SHAH ALAM: After a four-year hiatus, Imdex Asia 2023, returns hosting 250 participating companies from 25 countries/regions, at the Singapore Changi Exhibition Centre from May 3 to 5. Malaysian Defence was however unable to attend the show due to reasons.
However, thanks to the kind nature of defence journalist Dzirhan Mahadzir, who is attending the show, we have a selection of pictures from the show. Among them is a scale mode of the Israeli Navy Sa’ar 6 corvette, which three out of four are in service. The corvette is a Kedah class on steroids.
From Wikipedia:
The Sa’ar 6 has a displacement of almost 1,900 tons at full load and is 90 m (295 ft 3 in) long. It is armed with an Oto Melara 76 mm main gun, two Typhoon Weapon Stations, 16 vertical launch cells for Barak-8 surface-to-air missiles, 40 cells for the C-Dome point defence system, 16 anti-ship missiles Gabriel V, the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR AESA radar, and two 324 mm torpedo launchers. It has hangar space and a platform able to accommodate a medium class SH-60-type helicopter
Naval Group was also present at the show showing a scale model of its City-class mine-counter-measures (MCM) vessel.
In May 2019, the Belgium Naval & Robotics consortium, comprising Naval Group and ECA Group (now known as Exail, was awarded a €2bn ($2.4bn) contract to deliver 12 MCMVs, six each for the Belgian and Netherlands navies as part of the naval mine countermeasure capability replacement programme.
Pan European missile firm, MBDA, is also taking part in Imdex, showcasing its various missiles and other capabilities to customers and prospective ones.
And expected home-grown Singapore Technologies also took part in the show. It is show-casing its various product including the Vanguard 130 multi-role combatant. The Vanguard 130 may well be the preview of the six Multi-Role Combat Vessel (MRCV), the first one to be in service with the RSN in 2028.
— Malaysian Defence
Devils Advocate: LMS2 might as well go for Saar6 since our appetite for NAVAL stuff are soured by LCS fiasco and Scorpene subs that cannot dive.
Any close-up of the container on the edge of the heli deck of that Sa’ar 6 model?
The Sa’ar 6 corvette is designed for a very specific mission against very specific adversaries.
The ship cost about USD480 million each.
I think they showing the new C-DOME launcher and mission modules which IAI is promoting currently for other ships that does not have them currently
on IMDEX
looks very likely that the future Singaporean MRCV Frigate would be a customized version of the Iver Huitfeldt / Type 31 frigates, and not a design from ST Marine.
https://www.edrmagazine.eu/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/IMDEX-Singapore-MRV_01.jpg
@hulubalang
“The ship cost about USD480 million each.”
RM 2Bil for a ship that appears to be more heavily armed than our LCS – which could likely cost as much as 2Bil as well – doesn’t sound all that unreasonable. If need to save, we could partially armed it; load half the VLS spot, half the ASM, remove the CIWS, etc.
Like us, new ships, even for ST Marine is a big hill to climb. One need continuous shipbuilding even civil ones to develop new ones. At least they acknowledge it albeit in a roundabout way.
French stuff are expensive because it used a lot of customised unique parts due to desire to keep productions, technology, employments & know-how locals while Germany arms manufacturers use commercial off the shelf parts. German are an industrial behemoths on itself, so they can source locally most of the parts for others that they don’t manufacturers they have no a problem sourcing internationally. The Saar 6 is a fine example of German value proposition compared to similarly priced gowind.
But french stuff despite expensive are standalone and would allow some countries to circumvent the US hegemony. Allowing them a bit more sovereignty to US ‘advice’ which could go as far as what 5G equipment you could have.
SG with MRCV continued on their existing cooperation with the North sea States since the North sea states face the same geographical, political & military challenges. Help the US to contained the Russian’s Baltic’s fleet for both US & own security & be useful enough to the US that they have some say in shaping US policy so they can trade with Russia (then Soviet) which intertrade, interdependency & balance of power allows for coexistence all throughout the cold war all the way till last year.
But then again all of the above are advanced, matured & stable countries whose decision is consistent as minister always act on advice of the burocrat made to prioritize national interest rather than ours politicians heavy handed approach which jump from one extreme to the others resulted in inconsistencies being the only consistent.
we just ain’t gonna have a continuous shipbuilding policy if we keep jumping all around all over the place. The desire to fully import LMS2 is a fine example of us jumping around doing the same thing we did with the gagah back then rather than more meko with BNS or continues on with local production of f2000.
@Zaft
“allow some countries to circumvent the US hegemony”
One could try but if ever were to get into a tiff with USA, one call to the French President and the French will gladly give Uncle Sam whatever technical & performance capabilities of their equipment sold to that nation.
“all of the above are advanced, matured & stable countries whose decision is consistent”
Indeed, it didn’t matter if the Govt changes every few years but the program continues. UK’s QE carrier project from start of concept to operational had seen a series of Govt changes and even a bigger plethora of new PMs but it (and many other defence programs) survives the political pettiness of change. Here everytime we change Govt, everything, every decision, change 180degrees, no better showcased than the on-off-on-off-terus-masuk-longkang SPH program. How to make any meaningful progress when we end up standing still?
Zaft – “rather than more meko with BNS or continues on with local production of f2000”
As has been explained to you there are reasons why we won’t work with the German Naval Group anymore or for that matter BAE Systems. Also, does BAE Systems still market the 1990’s vintage Frigate 2000? Think …
As for inconsistent policy; by and large with some minor exceptions different government’s have stayed the course and I can provide multiple examples.
– With the SPHs for the vast majority of the time Caesar was the army’s main choice and the political favorite.
-The M-109 was selected because it was politically expedient and the new government cancelled it because it could as part of a politically driven cost cutting measure which it couldn’t with the Little Birds without incurring a huge penalty.
-Yavuz was selected because like many things it was part of the patronage system and was cancelled ostensibly because it didn’t go through a transparent tender but may yet
re-enter the scene.
Sa’ar class got a navalised Iron Dome. Just wow, combination of aster & mica too. The Israelians are the most intelligent ppl in the world. Well apart from that two states conundrum, the zionist deep state, the normal people just strive to do things out of the box. No wonder pinoy buys from them. Cost as much as our own LCS. One question, how did they got Kedah’s hull rights? Hmm
Joe “One could try but if ever were to get into a tiff with USA, one call to the French President and the French will gladly give Uncle Sam whatever technical & performance capabilities of their equipment sold to that nation.”
French equipment are for those looking into a bit more freedom of action from uncle Sam and not to be used to fight uncle Sam or her allies & patner. Seem like a perfect fit for Indian & Indonesian who are committed to neutrality to the point of accepting less wealth & go for mostly domestic consumption based economy with high degree of food security.
For us whose have an export base economy with low degree of food security, we relied too much on the USN that we aren’t capable of being neutral. But unlike PH & SG which is useful to US as they provide basing. We don’t have any card to pull when dealing with the US. Then we go around buying french stuff and paid 200% more for similar capabilities that the german & US can provide but don’t have the foundation to be neutral either. We are basically neither here nor there. Not because we lack strategic vision but that strategic vision objective & effectiveness is compromised when politicians just do whatever they want.
If we relied on the US for our security & prosperity then there’s no point in immitating Indian & Indonesian localisation which seek to learn building weapons from A to Z & making most if not all of its components. It enough to just have a final assembly point or be involved in the US & friends supplies chain. Being involved in US leads supply chain is what make German weapons so cost competitive compared to the French. So going around turning what essentially an APC into an IFV like the gempita doesn’t actually achieved anything. We don’t buy enough, we in troubles like Ukraine would depend on foreign resupplies. So why learn building an IFv from scratch in the first place? Wouldn’t the atlas approach be better suited as in exchange to risk taking we get to be part of airbus supplies chains?
Azlan “why we won’t work with the German Naval Group anymore or for that matter BAE Systema”
If there is one thing We are very consistent in. Its reboot. We reboot the f2000 to meko then reboot the meko to gagah. Always finding fault with each supplies and forever looking for new supplies.
Meanwhile our southern neighbors too likely face challenges but the difference is their perseverance. And now they reap the benefits of their perseverance and not needed to reboot & relook new supplier every 5 years. It got a going concern working for them and with these long term relationship they not only able to retain knowledge & talent (something BNS can’t even do because orders just isn’t consistent) but to advance the skill & knowledge & even involved in F35 supplies chain & creation of new IP for the unmanned MCM toolboxes.
Qamarul – ”No wonder pinoy buys from them.”
What they produce is pure utility and has no frills; in addition to being very customer centric in terms of threat. That’s why many people buy Made in Israel.
Zaft – ”French equipment are for those looking into a bit more freedom of action”
Nonsense. People buy French for a multitude of reasons and it would have occurred to you [or maybe not] that a lot of French stuff people buy may not be available from the Americans for a multitude of reasons and for quite a long period there weren’t many equivalents to the likes of Exocet, Milan, etc.
Zaft – ”We reboot the f2000 to meko then reboot the meko to gagah. Always finding fault with each supplies and forever looking for new supplies.”
Incorrect. The ”reboot” exists only in your mind. The F2000 and Meko A-100 were for different purposes; that’s why different designs were selected – you do understand this do you not? Also this may surprise you but it’s not only us that may face problems with certain companies; so much for your ” finding fault with each supplies and forever looking for new supplies” – perhaps do some research or ask around before hitting the keyboard. There are a few legitimate reasons why we were put off with Bae Systems.
zaft – ”Meanwhile our southern neighbors too likely face challenges but the difference is their perseverance. ”
Incorrect… What ”perseverance”? You never cease to amaze e with the things you come up with. Singapore places much more emphasis on defence because of its acute vulnerability and from Day One the PAP has drummed it into the heads of the populace; the need for a strong defence. It also helps that most politicians/law makers; etc; have NS experience. It’s not ””perseverance”.
“different government’s have stayed the course”
What course? Thru our many Govts and many decisions about the SPH what was the final outcome. Plain simple, we aren’t moving in any direction at all! We started with nothing and today we still have nothing.
@Zaft
“a bit more freedom of action from uncle Sam and not to be used to fight uncle Sam or her allies & patner”
Things happen. If your looking for freedom there is a chance that your nations policy or leaders decision comes into conflict with Uncle Sam & his minions. Iraq didn’t invade Kuwait looking to fight USA but when Desert Storm happened Uncle Sam & their allies got all the knowledge about French stuff used by Iraq. There are no such thing as freedom, the nations either a Western minion, a Chinese minion or a Russian minion.
“but the difference is their perseverance.”
And also a realisation what needs to go into a local defence industry, they sink far more money just to make it work and they temper their expectations knowing its gonna be very expensive and only sufficient for local usage.
Azlan “Incorrect. The ”reboot” exists only in your mind. The F2000 and Meko A-100 were for different purposes; that’s why different designs were selected – you do understand this do you not? Also this may surprise you but it’s not only us that may face problems with certain companies; so much for your ” finding fault with each supplies and forever looking for new supplies” – perhaps do some research or ask around before hitting the keyboard. There are a few legitimate reasons why we were put off with Bae Systems”
If one change supplier constantly then most likely answers is we are the one being the problem rather than the suppliers.
Those 3 class are in the same size. One can easily add in/remove/change equipment to suit slightly different requirements like the absalon is the base for iver huitfeldt,type 31,32, MRCV and so on. But rather than that we forever rebooting & changing supplier increasing the logistical supplies chain and thus never get cost & operational efficiency endless reboot also mean our industry is forever stuck at the low end final assembly job and even then follow on orders are not guaranteed & may not comes.
Azlan “What ”perseverance”?”
They don’t reboot & change supplies constantly didn’t they ?But in general they have a single suppliers who get continuous build contracts who work with the same sub suppliers and thus both the industry & military aligned their interest.
Azlan “It also helps that most politicians/law makers; etc; have NS experience. It’s not ””perseverance”.”
They don’t have politicians per say. LKY had fused the civil service & PAP that being a minister is a natural carrier progressions for civil service members. Their job security allowed them to take short term pain for long terms benefits and they gains legitamacy through meritoracy rather then consent of the governed. It’s a very in LKY own words Confucius way of governance.
But for others western style country where legitamacy is gained through the consent of the governed they managed to pull long term strategic plans through birocracy.
Joe “What course?”
Same with the LMS2. it has stopped being a littoral ‘mission’ ship under current administration and are turning into a combat ship. In other countries such systematics changes required huge bureaucratic process of defense review, public consultant, stakeholders engagement and so on. But here the PM & manhen can just change the programme definitions on their own in record time.
Joe “And also a realisation what needs to go into a local defence industry”
Pap selling point is efficiency. They are a well oils machine. They communicate their threats perception clearly. Then they put forward what assets, diplomacy, posture & capabilities needed to secure their interest & then they worked out what their local production need to do. Communicate what challenges & hardship the citizens have to endure & gains from their policies. Every part of Thier government & civilian are in sync with one another to achieve a singular goals.
Again we don’t have a problem with strategic planning & policies like SG. What we have a problem harmonizing the often competing strategic planning from each ministry & agency and most importantly with is implementation. We keep sabotaging our long terms planning and suprise suprise got nothing to show for it despite ten of billions being spend.
”What course? Thru our many Govts and many decisions about the SPH what was the final outcome.”
As I made clear in my previous post; overall policy remains largely unchanged … Yes there may be slight delays or adjustments but overall policy with regards to big ticket procurement remains large unchanged.
As for the SPH; it was not an anomaly or unprecedented. There are actually other procurement programmes which fit your ”political football” definition which you may be unaware of.
” we aren’t moving in any direction at all! ”
The dramatic exclamation marks are noted but the discussion wasn’t on the fact that we were ”moving in any direction”… That was never in dispute. As a long time observer of the scene I’m fully aware that we are regressing – nothing I’ve said in my posts here over the years indicate we are moving in the right direction.
Zaft – ”If one change supplier constantly then most likely answers is we are the one being the problem rather than the suppliers.”
Research or ask around. Take the Cougars; the RMAF was annoyed that Eurocopter was late in informing it about the gearbox issues [read Alan Warnes article]; so can we be the problem? With BAE Systems we were unhappy with a number of things they did and prices it charged for various things. Our fault? Need more examples; ask rather than assume and insist something untrue is true.
zaft – ”Same with the LMS2. it has stopped being a littoral ‘mission’ ship under current administration and are turning into a combat ship.”
Are you saying a ”littoral ‘mission’ ship” is not a ”combat ship” or that both are different? Incorrect.
Zaft – ”They don’t have politicians per say. LKY had fused the civil service & PAP”
Spare me the obfuscation and semantics. If they rely on votes; serve under a parliamentary system and other things; they are ”politicians”.
Zaft – ”Those 3 class are in the same size.”
How on earth can we have stuck with the F2000 when it’s a 1900’s design; is not being marketed anymore and is of a larger displacement than what’s needed for the LMS.
Zaft – ”happened Uncle Sam & their allies got all the knowledge about French stuff used by Iraq”
Nonsense. They knew what the needed to know about French stuff way before Iraq was invaded. The French made known details about KARI and other things… \\
Zaft – ”Again we don’t have a problem with strategic planning & policies like SG.”
To keep it simple; like I’ve been harping on way before there was anyone with a ‘zaft’ nom de plume here : we don’t have a MAF whose capabilities reflect what we’ve spent on it for reasons that have long been alluded to – for one; we don’t even have the right fundamentals in place and defence is part of the patronage system.