PETALING JAYA: Based on the story below, it appears that the no stack design of the Meko 100/200 series are not that really practical.
As I had mentioned earlier Boustead Naval Shipyard, the forerunner of PSC Naval Dockyard, had submitted a smoke stack equipped design for the RMN new frigate (LCS) programme. It did not get what it had proposed and looks likely the Dutch design is being backed by the RMN.
As for the Kedah class, the misfortune of its cousin ships of the South African Navy does not bode well for its future.
Does this mean that the Kedah class future lies with the red ensign of the Coast Guard and not hallowed halls of the navy? Only time will tell.
By the way, the cost of a new diesel engine together with repair work for the Amatola is put at RM6.6 million. The four ships originally cost South Africa around RM4.4 billion while our six ships cost us double that amount together with lesser capabilities.
South African Navy’s SAS Amatola to receive new diesel engine
08:35 GMT, August 16, 2011 South African Minister of Defence and Military Veterans Lindiwe Sisulu has confirmed the replacement of the port diesel engine of the SAS Amatola will cost R16 million. Answering a parliamentary question by Freedom Front Plus MP Pieter Groenewald, she added the work would be complete by next March.
South African Navy Chief Director Maritime Strategy Rear Admiral Bernhard Teuteberg last November briefed the National Assembly’s Portfolio Committee on Defence and Military Veterans that rough seas had irreparably damaged the engine. He at the time also put the cost of the repair at R16 million.
Teuteberg said the “starboard propulsion unit on one of the frigates is broken. An investigation subsequently discovered a shortcoming on an underwater exhaust valve, the South African Press Association reported. But Sisulu in her answer – drafted by Teuteberg – states it was the port diesel. The cause of the damage was “ingress of water through the exhaust system and due to sensor failure. This was caused by normal wear and tear.”
The admiral last year amplified that the Navy believed “this to be a design shortcoming, but particular to the sea states we operate in. It happened when the vessel was rolling excessively and therefore the pressure changed as the exhaust went down. And there was water ingress… to the engine, [which] damaged the crankshaft of this engine,” he said.
The discovery of the faulty valve had led to an investigation of the Navy’s three other frigates. “An… engineering change was done in order to improve the closing of the valves under extreme conditions,” Teuteberg said. The ships are fitted with a CODAG-WARP (COmbined Diesel And Gas turbine-WAter jet and Refined Propellers) propulsion system consisting of a General Electric LM 2500 gas turbine delivering 20,000kw (26,820 hp) and two MTU 16-valve 1163 TB93 diesels, each delivering 5920kW or a combined 11.84mW (16,102 hp). These, in a variety of combinations via a Renk combined gearbox, power two shafts, each fitted with a LIPS controllable pitch 5-blade 3.4m diameter propeller, or a centreline LIPS LJ210E waterjet (6-blade impeller, 2.8m diameter) with a max forward thrust of 1650kN and a crash-stop facility of 3300kN.
Earlier, he told members South Africa had got “the best value for money ever” when it bought the frigates from Germany, SAPA reported. “They are brilliant. At sea they are capable, they’ve got long legs, they’ve got speed when you require them, the sensors work beautifully… I tell you, perfect ships for our type of coast.” Teuteberg said the repair would involve cutting open the vessel’s hull. The frigate was currently operational, propelled by its starboard engine and gas turbine-driven water jet, but is confined to coastal waters. “We would not send her beyond that,” Teuteberg said.
But they have. The Amatola has just returned from a three-month counter-piracy patrol in the Mozambique Channel as part of the secretive Operation Copper.
The class was acquired for R9.6 billion as part of Project Sitron,a component of the controversial Strategic Defence Package signed on December 3, 1999. The contracts became effective on April 28, 2000. The Amatola arrived in South African waters in November 2004, the Isandhlwana in February 2005, the Spioenkop in May and the Mendi in September 2005.
Meanwhile, it is still not clear when the engine incident happened. The parliamentary answer also noted that the starboard diesel had suffered damage and “became inoperational”. The defective component was replaced at a cost of R3185.00. The answer did not say when and for how long that engine was inoperable – or when it was repaired.
The answer also added another frigate has experienced engine problems, but gave no details. It has been reported this was the SAS Mendi, which then also completed a three month Op Copper deployment with just one diesel and the gas turbine.
(Courtesy by defenceWeb; First published at http://goo.gl/ZK7zf)
–Malaysian Defence
If you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment
Rather than upgrading the Kedah Class to carry NSM missiles, i agreed with the idea to give the ships to the Coast Guard instead.
Maybe we can replace it with the Brunei’s Nakhoda Ragam class OPVs. Despite rumours of the Algerian Navy interest, all three ships are remain unsold and the RBN didn’t want to use it due to lack of expert personnel to operate the ships.
The ships are basically the same as our F2000 frigates in term of design, weaponry and sensors. It just lack a heli hangar and endurance at sea when compared to the F2000 frigates which is bigger than them. Then again 3 ships to replace 6 ships is hardly enough despite the advance weaponry and sensors…..
Reply
As far as I know there is no immediate plans to transfer the Kedah class to the MMEA. If it happens it will be after the frigates/LCS have been commissioned into the navy
Even the Germans have had problems with their MEKO class ships (K130 Braunschweig class). I don’t find it unusual for problems to arise with any new class of ships. What is important is how those problems are overcome in terms of cost and time. It should also be noted that more classes of ships means more unique problems to solve. It is better to have fewer classes and more ships per class. I hope that is clear.
Reply
Having to replace an engine due to water ingestion is a major design flaw, it is not a teething problem.
Nothing is perfect, so be vigilant in operation and maintenance must tip-top.
Reply
Based on the story it appears that the sensors at the exhaust opening failed and this prevented the sailors from noticing water was being ingested. It must have been a lot of water ingested to damage the crankshaft. If I remember correctly the exhaust openings on the Kedah class is about 10 to 15 feet above the waterline. It was designed to be that low so water spray would mask the IR signature. The louvre openings could be closed of course but I guess that’s why they had sensors there so closing would be automatic.
In this case, BND should send engineers to South Africa to learn and apply it back home. Rather than ditch/hot transfer 6 Kedah to MMEA (if they do that now it can raise unnecessary questions in Dewan Rakyat,better TLDM up-gunned them to FFG standard (whatever FFG designation meant to TLDM)ASAP then Voila! TLDM gets 10 FFG to play with (2 jebat 2 kasturi 6 kedah). Yet, is it a much needed capability compared to TLDM Amphibs requirement? Imagine tomorrow Sarawak faced with megadisaster/war/uprising then all ports/airports knocked out,TLDM confident to transport relief/reinforcement with just 2 heavily flogged MPCSS?
Ya la guys, transferring the boats to MMEA does not resolve any of the issues. We are transferring the smoke issue to them. Anyway relatively speaking, RM 6.6 mil is ok – payable.
Marhalim, are you sure your figure is correct?
Reply
I google it…
“the best value for money ever”. … I tell you, perfect ships for our type of coast.”
HAHAHAHAHHAAA…I like the value for money part. Something to extra think about for the proponent of such ideas.
By the way, google HMAS LEMON SCENTED while you are at it.
I agree that “having to replace an engine due to water ingestion is a major design flaw”. My point, as I stated, is that it is NOT unusual for problems (big or small) to arise with ANY class of ships (even for ‘top-shelf’ navies such as the Deutsche Marine). What needs to be looked at is whether or not the problem that the South Africans are having will also affect the Kedah class ships. If so, then how much will it cost to modify the ships? And how long will it take? If we were looking at buying the ships today, it would be a no-brainer. The issue is that we have the ships now. The investments have been made; we might as well put them to use in the best way possible. It would be foolish to transfer them to the MMEA at this point.
On another note, “New Russian Air-to-Air Missile Unveiled”:
“Russian industry has unveiled a new air-to-air missile for engaging fighters and airborne early warning aircraft at extended ranges.
“The missile, the RVV-BD, appears to be the latest iteration of prolonged development activity, although the design also features differences from configurations previously seen in Russia.
“The missile’s key feature is its extended range, which company officials note is 200 km (124 mi.) using a two-pulse motor, or significantly above the 120-km range for the R-33E that the RVV-BD nominally would replace. The new weapon also can engage targets pulling 8g, whereas the R-33E was limited to 4g.
“Company officials differ on the exact development status. One says the development activity is wrapped up, although others indicate more work may need to be done.
“The missile features a 60-kg (130-lb.) blast/fragmentation warhead, activated with a radar proximity fuze or on impact. The active radar seeker has a field of view of +/- 60 deg.
“The missile measures 4.06 meters (13 ft.) in length, with a diameter of 0.38 meters.
“The missile is not designed for internal carriage on the T-50 fighter, says one official for missile maker Vympel. However, two of four rear control fins can be folded for recessed carriage on the MiG-35. The MiG-29 also is seen as a potential launch platform, although other aircraft, including Su-27 derivatives, are likely targets for the weapon’s use too. The missile weighs 510 kg.”
Any chance we’ll see it on the Su-30MKMs any time soon?
At the moment the MMEA simply does not have the personnel, the infrastructure nor the operating budget to operate the Kedahs. If the Kedahs were to go to the MMEA so would dozens of RMN people, to operate the ships.
Lurssen has been having a hard time securing a buyer for the Nakhoda Ragams because of the price….. prior to Algeria, Pakistan had expressed an interest. They were reportedly built to a higher standard than the Lekius and using a higher grade of steel.
FareedLHS,
The question you should ask is whether we will see R-77s/AA-11s/Adders/AMRAAMSKI’s on the MKMs anytime soon. I’ll believe in the RVV-BD when it actually enters service with the Russian Air Force! The R-77 programme was delayed for years due to technical problems and Vympel’s lack of cash – the only thing that saved it were large orders from China and India.
Aiyah…. the main issue the RMN has with the shipside exhaust is the smoke entering the ship through the air intakes when the ship runs her gensets in harbour. I believe this has been handled by a re-design of the air intake by Boustead. The problem with water ingress through the shipside exhausts have never occurred and most probably will never occur on the KEDAH class if the ships are operated within the design limits and if they are maintained well. Remember, the FACs and LAKSAMANA class also have shipside exhausts.
I believe the South African Navy ship in question operated over and above her design limit. She must have been rolling severely, scooped in water on one side, then rolled the other way, thus sending the water straight back through her silencers into the engine. The non-return flap on the exhaust must have failed to operate or were stressed over their design limits and maybe the sensors were also faulty, thus the crew in the Machinery Control Room didn’t know the flaps were faulty, and many other maybes!
Anyway, I also understand that the cost of 4.4 billion for the South African Navy ships is only for the platform. The South Africans undertook to install the CMS and weapons on their own in South Africa. So, cannot compare costs unless the cost of the CMS and payload items are factored in, and we all know this maybe up to 20 – 25% of the cost of the ship itself!
Reply
Thanks for the clearing up the issue. The waters of the South Africa are quiet severe to say the least!
Hmmm giving up the Keday class is a no brainer.Its not a workable choice.Its best to now spend even more money on it to upgrade it with a complete weapon system that can defend against all three dimensions-air, surface and undersurface threats. So get anti ship missiles, bigger guns perhaps, anti aircraft missiles and of course sonars and torpedos.
Thats the best option to optimise the value for this class of ships.Its there ,available now and its just putting the weapons now.
hei…around 0830hrs today i failed to reach malaysiandefence as it was directed to a pro-Indonesia page and proclaimed hacked by indo-based hackers..anyone faced the problem before?
Reply
Its the first time they managed to hack into the site this year. It happened about three times last year. They seemed to think that this is an official Malaysian government website.
Agree with Ym Lee. I think the fitting of the FFBNW stuff on the KEDAH class would only take approx 6 – 9 months by Boustead with possibly a year beforehand for the CMS software upgrade, lead time for equipment delivery etc. etc.
BTW, the COSYS CMS on the KEDAH class is already ready to support an SSM and a SAM. The sensors are already better than on the JEBAT class, e.g. 3D radar on the KEDAH vs a 2D radar on the JEBAT. Only interface and integration is necessary with the various effectors based on the one chosen as each effector would have differing input data requirements.
YM Lee,
The only advantage to get from fitting a larger gun would be the ability to perform naval gunfire support or take out surface targets – a 100mm or 127mm gun as you know makes a bigger bang than a 76mm. The problem is that the hull of the Kedah will not be able to take a 127mm gun, a 100mm might be possible but then we would be adding another calibre to the fleet for little gain. The 57s and 76s we have are more useful for the anti-air role due to a higher rate of fire. Doubt also if there is space on deck for 2 triple torp tubes.
Marhalim,
The 2 Creusot Loire [now Giat] 100mm guns on the Kasturi and Marikh class were replaced by a Bofors Mk1 57mm, as was the 114mm gun on the Rahmat. Where did we get these ‘spare’ Mk1s?
Reply
No idea but will try to find out…
Azlan,
According to SIPRI:
4 SAK-70 Mk1 57mm naval guns (delivered 1972-1973) for 4 Combattante-2 (Perdana) FAC from France
2 SAK-70 Mk1 57mm naval guns (delivered 1984) for 2 FS-1500 (Kasturi) frigates from Germany.
2 SAK-70 Mk2 57mm naval guns (delivered 1999) for 2 Lekiu frigates from UK.
That’s all the information they have on 57mm naval guns.
Reply
The Handalan and Jerong classes are also armed with the MK 1 57mm guns as both the Inderasakti and Mahawangsa. The Musytari class were also originally armed with 100mm guns like the Kasturis. The Kasturis aft guns were the 57mm guns so they could just transferred to the A mounting to replace the French made guns.
Dear all,
The Meko/Kedah class is a good ship. There are troubles with any ship, but at least now the RMN has managed to control the issues. Water ingression can happen under severe sea state – the fact that the RSA Navy is taking action on it indicate that the problem is solvable. It is a good technical decision to stick with the Meko class design even for the LCS ; we have learn many tricks in the production of the Kedah class ships – all the drawings, CNC programming and loftings are available. We need to take this necessary steps of mastering one thing at a time and if we stick to it Insya Allah we will be known as the finest Meko class builder and operator in the world. Mastery of skills does not come by changing the platform design but by sticking to one design, build, operate and maintain it until you (Malaysian dockyard) can build the platform on time, on costs and with quality…honing the skills day in and day out until you get it perfectly right. This is not textbook problem where there are answers at the back of the book. There is no harm to stick with one design, that is why they are called platform, the RMN can configure it for any mission.
The simplest issue such as docking and arranging the keel blocks : different class require different docking plan. Imagine a whole fleet of Kedah class- what a breezer for the maintenance guys. You carry the same tools ; every ship is the same except for the details (WS, CMS etc.) Then the RMN will definitely have faster turnaround.
Another factor is personnel training both for the engineering and navigation. You will have flexibility of crew change and shorter training time due to commonality ; we might even spend more on the simulator to get the best navigators for the ship. Adding to that is the much reduced inventories etc. The Fleet Technical Support guys will surely agree with me on this. Just look at the Leopard Tank, the engine power pack can be changed in 36 minutes. This can only happen because the Leopard platform has been around for so long and with numbers that allow for specialissed techniques and tools developed for its maintenance..same concept here for the Kedah Class.
The only parties benefiting from a new platform are the Naval Architecture firm and the fabricator. I plead to the authorities to use common sense and let logic prevail. We surely do not need another yard in Teluk Intan and we can save the RMN from a lot of pain by sticking with the existing platform. (Amin..this is my Ramadhan du’a for the beloved Malaysia)
What a shame about the Kedah class huh? As I’ve mentioned in an earlier thread I’ve been so disappointed with the way they were handled way back. We can’t even get assembling pre-fabricated modules right. Ok, I am over-simplifying the scenario, and also, it might not be wholly the technical competence part, but also the management and the dirty laundry that was in the mix. But it’s all part and parcel of a big project isn’t it? If you can’t get it right, you can’t get it right.
Things like this reflect badly on the local industry, next time we’re trying to negotiate something similar – people do remember. Yea, I know it does happen in other countries too.
Whinge over. Back to the boats themselves. I’m with the folks who just don’t see her current configuration as a suitable frontline warship. Ok, we can’t afford or we don’t have the means to worry about some hostiles launching a saturated missile attack at RMN – but sounds like most agree that a minimal SAM, integrated missile defence system is still required. E.g. RAM which in itself is pretty much a point-defence (read: last ditch) weapon system. You can’t expect these boats to have a decent chance against anti-ship missile attacks.
So, if the MMEA aren’t ready to take these, then they will be pretty much, patrol boats. And they will be pretty good against pirate-level threats, unless the pirates get hold of some harpoons or exocets. As to the no-stack design, I believe this is to reinforce the overall low observables design of the boat isn’t it? Specifically, the boat’s IR signature. Well, if the boat is currently not suitable for frontline duty, we don’t need to worry about the low observables bit that much. And if so, then wouldn’t it be great if we had someone in the marine industry that could come up with a retractable stack, or just water shield in rough weather condition? Sorta (very roughly) like how the IDF added an extended tailpipe to their A-4s when they were in active service.
On the upgrade bit – yea it would make sense if we had the know-how and a decent track record of such projects. Perhaps see how well the Kasturi SLEP goes first. Also, I kind of remember reading that we don’t really have much room to add stuff, despite allowing for it in the CMS. So will it be worth it? I’d rather put the money into the LCS programme, but of course, we don’t know how that will turn out. Don’t mean to sound terribly pessimistic, but like many of you, I still bother to write, in the hope things will improve.
Reply
The talk about RMN giving up the Kedah class to MMEA – once they got the LCS – is due to the fact that the Coast Guard had asked for six large OPVs under RMK10.
I don’t think the RMN will be letting go of the KEDAH class. I have been made to understand that Bouestead have already quoted the price to do this to the RMN last year but due to budget constraints, the program has been deferred. I was told that this was the first time that the NSM was considered as a viable SSM by the RMN. IMO, the MMEA will be getting new OPVs, especially since the LCS program would most probably stretch to the end of RMK 11.
As for the comments from overseasbased on ‘We can’t even get assembling pre-fabricated modules right’. From my sources, the first 2 ships were fully built in Germany by B+V and transported by a heavy lift ship to Lumut. She then proceeded to finish up her outfitting and carry out test and trials in Malaysia. The delay on the first 2 ships (apart from the shenanigans of you-know-who!) was due to CMS software issues, which is similar to the situation faced on the JEBAT class. The remaining 4 PVs were totally build in Malaysia by Boustead. I agree slight delays were experienced but these were mainly due to the time taken to reactivate suspended supply contracts by OEMs, remobilising contractors, refurbishment of things left unattended for nearly 2 years etc. etc…. I simply don’t see it as an issue of technical competence as far as the construction is concerned.
After the (forced) Boustead management takeover, I believe the issue of mis-management and ‘dirty laundry’ experienced during the Business Focus regime would most probably not recur or will be drastically minimised, especially with Tan Sri Wok Lodin looking over the shoulder at the Boustead Holdings level and Tan Sri Anuar overseeing everything at the LTAT level!
As for the no-stack design, this was design proposed by the Germans to reduce IR. Hear that the exhaust temp at the outlet is less than 60 degrees from a few hundred degrees at the engine due to the exhaust cooling seawater injection system used. This system cannot however be applied on a stack design.
I do think that the PVs once fitted with the FFBNW equipment would be capable of performing at the frontline, although she would not be that fast! LOL! And the FFBNW arrangement not only allows for CMS upgrade but space and weight for the FFBNW effectors and their components are already there. Anybody can go visit the PV during Hari Terbuka TLDM and see for themselves. Big empty space at the transom for a Towed Array Sonar. I believe some of the ships have converted this space into a gym while waiting for the fitting of the FFBNW TAS! Another empty space at the back of the CIC for the SSM control equipment etc….
Reply
Money or the lack of it is the main reason they have yet to fit the other weapon systems on the Kedah class. This has been the case for the last eight-years or so and I am assuming to guess that the status quo will remain.
Yes, the two lead ships were built in Germany and out-fitted here. To me it was a typical get rich quick scheme disguised as a national interest project.
Fareed LHS,
I’m very curious about where the surplus Mk1s came from as Bofors no longer makes the Mk1 and all the Mk1s we have are accounted for. The Jerong and Handalan class also have a single Mk1. The Rahmat had her 4.5 inch replaced by a Mk1 about 10 years ago. And the Kasturis still had their Mk1 up until the time one of them went into drydock for her SLEP last year, her sister still has her Mk1 as shown from the photos taken during the exercise with the USN early this year and during Taming Sari 3 weeks ago.
overseasbased,
People tend to forget that the original requirement was for the NGOPVs to replace the Sabah and Keris class for patrolling our EEZ and other peactime or low intensity tasks. As time progressed the NGOPVs became larger and more expensive but they were never originally intended to be our Team A as the RMN had a requirement for additional frigates. There is space for RAM, integration has been done and RAM is a very decent missile, even if its a point defence weapon. The number of targets that can be engaged is dictated by the number of missiles you have and the number of fire directors you have, so even if the Kedah class was fitted with ESSM or something else with a longer range than RAM, who’s to say she can deal with saturation attacks? As for the Kedah not being suitable as a ‘frontline ship’ it depends – are they suitable for escorting convoys across the North Atlantic against the threats of Backfires and attacks by Oscars/Akulas and Kilos – no. Or against a PLAN taskforce in the South China Sea – no. The question you should ask is whether, fully equipped, the Kedah class is sufficient to meet the most likely threats and challenges we are most likely to face in the near future.
I believe the answer is YES as the possibility that we may have an exchange of fire with our ”cousins” from ”seberang” in the Ambalat area or that we may be fired upon by pirates is much higher than the possibility of an RMN ship facing a saturation attack by a foreign navy.
Thats why I have always maintain the proposal of why acquire new ships when even the current ones have not been properly armed?. Arm the current ships to the teeth first then lets talk about getting new ships. No use to keep on buying ships which are not properly armed. All defence equipment we buy must be fully capable-including arming them with the best weapons. We can have the best ships, planes, tanks etce but if we dont arm them with the best weapons its like buying a Porsche but using RON 95 and not daring to exceed speed limit in the highways.
Or buying a porsche and using only local retreads
We need to give our lads not only the best platform but also the teeth-i.e the weapons to bite with
Reply
Its a chicken and egg issue, Lee. Get the basic stuff and worry about the other things later …its the government policy of purchasing weapons at affordable costs.
P.S. The photo on page 744 in ”militaryphotos”. I was unable to ID the weapon dropped by the Hawk but it sure looks like a Paveway. We know the RMAF has Paveways as Paskal has been operating laser target designators for some time now and 2 years ago a Pakistan company was awarded a contract to supply laser target designators, but no photos of the Paveway has ever been released.
YM Lee,
There’s no such thing as the ”best weapons” IMO its what suit our operational and budgetary requirements. The RMN has a severe shortage of hulls to patrol our waters, especially given that the Marikh, Sabah and Kris class have either been transfered to the MMEA or retired. Even if the Kedah were to be fully armed, the fact remains that the RMN is still short of hulls, hence the decision to go with the LCS [I hate the name!] programme. Though they are not equipped with missiles, the Kedah class is still more than adequate for performing routine peacetime roles.
BREAKING NEWS:
Mindef had just entered into an agreement with PT Pindad to purchase 32 units of the Anoa 6×6 armoured vehicles for the Malaysian Armed forces presumably for the Lebanon deployment
Azlan, Api – good stuff
I did imply we don’t need to worry about saturated attacks. No, I wouldn’t expect these to deal with the cold war scenario nor the Plan as Azlan has mentioned. I do expect limited air defense, at least missile based. Lets not bring in limited asw for now. With the exception of possibly one, none of our regional neighbors have the capability to sustain a saturated missile attack anyways.
My bit on the RAM was not clear. It was meant to say something along the lines of, the boats don’t even have RAM, so we can’t really expect them (boats) to defend against anti-ship missiles. I’d be well pleased if they did mount RAM on the boats
With regards to the water ingress problem, my point was, if there was a capable local industry, there might have been a simple engineering solution – with trade-offs to the overall performance of course. Yes, I did read Api’s post about them being possibly operated above design limits.
Yea I haven’t lost sight of the fact that they are designated OPV. But I always thought all that talk of RAM in the future, the already integrated CMS system meant that they were planned to have a secondary front line role. If not, then we surely could have saved by not needing a low observables hull, choosing less capable cms & sensors.
As Marhalim suggests, doesn’t sound like a national interest project from the start.
Azlan,
According to SIPRI, all of the Mk1s that I mentioned came from Sweden. However it should be noted that Mk1s, other naval guns and components that were transferred as part of fully out-fitted ship purchases are not typically listed separately. Of course, not every arms transfer is listed by SIPRI either; undoubtedly some slip through the cracks outside of official reporting.
Does anyone know the status of the 2 Daewoo 80m OPV (for training also) that SIPRI cites as having been ordered in 2010 from South Korea (assembled in Malaysia)? They claim delivery is scheduled for 2012.
Reply
Its probably the two training boats being build by NGV Tech at its Banting shipyard.
Dear Ym Lee,
Where did you heard about it? Is it confirmed this time or just another rumor from the Indonesian news?
All the Mk1s that were delivered on ships – Perdana,Jerong, Handalan, Indera Sakti, Marikh, Kasturi – have been accounted for. About 10 years ago the Rahmat had her 114mm replaced by a Mk1, the Marikhs had the Creusot Loires replaced and I’m curious as to where it came from as the ships that were originaly delivered with Mk1s still have theirs. Bofors ceased production of the Mk1 many years ago.
The Anoa news came from a reputable defence on online magazine.In fact it announced a contract won by my US HO on a recent US Army contract even before it was released in an internal newsletter on the company.
So its not a rumour any more.Its in black and white
Reply
No, its not yet official, its just another statement by the Indon Defence Minister. It was reported by most Indon newspapers like Kompas and Detik but not Antara.
Anoa/VAB from Indon? yet OEM from French rite? OMG ATM have so much French-made military equipment. Wonder what will happen latter if Renault to raise hell about the purchase. Eh, ATM don’t consider TERREX for UNIFIL?
Reply
My guess on the Anoa supposed deal is that someone had made a verbal promise but had been unable to make it stick on paper as I mentioned past postings..
Apparently the engines will come from either Renault or mercedes
Reply
If it happens it will be the Mercedes engine as Renault has told the Indonesians that it cannot sell the Anoas to Malaysia if its fitted with its own engine…
I tend to agree that the building of the first 2 PVs in Germany reeks of a get-rich-quick scheme! Typical vintage Amin Shah (at the very least!).
I pity seeing the Boustead people being forced to take over the project but have to hand it to Tan Sri Ramli… he has managed to turn around the company.
Reply
What do you mean 2? Yes the two built in Germany were in Lumut by that time as the four others were in various stages of fabrication. If you read the AG report much of the RM4 billion money meant for the project had been paid for by the MOF although none of the ships were delivered. The former Datuk was of course were nowhere to be seen by then. Of course they never charged him as the case was declared a national security interest! Like Tajudin Ramli, I guess he would have raise the issue of “I was acting on the behest of the government…”
Anoa?
OMG!
What should we support the Indon defence industry when the Indon curse at us!
Anyway, Anoa in M’sia will probably get a Malaysianised name like “Anwar”.
I rather that MAF just continue using the Condor for UNIFIL. We will have a huge surplus of them once the AV8 comes online. So just start disposing them for UN ops and at the same time get the UN to pay for them
Well, most of the shenanigans involved the early 2 ships although I would agree that the equipment purchase for the balance 4 would have contributed as well to the former Datuk’s coffers! I heard that the total additional requirement to salvage the project was actually 1.8 billion but the Government only coughed up 1.4. Boustead had to undergo a serious session of bank loan haircuts and various other tricks to try and make up for the balance 400 mil.
Anyway, let’s treat this as a lesson learnt and hope the same would not be repeated on the LCS. To see how things are going to be, lets see whether DCNS or Damen gets the pick…hehehe…
Api,
Lesson not learn, now they are putting the SGPV or what ever they name it into another round of tender and selection. A complete mess.
I was working for a company that supplied something to Amin Shah company for the OPV project. From a cash rich company it went to almost with nothing in the coffers and had to pay us one year late for certain things and at the end after Boustead took over, we were offered a haircut for immediate payment. Lost on that job. But a lot of old heads under Amin Shah rolled too
Reply
Yes a lot of people got burnt because of the project. But somehow Saudara AS survived.
Around 1999-2000, the Naval Dockyard submitted a plan to manufacture the Royal Ordnance 105mm Light Gun to replace or supplement the Model 56, to be locally known as the ”Sakti”. The plan never got off which in my opinion was a shame.
Another of AS’s plans thankfully never got off – the sale of the former Zwaardis and Tigerhaai to the RMN.
Reply
BNS or BHIC remained the authorised agent/servicing fro Bofors in Malaysia, so I guess the Mk 1 57mm guns you mentioned earlier must hve been supplied by them…
Yeah, he is a survivor. Some of my friends in the ACA then said he must be tied to the “Research Department”, whatever that means… Malaysian version of the CIA perhaps? 🙂
Although the Kedah “Incident” have put us (public) to pay a lot attention on ATM plans on “interesting stuff”, and taught all stakeholders an expensive (taxpayers monies@rakyat monies) lesson, IMO if $ scarce now, better up-gunned all those PVs with stuffs that almost all of you suggested, then TLDM can do some “gun-boat diplomacy” in SCS and Sulawesi Sea. From what I gather, ATM saw Viet as a primary threat (not sure now). Viet have 2 FFG Gepard class (IMO much better armed than Lekiu)yet we still shake our heads in disbelieve with Kedah design inadequacy. New TLDM frigates still unknown, then why not get Kedah into SLEP and armed in to the teeth?
Fully agree with Nimitz on this. Early to mid last year the Navy boys were busy soliciting quotes for fitting the FFBNW equipment on the KEDAH class but till today, nothing!
The intention is to equip the Kedahs for surface warfare, meaning retrofit some anti ship missiles (NSM is the favorites) but no ASW or B/PDMS capabilities at least not for now.
Talak luit..
Pecacai..Mindef adak luit tapi kasi lain projek maaa…Rather than spread the luit thin all over the services, dump the money to realize the FFBNW dream and Baaang! Kedah becomes a FFG comparable to Lekiu. IMO Kedah’s current configuration is less capable than Laksamana (Badan saja besar tapi si kichick lagi manyak ommphh)