SHAH ALAM: IN my post Five Things We Are Getting in RMK11, it was stated that the Deftech MRAP/AV4 would also likely to make the list. And unofficially it has been confirmed that the Army is getting the Thai-designed vehicle.
In my original report, I called the vehicle as Deftech MRAP but I was informed recently that Deftech had renamed as the AV4.
Janes is now reporting that “Thai firm Chaiseri Metal & Rubber has won a contract from the Malaysian government to supply 4×4 multipurpose armoured vehicles to the Malaysian Army, it has been confirmed to IHS Jane’s . The contract represents one of Thailand’s largest known military export programmes.
Karn Hirankul, general director of Chaiseri, said on 7 September that the on-order vehicles would be modified versions of Chaiseri’s 4×4 ‘First Win’ vehicle, which is in operation by the Royal Thai Army and Thailand’s Ministry of Justice’s Department of Special Investigation. In Malaysia the vehicles will be known as AV4.. The full story here.
Of course, Janes was following up on the story which first appeared back here, which originally came out in 2013 but was updated on Aug 27, 2015! Regular reader D.W posted that story in the comments section.
As everyone here remained tight-lipped about the contract, I guess we have to take the word of the Thai fellow for the time being. But since Janes is reporting about the contract, I guess I will not be accused of making up stories.
If confirmed, it will likely see the end of the effort Pindad to sell its Anoa 6X6 APC to the Army.
So what about the offset deal? As I had reported previously, Malaysian made M4 Carbines. But what about Colt LLC bankruptcy then? Not much really as the new company will of course backed the Malaysian-Thai deal.
The only fly in the ointment is the Malaysian ringgit slide…
— Malaysian Defence
If you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment
View Comments (32)
First of 6 AV4 will be send to Malaysian Army from Chaiseri and the other will be manufactured at Deftech. The same as AV8 Gempita were manufactured at Deftech.
Marhalim,
I am confused.
Many years ago (probably 10), Deftech reportedly developed its own 4x4. This apparently looked 'like the Belgian Iguana vehicle'.
What happened to that.....and why are we buying from the Thais, when we can buy our own?
Reply
The answer is simple, they got no buyers for the AV4 but they got it for the MRAP
I've been wet dreaming of MRAP for our boys, looks like its coming true!!!!! Though, I just hoped that there are no delays in the deliveries...
What is the difference between IMV and MRAP?
Just semantics?
The Australian and Dutch Bushmasters are called IMV.
Don't worry, got it.
MRAP are just a type of IMV.
..and the plan to transform the 1st Infantry Brigade into an armored brigade? Is it still in the plan or has it been scapped as well now due to falling RM? Might be wrong but the current situation seems to dislodge the idea of any additional tank regiment..
How many would be bought?
Would this be a replacement for the condor, or additional buy not related to the condors? One capability that the mrap lack compared to the condors is the amphibious capability.
Maybe the we can mix between first win and first win E which is smaller for special ops use.
Reply
AFAIK there will be only one version of the Deftech MRAP to be produced
Are the MRAPs meant to supplement the AV8 Gempita? I really love to know the planned makeup of the formations of both of them. Sure hope that we can fastrack it for our men in Lebanon and other peacekeping missions.
Marhalim, do you know how many AV8s already in service?
Reply
No idea yet to all of your questions.
Does Deftech actually have a proper RnD activity? Up until now, are they still incapable of conducting a proper study to develop our own platform? They already have the experience in manufacturing the Adenan and Gempita, should they not already have the knowledge in ballistic sciences, tracked and AWD system? Seeing them do this kind of contract is sad. After a few years, they would need to replace these machines and a new platform would be chosen. It really shows lack of forward thinking and continuity in our Armed Forces.
Of course, the usual excuse would be that it's cheaper. But developing our own system is an investment for the future. Because it will only require minor upgrades later to suit the industry's future needs. Of course, developing major platforms like a tank or an SPH is a rather long shot (but not impossible), but we should start small, like developing an IMV platform for the current need with the platform being able to cater the needs for the battlefield in the next 20 years (For example, the platform should be in concordance with the Armed Forces future acquisition plans like maybe an LHD, Long haul tactical airlifter etc.).
But of course, it all comes down to our politics. If we want to be a developed country, we should start developing our own technology. The government is the biggest investor in a country, as shown by Keynesian economics, so they should consider investing into something like this as well.
Reply
We are a developing nation, with limited resources. Even our national car is floundering.