Its Over for the Leased Black Hawks

MILDEF HMLTV displayed at the ADAS 2024 exhibition in Manila. Philippine DND.

SHAH ALAM: IT appears that long running saga of the four Black Hawks to be leased from Aerotree Defence & Services Sdn Bhd is finally over. Defence Minister DS Khaled Nordin today when asked about the contract stated that that the termination letter had been issued to the company. He did not say when the letter was issued though.

Asked about the Blackhawk leasing, Khaled said ” Well the deadline was October. It is now..”. Asked further, he added that the termination letter has been issued to the company.

A US Army Black Hawk helicopter landing at the Kota Belud airstrip on June 30. The helicopter is part of the US Army contingent taking part in Keris Strike 2024 exercise with the Malaysian Army and the Australian Army. Army

Khaled was speaking to media after attending the farewell ceremony for the first batch of Malaysian peacekeepers leaving for Lebanon for the Unifil mission at the Subang airbase, here. The first batch of 220 officers and men of Malbatt 850-12 was scheduled to leave for Beirut later tonight. The other three batches will leave within this week as their predecessors in Lebanon returned home.
Leonardo AW149 helicopter. Leonardo.

Malaysian Defence was the first the highlight the headwinds over the leased Black Hawks. The leasing contract for the four Black Hawks was publicly announced at LIMA 2023. If it was left to the Army the contract would have been terminated last year but the ministry had slow walked the termination, allowing for several extensions, before the October final deadline.
Paratroopers jumping out from a RMAF AW139 during an exercise in late 2023. Army. Note that the helicopter is not fitted with jump seats as it is a leased commercial helicopter. RMAF picture.

With the confirmation that the Black Hawks contract has been terminated, it is likely that the ministry and the Army will move forward with the leasing of four Leonardo AW149 helicopters. When the contract is to be signed is beyond me. But it is likely it will be featured at the the Lima 2025 contract day.
Mildef booth at DSA 2024. Already painted in UN colours is the HMLTV and the right is the Tarantula HMAV.

Asked on the High Mobility Light Tactical Vehicle (HMLTV) Khaled said the tender for them is expected to be floated next year. He initially said that the government was not buying new assets for Malbatt.

From the story at DSA 2024.

The HMLTV is also an armoured 4X4 vehicle but meant for the Malaysian UNIFIL contingent. The budget for the 80 HMLTV is RM200 million The vehicle will be lighter and more nimble as per the UN specifications as they will be used in urban terrain. It will be used for utility and communication missions unlike the 20 Pantheras recently shipped to Lebanon.

Nurol Makina NMS 4X4 is likely to be a contender for the HMLTV programme. The NMS was displayed by Nadi Corporation/Badan Bas Sdn Bhd booth which won the contract to supply the Pantheras to the Malaysian UNIFIL contingent. Malaysian Defence picture.

Once in service with Malbatt in Lebanon, the HMTLV will replaced the non-armoured Cendana Auto FFR.

— Malaysian Defence

If you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment

Share
About Marhalim Abas 2338 Articles
Shah Alam

53 Comments

  1. 200 mil for 80 HMLTV sounds about right. Just hoping they could be brought back instead of being dismantled and sold as scraps that only benefits Lebanese scrapmonger

  2. Its the US Army ones for Keris Strike exercise, the second picture in the post is one of them. They were based in KK airport for the duration of the exercise, where the old terminal is located. I have used the picture already a few times here. Also, there were Chinooks as well.

  3. Its too expensive to bring them back home, especially after being there for three decades or so. The vehicles also need to be tropicalised as Lebanon is a four-season country.

  4. “200 mil for 80 HMLTV sounds about right”

    IAG JAWS cost RM2 million sold to PDRM.
    https://www.malaysiandefence.com/home-ministry-and-assets/

    But a more advanced APC also based on the land cruiser 79, like the TAG Terrier LT-79 costs just USD144K each including airfreight. Lets say with support + markup 100% RM1.3 million each. So 80 LT-79 costs RM104 million, far less than the RM200 million budget.
    http://pbs.twimg.com/media/DteLdC5WoAEzSpc.jpg

    http://pbs.twimg.com/media/ELfqI2zUUAI67xZ.jpg

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GbsbkmRa8AAHKki.jpg

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Gbsbgy8b0AABIso.jpg

  5. For HMAV it is confirmed 136 Mildef Tarantula will be bought. For HMLTV I hope Mildef Rentaka will be choosen so it will be easier for Mildef to marketed Rentaka to the Philippine.

  6. It will be a huge relief for the current Malbatt team coming back but a dread for the new team going there into a warzone and not allowed to shoot.

    Sad the army could not further whet their appetite for more Blackhawks.

  7. Rock – “Mildef Rentaka will be choosen so it will be easier for Mildef to marketed Rentaka to the Philippine”

    What’s the reasoning behind this? Will the fact that it’s been ordered by the Malaysian army influence a Philippines decision to buy it?

  8. It is long overdue for MALBATT to have proper armoured jeep, rather than a softskin jeep pretending to look like an armoued vehicle.

    Other than the Terrier LT-79, we could also look at the KIA KLTV, something already in use in Lebanon by South Korean UNIFIL team. That thing cost around USD150k each. Or ask KAI to sponsor some as offset for FA-50 (like what is done with the starstreak deal, getting free IAG Guardians for MALBATT)

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F3e0ZC9X0AEKhYw.jpg

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F3e5TxfbYAI_d3v.jpg

    https://www.seairlandshots.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/744df9f2-90b2-4a8c-ae0c-d423e8f960d4UNIFIL_Attivita-combined-ROKBATT-FCR-.jpg

  9. You know they will not do it. As I said before for both the HMAV and HMLTV requirements, the JTLV was found to be the best solution.

  10. >IAG Jaws

    You mean they were cheaper 10 years ago when steel and other raw material prices were lower, labor were cheaper and when MYR were stronger? Wew who knew

    >LT-79
    It’s smaller and made of literal civilian-grade chassis with armored hull transplanted on like any other ladder frame chassis. It’s probably more suitable if we’re transforming into full armored expedition army but thing is, we’re not.

    That said it if the army is looking for Cendana auto FFR replacement it think it’s more than enough.

  11. @ marhalim

    Well if they basically want an armoured version of the cendana auto FFR, the IAG JAWS, TAG Terrier LT-79 or KIA KLTV will be the one.

    But if they want JLTV, then we should go and ask for US DSCA FMS approval. They will easily get those JLTV for under the RM2.5 million each budget.

    BTW this is the latest US Army scout platoon concept. Should be a good fit to the current KAD Cavalry regiment missions, something like the ferrets used to do in the past.
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FsYxa64aMAE3qPL.jpg

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FsYxdrZaAAEp1Y6.jpg

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F3vOeIhbcAAkLGP.jpg

  12. “not allowed to shoot”

    The ROE enables them to open fire in self defence if they are directly threatened. The same ROE applies to UN troops everywhere.

  13. … – ” Or ask KAI to sponsor some as offset for FA-50″

    The deal is signed/sealed. All the offsets have long been agreed upon.

  14. They won’t be getting the JLTV as soon as the word got out that they preferred the JTLV, every tom, dick and harry out there went out of their way to get the rights for them to be the sole agent in MY. The company that got it sent out a press release saying that they will uplift the local defence industry as they will be building the JLTV locally. The release was pulled out as soon as it came out. Note that I heard about the Army preference for the JLTV thing after I saw the release. I was intrigued about it, asked around, and found out the reason the release came out.

    As such TD lost interest in JLTV as they were then forced them look at the Nimr Abjan. The NMS from Nurol Makina was also favourable to the HMLTV requirement. Now it seems the requirement has gone back to a locally manufactured vehicle.

  15. dundun – “It’s probably more suitable if we’re transforming into full armored expedition army but thing is, we’re not*

    What is a full armored expedition army”?

  16. … – “something like the ferrets used to do in the past.”

    We employed it as a jack of all trades; from recce to convoy escort to cries control to infantry support. In the Congo it really proved its worth.

    Recce really depends on how one goes about it. The U S. way is to fight for units to be aggressive; to fight in order to do their job. A task aldo made somewhat easier by the fact that recce/cavalry units have arty and airpower on call. They are also fully trained to call in CAS.

    If you look at how different armies equipped and orgarnised recce units; gives an idea as to how they go about doing theur job. The Brits went from the Ferret to Saladin, Saracen, Fox and Scimitar, to Ajax. The Germans with their long tradition went for the small Weasal and Fennek; contrast that to the U.S. use of Bradley; a much larger and heavily armed solution.

  17. ” They won’t be getting the JLTV as soon as the word got out that they preferred the JTLV ”

    The situation is significantly different right now, as currently there are 2 different manufacturer that is authorized to build the JLTV in USA,

    – OSHKOSH ( the original designer )
    – AM General

    Why can such a thing happen? Even though the JLTV is developed by OSHKOSH, the IP of the JLTV is paid for and owned by US Department of Defence. So for next batches of JLTV, they did an open tender, and it was won by AM General, which build s Humvees previously.

    This is something we can emulate, all ToT IP should be owned by the country (KEMENTAH) so we can use the IP to build more of the same by other manufacturers (local).

    We should start to transfer all IPs, like M4, MEKO A100, Gowind frigate, AV8 Gempita, MD3-160 etc etc to the government, and to make sure any ToT/IP in the future belongs to the government.

  18. ” The deal is signed/sealed. All the offsets have long been agreed upon ”

    There is still the FA-50 batch 2 and (probably) MRCA deals pending for south korea, so it can be included in those deals.

  19. Yes we should do that especially when it was the government which paid for the license, via the companies of course. One thing to ask when meeting LUNAS people, did they secure the IP rights for the Kedah and Maharaja Lela classes when they bought over BNS. It should be done of course but you will never know with these people.

    This should include the command post and other types of vehicles modified by local companies.

    As I said, the Army is looking to get something built locally. The JLTV is under the bridge now, furthermore it is difficult for the government to sign a contract with the US for new things these days due to the Palestine issue. Even training with them has created issues.

    Buying secondhand things like the Hornets and ex Coast Guard cutter are fuss free, thankfully. Even then I received one or two emails telling me to tell the government to scrap these deals due to the Palestine issue.

    That is the reason I think the government is going forward with the Hercules upgrade even though it is cheaper – in the long term – to buy new Js. The price difference between the upgrade cost for a single H and a new J is around RM50 million only – via FMS of course.

  20. … – “We should start to transfer all IPs, like M4, MEKO A100, Gowind frigate, AV8 Gempita, MD3-160 etc etc to the government”.

    Sounds great on paper but in reality; a whole host of political factors at play; including why the government might not be keen.

    … – “There is still the FA-50 batch 2 and (probably) MRCA deals pending for south korea,”

    Still years away and even then; what we would like as an offset may be something totally different.

  21. Marhalim – “. Even then I received one or two emails telling me to tell the government to scrap these deals due to the Palestine issue.”

    These individuals should also stop wearing blue jeans [an inconic pax americana symbol], buying I Phones, watching American movies and other things. Don’t do things in half measures. Whilst they’re at it; if any of their kids are studying in the U S; rush them back and re-enrol them in Russian or Iranian universities.

    The people who tend to talk about nonsense like scrapping exercises and things like that are normally the type who only have superficial knowledge of the decades long issue and who only know about it via social media.

  22. @ marhalim

    ” The price difference between the upgrade cost for a single H and a new J is around RM50 million only – via FMS of course ”

    What on earth??

    The cost of upgrades, even with top of the line avionics, 8-bladed props, MAWS/DIRCM etc, should be only around USD10-15 million for each aircraft.

    https://www.defenceweb.co.za/featured/saab-supplying-maw-400-sensors-to-hanwha-systems-for-korean-c-130h-fleet-protection/

    ROKAF has 16 C-130H, so around USD3.5mmil per plance for DIRCM/MAWS

  23. off topic

    KD Ganas to undergo OP Rehulling program from 1/2/25 to 31/1/26.

    So currently 2x Perdana class FAC to be/undrgoing rehull program

    KD Ganyang
    KD Ganas

    From KD Ganyang social media, it seems that it will be transformed into a ship similar to the KD Perkasa. In that case, should we reclassifly these as the NFAC Perkasa class?
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GURG1QSXoAANSlc.jpg

    Right now there is not much visibility on the OP rehull program. How many more are to be rehulled? If more ships are to be rehulled, the next ship to be chosen should be the KD Pendekar, as it is already destroyed anyway. IF all of the former FAC(M) is to be rehulled, the end state would be the convergence of 2 FAC(M) classes becoming 1 new ship class.

  24. ” No DIRCM/MAWS for the upgrade, AFAIK ”

    But the supposed TUDM upgrade costs could fit those DIRCM/MAWS probably 5 times over…

    And yet we wonder why our military is poorly equipped.

  25. We don’t “wonder’. We’ve long known that we do things in bits and drabs [the “little of everything but hardly enough of anything” syndrome]; often belatedy; that emphasis is on the local industry and other interests; that we don’t get optimum value for what we spend and that the way we equip the MAF is on the basis that we won’t be in an existential state on state high intensity industrial level conflict/war.

    … – “would be the convergence of 2 FAC(M) classes becoming 1 new ship class”

    2 FAC [G]. One can also ask if they can still be considered “FACs” given we don’t use them for that role anymore and that various modifications they’ve received have impacted their ability to reach certain speeds.

  26. They should be reclassified as patrol craft (PC) just like the KD Seri Perlis, KD Seri Johor, KD Seri Sabah and KD Seri Sarawak.

  27. Typo

    “to convoy escort to crowd control to infantry support”. The Ferret was deployed to the streets of KL following the 13th May riots an on several occasions in the Congo its presence deterred violent crowds.

  28. @ marhalim

    ” They should be reclassified as patrol craft (PC) ”

    I fully agree with you on this.

    But then comes another question. If they are purely a PC, should they instead be operated by APMM rather than TLDM?

  29. “The same ROE applies to UN troops everywhere.”
    Oh you mean the ROE that prevent UN from protecting Srebrenica who turn tail and ran away or else die standing? Whodathunkit?

    “as soon as the word got out that they preferred the JTLV”
    Isnt that under FMS, so why locals are involved? Or did USA allow local involvement now?

    @Hulu
    “next ship to be chosen should be the KD Pendekar”
    It was sunk and raised for investigation to this incident, nothing more. Why would TLDM rehull it, as nothing can be reused & doubtful the main gun is still workable.

  30. @ joe

    ” Why would TLDM rehull it, as nothing can be reused & doubtful the main gun is still workable ”

    There is probably only 10% of the original KD Perkasa left in the new KD Perkasa. As we seen with KD Pari, the gun can be made operational even after submerged for a month or so. Anyway, the current “rehull” project is just a thinly veiled excuse to build new ships with acceptable cost using OPEX budget and bypassing the big sharks with big markups.

  31. Why on earth would the RMN readily give up anything until there’s a replacement? Also, as it stands the small number of hulls is an issue given that there are X number of officers who need ship commands as part of their career progression. Getting rid of the FACs would have a major adverse impact on the RMN.
    On Pendekar : zero intention to get it operational again.

  32. “Oh you mean the ROE that prevent UN from protecting Srebrenica who turn tail and ran away or else die standing”

    Save the sarcasm for a more apt occasion. You mentioned that UN troos can’t fire back and I replied that under the ROEs thrh can in self defence. The issue of Sebrenica is another topic and if one wants to mention it; there are also instances where the UN did Steve it’s ground, including in Lebanon where Fijian troops once refused to move when confronted by a IDF convoy. Sebrenica BTW was the result of poor judgment on the part of the Dutch officer; not the result of UN troops being unable to fire back.

  33. “Save the sarcasm for a more apt occasion.”
    It happened, it is history, it is fact. It was real. Poor judgement due to that Commander interpreting his ROE amongst other factors why they retreated without a fight.

    As just as spoken, 6 Malbatt troopers got injured even before reaching base. This shit is real.

    @Hulu
    “thinly veiled excuse to build new ships”
    Yes everyone knows that, but the loophole is for existing in service ships. Otherwise TLDM would have a whole list of historical ships they could ‘resurrect’ starting with Hang Tuah. Ostensibly TLDM could say they will repair it but build a whole new ship, stick on KD Pendekar name and call it the same ship that had sunk but can they really fool everyone that way?

  34. Those former FACs does not contribute much to the war fighting capability of the navy

    But getting something like these instead can. Something like this fully armed with anti ship missiles on detachable modules, AESA radars etc can be had for around USD30 mil each. These, unlike former FACs, can be used to fight side by side with our Gowinds, Turkiye Corvettes doing AShM or ASW missions.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GPYbnwvbEAAFKA1.jpg

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GV1WGRfaQAAcprt.jpg

  35. … – “Those former FACs does not contribute much to the war fighting capability of the navy”

    You miss the point. There’re not supposed to “contribute much to the war fighting capability of the navy” per see. They enable the RMN to maintain certain peacetime commitments and doing away with them prematutely will less to a whole host of issues. As it is, the shortage of hulls is a major issue because of the number of officers who need to be assigned certain positions. The intention – as you very well know – is to operate the ex FACs until such a time they can be retired. Also, even if the MMEA had 100 OPVs the RMN like all navies would still have peacetime duties.

    … – “But getting something like these instead can”.

    Ta for the obligatory link but in reality the only combatants planned are the LCSs and LMSs. In paper various things can be done but it’s the reality were discussing.

    “Poor judgement due to that Commander interpreting his ROE amongst other factors why they retreated without a fight”

    Yes it happened [that was never in dispute] but getting back to what you said; UN troops operate under ROEs which allow them to fire back in self defence and have done so [in our case mostly in the Congo followed by Somalia and also Cambodia]. The Dutch troops in Sebrenica were not fired upon. They were protecting a “safe area” and left when sorrounded. We also have the situation in Rwanda when Belgian para-commandos did nothing when their colleagues were hacked. If you want to go further we can even talk about the Italian incident involving our troops. The RMR officer lost his comission and if it wasn’t for others intervening; he would have handed over weapons too

  36. … – ” yes technically the possibility is there…”

    “Techinally” a lot of things are possibly. You can go to the Thames and make Sheffield seaworthy again. You can go to the army museum and get the Panhard there running again. In reality the RMN has no plans to get Pendekar operational. She will be struck from the active list.

  37. “The Dutch troops in Sebrenica were not fired upon.”
    Let me get you the correct history; 6–11 July 1995: Serb takeover (the VRS, numbering 1,500 in the initial stages of the attack, then shelled a series of Dutch observation posts..), (On 8 July, a Dutch YPR-765 armoured vehicle took fire from the Serbs and withdrew. …) And nope they did not fire back.

  38. I wonder why the new LMS was in odd 3 nos when we usual do with even number of hulls 2, 4 & 6

    Was it we have insufficient green notes or was the 3 nos was on offered

  39. “Let me get you the correct history”

    You mean your “history” in your context? The Dutch at Sebrenica were told to leave when the Bodnisn Serbs arrive but they were not fired upon directly [as opposed to arty fire which the Bosnian Sebs claimed were aimed at the Bosnians] per see but they were threatened with direct fire if they didn’t leave. I was refering to that, not previous incidents. And yes the Dutch did not fire back but then nobody says they did.

    Ultimately, going back to your claim. UN troops are authorised to fire back in self defence if directly threatened.

  40. 3 is the minimum number of hulls you need to keep at least one ship in the sea at all time; one on duty, one on standby and one undergoing maintenance

  41. @ marhalim

    ” they built another 15 locally ”

    15?

    In the latest 15to5 force structure 2040, it is a total of 9 Corvettes

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

    3 in RMK12 2021-2025 (build in Turkiye)
    3 in RMK13 2026-2030
    3 in RMK15 2036-2040

    Personally i would prefer to cap them at just 6, plus to complete the 6th Gowind. So we will have
    6x Gowind Frigate 3200 ton
    6x Turkiye Corvette 2500 ton
    By 2030.

    Budget saved to be used for buying extra Scorpenes.

  42. Yes but that’s not why we ordered only 3 initially. It was the most we were willing to spend and we desire follow on hulls be constructed locally.

  43. The possibility of getting JLTVs was interesting. Lest we overlook it however it was originally specifically intended for use in Iraq and Afghanistan to deal with the IED threat; a means of protected transport. As it stands there are questions as to it’s utility for American use in Asia and Europe.

    The Ukrainians have done things differently; rather than use their MRAPs for the transport role they have employing them in conjunction with armoured units for the direct assault role. Although not as well armoured as IFVs the MRAPs offer way better mine protection and are faster. User preference. If course in the 1980’s the SADF used the Casspir for both the transport and combat role in South West Africa [now Namibia].

    For use I see no major issue with Tarantula or any other MRAPs; all depends on force employment; their use as part of combined arms formations. Like everything else MRAPs can’t be misused; placed in situations they’re totally unsuited for.

  44. JLTVs was not designed for the middle east.

    MRAP was.

    JLTV was to be a replacement for armoured humvees, but to have the same protection as MRAPs. But at much lower weights so it can travel offroad (while MRAPs due to their heavy weight, must keep to packed dirt roads)

    as it is, the JLTV is 1/2 the weight of even the tarantula, but with better protection. what we need are smaller lighter vehicles to complement the Gempita in our cavalry regiments, something JLTV and those of the same size and weight would be much more suitable compared to the tarantula.
    http://pbs.twimg.com/media/DteLdC5WoAEzSpc.jpg

    If say we do get the tarantula for our cavalry regiments, what would be its primary mission within the gempita-tarantula combination in the cavalry regiment?

  45. … – “MRAP was”

    I’m going on the basis that JLTV is considered a MRAP.. If not a MRAP what category would one place it in? Same category as the HUMVEE?

    … – “what would be its primary mission within the gempita-tarantula combination in the cavalry regiment?”

    As indicated in an earlier post and in other threads; it’s how we go about doing what we have to do; whether in a Tarantula or a JLTV. Not as clear cut as claiming something’s better on the basis it’s smaller; anymore than saying fighter X is better than fighter Y by virtue of being faster; having a longer range radar and having a tighter turn rate when fully fueled and loaded. The Tarantula is not the perfect solution but then nothing is; going smaller has advantages but also penalties.

    The trick is force employment; how to integrate its use with other assets as part of a combined arms formation.

  46. We unfortunately don’t live in a world of rainbows and gold but if we did; the force structure would comprise both a wheeled and track platform for the recce/screening and flank protection roles.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*