to the world’s shipping lanes due to the need for imports and exports for which their survival and economic well being is so dependent on. It goes way beyond “oil rigs”.