SHAH ALAM: ON August 22, Slovakian company – Konstrukta Defence – announced that its truck mounted EVA M2 6X6 SPH has completed its first shooting tests. It also said the vehicle also successfully completed the first non-shooting tests for vertical grade, trench and climb rate. It is interesting to note that Konstrukta call the same SPH as BIA and EVA M2 on its website. The EVA truck mounted SPH is the 8X8 variant.
The release (which was translated from Slovakian to English via Google:
Another milestone in the EVA M2 6×6 program
The company KONŠTRUKTA-Defence, a.s. is gradually completing the cannon qualification process in the next segment of its artillery portfolio.Modernized 155mm 52 cal. The EVA M2 6×6 self-propelled artillery system has completed its first shooting tests with a focus on the strength and stability of the object.
EVA M2 6×6 also successfully completed the first non-shooting tests for vertical grade, trench and climb rate.
It is interesting to note that the SPH – which was selected by the Finance Ministry for the Army SPH requirements – has just completed its first shooting tests. In contrast the Caesar SPH chosen by the Army was a prototype in 1997. Furthermore, according to the release, the truck based SPH – on a Tatra 6X6 chassis had only completed its first vertical grade, trench, and climb rate tests.
The release justified the Army’s objection to the selection of the SPH as it does not meet its requirements. Moreover, it is a prototype which means that we will be the first user of the 6X6 variant, if the Madani government goes ahead with the procurement. MOF chose the Eva even though PMX had stated that the government will listen to the military in procurement decisions. I
The BIA/EVA M2 prototype camouflage looks similar enough to the Malaysian Army digital camo (as seen from the comparison above). I know it is not the same, but this could be easily retouched. One wonders whether it will be done when they shipped the prototype here to Malaysia for further tests or delivery.
— Malaysian Defence
Seem like the military had used the words *against MOF decision twice before. Once for the Turkish SPH while another for the gowinds.
And both time we knew it’s not really MOF decisions to acquire such and such but rather the sitting menhan.
It seem like a code word
It is never the sitting menhan when it involved things above RM500 million.
Why did MOF choose the EVA?…lower cost? Or because Caesar will take longer delivery because of Ukraine war?
What are the requirements for it to be suitable for the army. IMO the Eva sph is pretty standard, nothing special.
None officially, what is being bandied cannot be posted here.
It is not standard; it has automatic loading which is not a requirement. One of the requirements is that the offered SPH is not a prototype.
I know the army have preference for wheeled sph. But what was the reason for the not considering of tracked sph?
Which might offer better protection overall
The tracked SPH was the M109, which will be part of the brigade with PT91 MBT. They decided to forego the tracked requirements during PH time stating that the offered M109 were too old. Other things cannot be discussed in an open forum.
Despite this the tracked SPH requirement remained in the books.
I think they should have a new competition. There are more and mature options now.
Based on the selection of the Eva M2 and earlier, Yavuz, another competition will see the same result as before. Two times they tried to buy the truck-mounted SPH, both had unproven SPH selected by the higher ups.
This wheeled sph will be part of which brigade?
Aren’t they supposed to follow closely behind the armoured division to provide artillery support at rear? Or the same as the astros since both are wheeled base?
They will be divisional asset actually, as we do not have enough SPH to go around as most of the RAD unit. As reported previously half of them will be placed in Sabah. Astros comes under the Markas Medan Barat.
The M109 was different as they are tracked vehicles so it will be better for them to be placed in an all armoured brigade. That said the support vehicles are mostly wheel vehicles.
@Tom Tom
The only wheels SPH that i think the best contender apart from Caesar is ATMOS 2000. But yeah…
There’s no guarantees that either the adnan and kifv would be replaced by another track vehicles.
Out of topic. Did we already received Oshkosh HEMTT that US donate to us?
So the does the Madani government doing “sembang2 kopitiam”? Government (Anwar, the PM and Finance Minister) stated that the government will listen to the military in procurement decisions.
This could be a repeat of LCS where the end user did not get what they wanted due to ‘unknown’ reasons. Someone should inform the YDPA regarding this issue.
Though it is also partly the Army’s fault due to, as reported by Marhalim, “The committee had forwarded its recommendation of the Caesar with Eva as the second choice”, in which the Army should not put the EVA as a second choice and should let the second choice empty
No, they must present a second choice, as that is part of the procurement process.
No idea really.
Luqman “This could be a repeat of LCS where the end user did not get what they wanted due to ‘unknown’ reasons.”
Technically speaking, the madani gomen is the one that decide to do G2G exclusively with turkeye and turkeye only and no one else and decided on the Ada. So In general the madani apple doesn’t really fall that’s far from the UMNO tree that decide on the gowinds a decade earlier.
Having said that to be fair to the bean counter & madani gomen . The eva did not technically fail the army evaluation nor that MY unlike the PH banned the acquisition of *prototype and generally speaking in lots of develop states, be it turkeye,SK,UK,OZ etc etc The military did not get to choose the exact made of what eventually get procured.
” Someone should inform the YDPA regarding this issue”
That’s just open a huge can of worms really. It’s the age old question of Whether HM the king could exercise HM absolute executives power as ordained by God or that HM The king must always support the civilian government policies regardless because of convention and democratic principle.
Caesar to M109 to Yavuz to Caesar to Eva. Why does it sound like a football commentary of passing balls? Oh wait because it is!
At this rate of cancels & changes, the next one should already call for an RCI enquiry on this procurement.
@Luqman
“Army should not put the EVA as a second choice”
In life, like everything else, not always one can get the best choice so if a 2nd (or 3rd) choice is the only viable option, its better to go for rather than waiting for the ‘ideal’ option to fall. Its because of waiting for ‘the best’ option that we are still waiting for so many years…
Caesar is the de facto first choice no doubt..most proven and matured platform out of the lot..reasonable pricetag compared to what they can offer..but hey if the army is okay with second,third choice (or maybe they are forced to pick other than their first choice) what can we do
EVA offsets is publicly unknown but is it so “nationally interesting”, wonder what are those offerings.
I think it is likely that the off-set involved technology transfer where the truck chassis is mated to the cannon and its automatic loading turret locally and of course support and maintenance.
And of course, the obligatory export license.
EVA, on paper, appears to be a good option vs the similar Archer but then again Archer didnt get that many external orders and its telling there must be a reason why self loading SPH arent being offered to market by other makers.
@Firdaus
“army is okay with second,third choice”
I dont think they are, its quite clear what they want and that they are okay to “wait a bit longer for other options to get cancelled”.
Luqman – ”Though it is also partly the Army’s fault due to, as reported by Marhalim, “The committee had forwarded its recommendation of the Caesar with Eva as the second choice”, in which the Army should not put the EVA as a second choice and should let the second choice empty”
Sorry but this is pure and utter nonsense. End users have to give the first and second choice. If the first choice can’t happen for whatever reason then consideration is placed on the second choice.
”again Archer didnt get that many external orders and its telling there must be a reason why self loading SPH arent being offered to market by other makers.”
There’s a great article on automatic systems in the Wavell Room. Archer is expensive andcan’t fit into a C-130; that’s turned many away.
Qamarul – ” IMO the Eva sph is pretty standard, nothing special.”
Ok but then share what you think is ‘special” and why eva is ”standard”. Eva is different merely because it’s fully automatic. That’s it. Nobody said it was ”special”. Putting aside the fact that the army has no need of automatic system; I know that if I was an artilleryman I’d rather be inside a protected cab rather than be exposed in the open.
Tom Tom – ”There are more and mature options now.”
Really? Like what? What’s more ”mature” than Archer, Caesar and other systems [not all being considered?
“Archer is expensive”
Doesnt mean that other systems cannot be cheaper. However the lack of uptake for self loaders and for some reason they arent more popular is also the reason why its expensive.
“if I was an artilleryman”
Like if I were a soldier I rather not be at the frontline risking to kill the enemy first, but you know the Generals think otherwise. Same same.
It’s precisely because we don’t have mass that arty should be a brigade rather than divisional asset. Having it a divisional asset is a recipe for ensuring that it gets parcelled out in penny packets and not being where they’re needed; when they’re needed. Same goes with UASs, loitering munitions and radar.
Apart from mass, the reason artillery is a divisional asset is due to the fact that this has been the way since the British time. As usual our military are very conservative when it comes to its formation.
“…the off-set involved technology transfer where the truck chassis…”
“…obligatory export license.”
Looks like nothing surprising on bundle things to come along with EVA together with the license to export “made in Malaysia SPH”. If this SPH is really being bought for TD, it is again in line with “an asset not same with neighbours”.
Marhalim – ”As usual our military are very conservative when it comes to its formation.”
Indeed. We’ve hardly made much organisational changes; much TOEs remain the same. Having things at divisional level is great – on paper – in peacetime; as it makes administration and logistics easier. The problem is that it’s centralised; with the penalties that come with it. Same with UASs and loitering munitions; as pointed out to ‘…’; ”decentralisation” is the name of the game. As reason why they’ve been so effective in the Ukraine is because they are decentralised; operated at brigade, battalion, company and platoon level.
As an asset not same with the neighbours, its not something that the Army had requested.
”Like if I were a soldier I rather not be at the frontline risking to kill the enemy first”
If that were the case I wouldn’t have joined the army. If I had a phobia of the sea and dolphins; I wouldn’t have become a fisherman.
“If that were the case”
Its just a counterpoint that what the real users (ie foot soldiers) would like can be totally different than what the decisionmakers (ie generals) would like. The requirement doesnt have autoloader and armoured cab, but your artymen would rather have it. So how would you justify a good decision, one that follows the real users? One that suits the generals whom came out these requirement sans armoured cab?
“What’s more ”mature” than Archer, Caesar and other systems”
M109. Ageing like fine wine since 1960s.
“ensuring that it gets parcelled out in penny packets”
Do we foresee ourselves in a battle/war where we need the firepower from an entire brigade of heavy arty? Perhaps the planners dont think so. Mind you we also need to split whatever we buy half to S&S.
“great – on paper – in peacetime”
Fact is, ours is an army living in peacetime. Sure its a disadvantage when a looming war is coming soon, but its a question to take at that time if the armed forces could reorg into a warfighting outfit.
”Do we foresee ourselves in a battle/war where we need the firepower from an entire brigade of heavy arty? ”
Unless we’re faced with another counter insurgency situation where we need 4 guns which are sometimes split in 2 gun troops. Also; I was referring to a regiment’s worth of guns; not a ”brigades” worth.
”Perhaps the planners dont think so.”
It’s not that they ”don’t think so” but a matter of being pressured to ensure the capability is spread out; i.e. 10 Cougars in Penang and 2 in Labuan.
”Mind you we also need to split whatever we buy half to S&S.”
Aware of that thank you. Also aware of the reason but ultimately if faced with certain operational conditions; having things in penny packets does not result in the desired capability needed.
”Fact is, ours is an army living in peacetime”
Thanks for pointing that out but I was merely stating that having something at divisional level has penalties. Aware that being on a peacetime footing determines what we do but this does not change the fact that organisational changes are needed if we’re to get the most optimum for what we have; operationally.
”So how would you justify a good decision”
I’ll leave that to you to figure out. I’m interested in the operational factors.
”but its a question to take at that time if the armed forces could reorg into a warfighting outfit.”
It’s not something which happens over night or something which can be implemented fast. Armies need to [as far as possible] train as they would fight and be organised in peacetime they way they would during war.
“optimum for what we have; operationally.”
Well again, we are optimised for peacetime operation (an economy driven armed forces), hence operationally were organised to save cost rather than effective warfighting. I dont think theres anything wrong esp if we havent fought a war in ages and Id like to think that we could quickly reorg into a warfooting when it comes, but I guess we will cross that bridge once we arrive but not then.
“does not result in the desired capability needed.”
If its to fight a peer war against opponents with arty too, then nope it doesnt. But if its to bombard entrenched insurgents that could not fire back, then even a couple penny packet units will suffice. Operationally then, which of the threat do we see more real happen?
“I’ll leave that to you to figure out.”
To me its who calls the shot counts. The decisionmakers & beancounters whom holds the pursestrings. Endusers (artymen) will have the micro view, how the equipment works best for them. But the generals will have the macro view, how suited the equipment performs even if its less enduser friendly.
“organised in peacetime they way they would during war.”
This I disagree, unless we have the resources, money & manpower to constantly be on high alert, train on frequent regular basis to react, that includes more bases & troop movement prepositioned to act, more drills & exercises, etc. Basically a team cannot be on crisis management mode forever. During training they need to rapidly convert into warfighting mode, and during peacetime able to operate at optimum cost.
@Zaft, @joe, @Azlan
I could see two situations here
First, Army wanted the Ceaser but is also ‘fine’ having EVA as 2nd option being chosen
Second, Army only wanted Ceaser but ‘forced’ to put a 2nd option because of our procurement system (just for sake of following the system) even though Army ‘don’t even want’ EVA at all
Currently it shows more leaning on the second situation because Army sent out an objection to the EVA, which also meant Army only wanted the Ceaser did not get what they wanted, or else why would they sent out an objection?
“That’s just open a huge can of worms really.”
Then just open it then regardless have worms or not
“Technically speaking, the madani gomen is the one that decide to do”
Technically speaking, considering circusmstances surrounding LCS built by a local company, did RMN objected that decision (at least publically) to procure through G2G and built by the OEM in a foreign country? So far many seems indicated that RMN is ‘fine’ with that decision. Well, time will tell.
No, Eva was never in the mix, it is just put as the second option as they have to do so.