View Comments (33)

• The navy is just getting what it wanted one by one. That proves a good leadership, with clear achievable plans will get what it needs.

  AIrforce on the other hand... we are still waiting for your plans... Skip all those "next generation" empty talks, the blue smurf silly "camos" and show us realistic plans that would support malaysian security needs. List down the current concerns and what can be done to solve it, not the other way round (ie surveillance concern - to get ISTAR assets; not get x asset - can solve y problem)

• Do you think this should be a priority? This ship has a well deck, which is only useful for amphibious assaults we aren't going to perform. It cannot beach itself in the event we want to deliver logistics without a port. And for other logistics purposes where we can use a port, we can use commercial services or conversions.

• We definitely have a need for MRSSs and have had a requirement for them even way before Inderapura was lost. How the ship is fitted out will depend I suppose on what the RMN sees its requirements are or the roles these ships are expected to perform in support of the army or other government agencies. One role these ships will perform will be as tenders for smaller ships - a role the Indera Saktis perform as did the 2-ex USN LSTs and the Langkawi.

  We often hear disaster relief as one of the justifications to seek funding for the MRSS but the fact remains that a lot of the disaster prone areas in the country are accessible by road or air; it's not like in Indonesia or the Philippines where a lot of areas are only easily accessible - especially when carrying large amounts of gear or supplies - by sea. As for ferrying heavy gear to East Malaysia; most of the time it's more practical to utilise commercial means [like the AV-8s that were sent to Sabah in late 2015] - its not as if embarkation areas in East Malaysia are beacheads with zero port facilities.

• How successful a particular service is on obtaining funding for what it needs; are not only determined by having ''good leadership'' and ''
  clear achievable plans'' but also what the government sees as being the country priorities and its threat perceptions. Historically, the government has always placed greater emphasis on the army and the RMAF mainly because it was felt that both services were the main ones to deal with the low threat. non state scenarios that we were likely to face.

  Another issue is that over the long run; supporting fighters and other air assets is more financially and resource intensive when compared to assets needed or operated by the RMAF and army.

• Good news but bukan 4 terlalu banyak? 2 sudah cukup and the rest of the money can go to more LMS or subs.

  Reply
  4 is in the plan, whether they are getting them as planned is beyond me at the moment.

• 'Telah memesan' sounds pretty definite to me!!

  Reply
  Again there is a lot of difference between intent and order. Let's hope it will be a contract and other parties don't get involved like trying to sell 2,000 Protons in the process.

• Marhalim,

  What comes to mind is the CN-235 deal in which we initially announced we were buying 32 CN-235s - how the 32 figure came about is still a mystery. Indonesia in return was supposed to have bought Protons and Aerotigas [for the Indonesian Communications Ministry]. As part of the offset deal, if I remember correctly, a couple of TNI-AU C-130s were also sent to AIROD.

• Do also note that each of the Makassar class derivatives cost around what TLDM currently budgets for each LMS ship (usd45-50mil per ship). That is a lot of ship for the money, and I think that it would be a money very well spent.

  This is also indicative of the compromises the current leaders of the TLDM are accepting in their plans for the future of the navy, and this has led to the relatively quick approval of the government for their new aquistitions. Planning from the start affordable assets that could perform most functions of more expensive assets could:

  - China made LMS instead of multiple ship types
  - Makassar based MRSS instead of more expensive Dokdo or Mistral based ships.

  So we now wait if the airforce is to follow suit, are they willing to forgo expensive MRCA's and go for cheaper lightweight fighters? Or are they going to get nothing due to their insistance of getting something beyond the means of the government?

  The airforce knows what is the priority of the government regarding the defence right now (as is the navy), but why are they not planning their aquistitions on the current needs? Saying something like maritime patrol is not the airforces job is foolish. You still do maritime strike, you still do CAS. Saying something is not your job for the sake of getting more money to buy MRCA's is just going to make the airforce irrelevant to the defence needs. If im the airforce chief, i would make my service relevant to all missions, and not push "unglamourous" missions like utility helicopter to the army and the like.

• really??MRSS now??curious to see what RMN have in mind for it(operational and what will be equip) although i hope they just save the money and invest in other RMN procurement(LMS or new frigate program)..well what do i know.....

• I suppose the numbers are always inflated, so the RMN can 'compromise' and accept 2 instead of 4!

  It all like bargaining at the local pasar malam.