View Comments (61)

• Talks about Hercs is much ado about nothing. With the A400M we wont see the need to add more Herc in the foreseeable future. Low mileage or not, these are old Hercs so unlikely we will do extensive upgrading like rebuilding to J spec. Any future upgrades will be to keep in current standards with improved aviation requirements. I dont see them being heavily used either, with TUDM preferring to rake mileage into A400M fleet instead.

  • No, if the mission calls for Hercules or something smaller like CNs but it is not available, RMAF will use the Charlies as it is cheaper to fly them. Regional missions like the one to Myanmar, a directive from MKN, they have to used the A400Ms as it is faster.

• That is by far, a great value for money.

  A brand new C-130J costs upwards of USD70 million each.

  Also to compare, the USD9 million price for 4x C-130H is significantly lower than the original cost of leasing four used blackhawks for PUTD.
  https://www.malaysiandefence.com/lima-2023-contracts-army/

  If we are planning to use something for 10-15 years, going for used is a practical option.

  It will cost very little to outright buy used blackhawks for PUTD for example.

  For TLDM ASW helicopter requirement, we can get used SH-60J to use for 10-15 years as now US Navy has already started planning for brand new Seahawk replacement. Japan already has approvals to transfer used military items to Malaysia, and SH-60J could be one of the items to be had. Japan is looking at offering Asian countries such equipment free of charge to enhance defense cooperation.
  https://www.my.emb-japan.go.jp/itpr_en/newinfo_10102024.html

  https://t.co/bGyYOTaiqv

  • There is also a roundabout way to get Sea Hawks in Malaysia. Defence News has reported that OZ will have around 36 Romeos in service by 2026 but only a small number of ships to carry them. Perhaps getting the Romeos based in Butterworth with TDY in Labuan would be a good way to get the RMN much needed experience to fly and maintain Seahawks.

• You cannot convert a H model into J. But you can upgrade them to a level arguably better standard than the basic J.

  Glass cockpit screens, SATCOM, DIRCM, 8 bladed propellers etc can be added to the H model.

  https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FgCsBs2UcAA2LtK.jpg

  Also we have extensive resource.and knowledge to support and sustain the C-130 indefinitely locally in-country. Combined with plenty of flying hours left with our C-130Hs, at least the newer half of the fleet (mid 90s vintage), we should be able to fly our C-130H to at least 2060.

  Many of our neighbours, including Singapore has C-130 in their active fleet that is more than 60 years old (Singaporean oldest Herc, 720 is 67 years old this year)

  TUDM youngest are around 30 years old (1995), and the oldest around 49 years old (1976). If we use ours as long as what RSAF is using them, our oldest is good up to 2040+, the youngest to 2060+

• Even doing away with the CN-235s for the light transport roles has issues. A few are still available for that though. There are times only a single pallet needs to be lifted in a whole C-130.

  The A400Ms are a major improvement because they came with various fancy high tech things but all those things require maintenance and support equipment. The C-130 doesn't or even if it does; on a much lower level.

• Using factor of 3, RAN would have 12 operational on board of its ships from the 36 overall they have. RNZN is also looking at retiring their Seasprites very soon, so if RAN have any extra, their 1st priority is probably to support RNZN rather than TLDM.

  Alos they have quite a few ships to have those Romeos on board, From the Canberra-class LHD, to the Hobart-class destroyer and the future Hunter-class ASW Frigate. So they probably don't have excess available even with the 36 strong fleet.

  Other options for used are the US Navy own excess stocks.
  https://www.twz.com/26395/the-navy-has-dozens-more-mh-60r-helicopters-than-it-needs-due-to-lcs-debacle

  But IMO the cheapest, probably free option is to go for ex-JMSDF SH-60Js. They have around 90 retired and has been mostly replaced with the SH-60K with japan's own proprietary larger airframe/cabin. But there are still a few handful SH-60J operational, and they were shown to TLDM personnel recently both in japan and during JMSDF Frigate visit to Malaysia.
  https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Gkmwua9bkAMFERj.jpg

• ... - "If we are planning to use something for 10-15 years, going for used is a practical option"

  In principle yes but we can't assume everything. What will need immediate replacing at the time of transfer or will need replacing in the near future? How much will operting costs and post flight maintenance increase as the used and aged platforms get older?

  Various things have to be looked at...

• Again getting used military equipment is the same as getting and old (more than 10 years old car) it's expensive to run, not particularly safe (drive shaft may break during high speed cornering sending you to the ditch) nor particularly reliable (won't start on one morning when you really need to get to work for a really important meeting)

  you are not going to use the old car as long as a new car and eventually you do need to buy new car. Since you would eventually need to buy a new car. What exactly is the purpose of these interim jerry rig solutions rather than just buying one now?

• At times buying used has its advantages but one has to be extremely selective. One also can't assume that just because another user has no issues that it applies to everyone. Different users have different priorities and different budgets.

  No point getting used and achieving short term savings if in the long run spares cost a lot or if it is not suited for ones requirements. If it suits requirements and is cost effective in the long run and is not used as an excuse to further delay other things then uers; per owned is the way to go.

• "if the mission calls for Hercules"
  Of course if only the Hercs could do it no choice then. But by largely TUDM now prefers to use A400M, this is evident by being hailed for raking in record mileage by any user.

  • Nope, again RMAF prefers the Hercules as it is cheaper to fly and maintain them as all the problems with them have been solved in all these years by other operators. Unlike the A400M which we are still finding out the cost of flying them as reported previously.

    It is the same with the Hornets and Flankers. The Hornets' problems are well known and can easily be fixed unlike the Flankers as we found out in the last few years.

• With current trade war, Uncle Sam may just want us get more US products... hahaha