Repost
SHAH ALAM: AS I was scouring my directories for sources to find out which yard got the MMEA/APMM NGPC tender, I was informed not to be bothered as the project will be re-tendered.
Unfortunately, the people who told me the latest development on the NGPC were unable to give the reason for the re-tender.
There are various reasons for a re-tender exercise – the winning bidder did not comply with the official requirement etc or simply the MMEA was ordered to do so by their higher ups after a peeved competitor complained.
Unfortunately as I am not in good books of MMEA (following my report on the grounding of the Bombardiers – that said soon after the report came out MMEA got the funds to fly the amphibians!) we will not get any official information on the re-tender exercise. Personally I preferred the NGPC project is re-tendered for technical reasons and not due to the antics of a jealous competitor.
However the exercise may well delay the NGPC date of entry into service by at least six months. The re-tender also means that the usual suspect, BNS and the others are back in the hunt then.
Anyhow, apart from the NGPC, APMM among other things is looking to re-stock their small arms inventory. Apart from the GPMGs, they also want to buy some HK416 A5 assault rifles, HK UMP sub machine guns and CZ SP 01 semi-automatic pistols.
I am told the numbers are small but its instructive that as the quotation document specifically stated the type and make of the firearm, it disqualified other makes at the starting gate. It is maybe unfair to other dealers but by stating the make and model of the small arms in the official document, MMEA officials probably wanted to ensure that they will get what they wanted in the first place.
I am not sure whether they will succeed with the 416s though, as the government had stated that its partially owned SMEO will supply the assault rifles – the M4s – to all agencies, no matter whom. As even the Paskal has to make do with the M4s – with accessories of course – I do not think MMEA can get away with buying the 416s. That said stranger things had happen before so we have to wait and see.
The 416s and UMPs are likely slated for MMEA special forces unit – STAR – which is also looking to add to its ACU digital grey camouflage uniform. Unfortunately, instead of moving to the combat shirt, they have settled for the coat version of the ACU!
The STAR current small arms inventory include the SG 553s, UMPs, Sig Sauer P226s and Glock 19s while regular MMEA personnel are primarily arm with M16s and Glock 19s. The CZ pistols I am told is for the MMEA’s IPSC team.
As for the GPMG, the quotation document did not specify any make which gives the impression that the MMEA is looking for another weapon than the in-service Denel SS-77. Perhaps another chance for the FN Minimi/MAG or HK MG5 this time around.
–Malaysian Defence
If you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment
Api69 says:
October 23, 2014 at 12:41 pm
Peeved preferred shipyard didn’t make the cut in a fair tender exercise is most likely…..
nimitz says:
October 22, 2014 at 6:47 pm
Agreed with Azlan. Yeah MMEA have much catching up to be done compared to senior MY maritime enforcement agencies. I’m not sure about MMEA land installation outside Sarawak, but currently over here their DM HQ are in commercial building lots, quarters to share with SPA-contolled federal quartes and vessel berthing jetty is managed by other agencies such as KDRM & Jabatan Laut. PDRM Polis Marine are better well off in terms of bases & housing.
Delayed it is, I like the NGPC specs and hope it become a reality in the immediate future.
Azlan says:
October 22, 2014 at 3:14 pm
SgWay,
According to what I was told by an MMEA officer, vessel’s the displacement of the Marikh/Mystari are considered too large and superflous for the MMEA’s needs. Due to geography, MMEA vessels will never be anywhere more than 2 days transit time to the nearest base or port and as such do not need the range, seakeeping or endurance offered by OPV size vessels.
Nimitz,
We can only hope not.
My understanding as to the issue of ”openess” is that sometimes – not always – it is not due to the government, but due to the bidding companies that insist on as little as possible information be made public, so as not to benefit competitors. This has been the case before with tenders for the MAF.
The good news is that the specs and mission fit – as released by Marhalim – appear sound. Like I said before, lets hope the MMEA gets its boats on time, within spec and within budget.
nimitz says:
October 22, 2014 at 1:58 pm
Adding to Azlan’s comment. “Then someone outside MMEA will decide who and what is best although it does not fit for MMEA.”
Compared to DND Phillippines, MY did not come to the level of openesss with info on reasons of re-tender NGPC. Who won in the first place also we dunno.
Azlan says:
October 22, 2014 at 10:13 am
We simply cannot make direct comparisons with other Coast Guards because they have different operational requirements in that they face different threats, operate in different conditions and operate alongside different partner agencies that are equipped differently in comparison to the RMN and Marine Police. As to the need for a UAV and mission payload containers to switch roles – which BTW is not ”high-spec” at all – these are needed if the ships are to perform the roles they are intended to perform and if maximum operationally flexibility is to be attained.
The benefits of having a mini-UAV to extend one’s radar horizon and to increase SA is obvious. And why should UAVs and anti-pollution be for 1,000 tonne ships when they can be performed from smaller ships and the MMEA in the 1st place doesn’t have very much use for ships displacing over 1,000 tonnes? Based on a discussion last year with an MMEA man who’s in charge of a District in Sarawak; the boat that had originally won the tender, others like it and the equipment fit; is exactly what the MMEA wants and needs.
At the end of the day, it is the MMEA that knows best as to what its operational requirements call for….
SgWay says:
October 21, 2014 at 8:58 pm
The official spec is not fully disclosed, the 45m is possibly just an unofficial estimate. We realy dont know what are the real specs on paper.I agree that for a ship to carry 30 crew, it will have to be at least 50-60 meters.
Something like the Musytari/Marikh class OPV types could be a good option. Very conventional and simple design that any shipyard like PME let alone BNS could deal with.
Reply
The specification I wrote is from the tender documents.
SavvyKL says:
October 21, 2014 at 3:22 pm
I think MMEA overly too much for there new Patrol boat …. $125 Million for 7 unit boat, MMEA should no think too overly high spec can be include in boat. navy gun with RIBs it enough for there patrol used, event other country coast guard patrol which much expensive like $50 million each also with Gun and RIBs only. UAV and Anti-pollution should for bigger ship like above 1000 tons patrol ship job. is almost impossible for 45m ship to support 40 crew( it is 1000+ tons level, DCNS Gowind L’Adroit 1500 tons OPV only 44 crew). now patrol boat ship direction to cost efficient, less crew, highly automation, light and bigger. Austal Cape class just 18 crew for 58 meter highly efficient $50 mil patrol boat. or Damen 5009.
For MMEA new patrol boat，45m with about 250~280 tons, 30/25 gun, 2×12..7 gun, 2 RIBs, marine radar, AIS, ECDIS, 20-22 crew. cost around $15mil each. design for cost efficiency operation, all should be good enough for small patrol craft already.