SHAH ALAM: Sendayan Airbase, one of several facilities built as replacements for Kuala Lumpur Airbase was officially opened today. Despite called an airbase, Sendayan does not have a runway as it is not involved in air operations. The airbase term is used as the facility is owned and managed by RMAF.
Facilities at the 303.5-hectare site include a sports complex, a nine-hole golf course , equestrian facilities, swimming pool, Islamic centre and residence complex or quarters for personnel. For this it has 693 units of various categories including bungalows, semi-detached houses and apartments.
The airbase was planned as non aviation training centre combining three RMAF training centres in Subang and Kinrara in Selangor and Penang under one roof. As you are aware RMAF is also moving out of the Kinrara camp.
Apart from Sendayan, seven other facilities have been build to accomodate units formerly based at the Sg Besi airbase land. One of them include the police Air Wing.
Prime Minister DS Najib Razak when opening the Sendayan airbase says its development had brought about transformation in three aspects.
He said the first aspect of the transformation was turning an oil palm plantation into the Sendayan satellite township of Kuala Lumpur and the Klang Valley.
The second aspect was the modern amenities and comfort enjoyed by the Royal Malaysian Air Force personnel, and the third was the development of the Kuala Lumpur Air Base as Bandar Malaysia, he added.
Najib said Sendayan, once the site of a Felda oil palm plantation, had taken on a new look as Bandar Baru Sendayan.“It will become a satellite township of Kuala Lumpur and the Klang Valley and the inhabitants here will enjoy a quality of life better than that in the city centre,” he says.
Najib said the Kuala Lumpur Air Base would be remembered as the air base that was witness to a host of historical events such as the take-off point for national leaders seeking independence and operations to address the communist terrorist threat.
“But with the passing of time, Kuala Lumpur, having developed with its skyscrapers, has become no longer suitable to host an air base due to priority for flight safety. The transfer of the Kuala Lumpur Air Base to Sendayan is not just a physical move but a move to a sophisticated, modern and comfortable air base.
— Malaysian Defence
If you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment
And a 9 hole golf course is a priority over a landing strip that can at least operate something in the size of MD3 Aerotiga? An aero club for for officers instead of a golf course maintains flying skills of those doing desk jobs.
It’s lovely that “equestrian facilities” and a whole infantry battalion earmarked for ceremonial duty have priority over so many things.
Ada sebab knapa sendayan tiada runway..bnyk isu akan timbul sekiranya sendayan ada runway. Contohnya approach and departure path untuk runway sendayan mcm mana..it will effect klia landing n departure..satu lg stucture of airspace, bila ada runway mst ada tower n ada area of responsibility..tu blom standard instrument departure n landing..tu suma kena amek kira..sudah pasti akan menyebabkan operasi klia akan terganggu dan membahayakan operasi penerbangan di klia..cer check dengan pihak penerbangan awam bagai mana sesebuah airport baru dibina..
@ AM
actually right now we have 2 battalions earmarked for ceremonial duties, 1RAMD and 1RRD; 1 howitzer battery and 1 horse cavalry squadron. If the army has units earmarked for ceremonial duties, why not the navy (kd hang tuah perhaps) or airforce (historic flight)?
@ kilohotel
A runway does not neccessarily mean a need for a control tower. A runway does not even need instrument landing systems. The advancement of consumer electronics mean that you could even have flight instruments on your ipad to guide you to an airfield. A small runway for light training aircrafts is adequate for sendayan, something around 400-600m in length.
Reply
Light aircraft flying VFR around an international airport is not something that likely be approved by DCA. Anyhow its not like the air force has such light aircraft for the type of flight training you envisaged.
One reason is that an army ceremonial unit [irrespective of whether mounted or artillery] consumes much less funds/resources to maintain compared to a ceremonial/historical ship or aircraft. There is also the possibility that the RMAF and RMN are not to keen on having them.
Marhalim,
Are you aware of any army bases that have a dirt strip that can take a C-130H? I know the GOF base at Ulu Kinta had a dirt strip in which Caribous use to land but I’m not sure if it’s still there.
Reply
Taiping was supposed to have one, I was told. Whether this is still active is beyond me.
I hope that they’ve set aside a space or two for helipads to be built there.
Reply
Yes they have helipads there
Kilohotel: “it will effect klia landing n departure”
Absolutely untrue. Azlan is right that “a runway does not neccessarily mean a need for a control tower” because a runway can be uncontrolled though in this case, if Sendayan had a runway could be controlled by KLIA’s tower. Sendayan might only have a ground control tower for taxi traffic, again not a must.
There is no problem with Sendayan not being a flying base, for the simple reason that admin, training and logistics facilities are always necessary and one does not make each base a flying one for the sake of it.
Azlan “One reason is that an army ceremonial unit [irrespective of whether mounted or artillery] consumes much less funds/resources to maintain compared to a ceremonial/historical ship or aircraft. ”
I can understand an infantry company being cheaper to upkeep than a ship plus its complement, but would a whole battalion be cheaper? Guess it depends.
“Are you aware of any army bases that have a dirt strip that can take a C-130H?”
Of all the strips visible on sat images, Terendak’s strip appears the most usable. Though it hardly matters since it is a few minutes drive from Melaka’s airport.
@ azlan
I know of a few dirtstrips not in DCA AIP that can be/has been used by hercules, but i prefer not to list them here. Here are the official DCA airport/airstrip list.
http://aip.dca.gov.my/hAD.htm
The sg petani camp is built on a former air force base. muar bakri police base is a former airstrip.
@ marhalim
Light aircraft and heavy commercial aircraft operate in different airspace even above a same location. With the use of systems like ADS-B, safety is better than in the olden days.
Dude.. Its not an Airbase meant for planes. Its a training, admin, housing base. Its mentioned in the article, its the purpose of the base. Why is there a need to build an air strip? Its like saying why doesn’t MINDEF have an airstrip, armoured battalion, infantry battalion, Special Force base, etc since its the HQ.
@ Kel
Dude.
It has a 9 hole golf course for god sake! A land space for a 9 hole golf course can easily house an airstrip for light aircraft like MD3 aerotiga. If its up to me that would be a priority rather than a golf course. I would make it a priority for all air force officers on desk jobs to maintain their flying currency (not necessarily aircraft type currency).
Reply
All of RMAF airbases apart from Kuching have golf courses. I doubt anyone at Sendayan will need to maintain their flying currency as its meant for non flying trade. Even the CO a Colonel is an admin officer by training. Non of the MD3 AFAIK are flyable currently, a few were when they were stored at Sg Besi
U have any idea wat the golf courses are?well ur southern neighbour use it to hide their rotary aircraft well camo under tree shades…in any emergency cases..they do have these xcersies now n then…so incase of emergency where ar u going to hide ur planes if the area of intrest hard shelters…runway being carpet bombed?where ar ur military going to operate covertly?i hope i give u hint of the purpose of the golf courses…
@RedSot “U have any idea wat the golf courses are?well ur southern neighbour use it to hide their rotary aircraft well camo under tree shades…in any emergency cases..they do have these xcersies now n then…so incase of emergency where ar u going to hide ur planes if the area of intrest hard shelters…runway being carpet bombed?where ar ur military going to operate covertly?i hope i give u hint of the purpose of the golf courses…”
Really? You mean there are helicopter shelter, maintenance and fuelling facilities hidden in SG golf courses? Then where do SG execs do their golfing? And how will this be affected by future plans to eliminate all golf courses in SG?
I’m not going to comment on the in/appropriateness of provision for golf courses in Sendayan, but to describe it as a purposive secret dual-use asset… come on, give me a break…
@ redsot
You are dreaming too hard. Please tell me how can you hide and operate airplanes from a golf course? Do we have harriers or F-35b? Helicopters dont need those runways that would be carpet bombed as you said.
AM – ”I can understand an infantry company being cheaper to upkeep than a ship plus its complement, but would a whole battalion be cheaper?”
That battalion, in addition to being a ceremonial unit, also is combat capable. At any one time, only elements of the unit is employed on ceremonial duties; the rest are doing other things.
A ceremonial/historical ship won’t be capable of being used operationally and keeping that ship manned and operational will soak resources than can be used elsewhere.
RedSot – ”i hope i give u hint of the purpose of the golf courses…”
For one, aircraft need a flat area to operate from; golf courses can be a problem. Secondly, unlike Singapore, there are many more airports, dirt strips and flat areas that can be utilised in case of an emergency.
@ marhalim
Without those MD3 operational, so what are they using right now for SFCU?
Reply
I have no idea
@ azlan
It is not just 1RAMD that is now a ceremonial battalion, even 1RRD is now one. So that is 2 battalions, 1 gun battery, and 1 horse cavalry squadron dedicated for ceremonial purposes.
So basically we have a ceremonial brigade in the form of 12 Brigade
http://m.utusan.com.my/berita/nasional/warga-12-briged-sambut-ulang-tahun-ke-37-1.583935
….,
Yes but still requiring less resources than it would to maintain a ship or aircraft. The RMN and RMAF also has units for ceremonial purposes; smaller than the army’s of course and like 1 RMR and 7 RRD; also have a non ceremonial utility.
….. – ”can easily house an airstrip for light aircraft like MD3 aerotiga”
At present the only thing operated that could land on such a strip are the leased Super King Air 35s. As such having a heli pad would suffice for any emergencies requiring MEDEVAC or personnel transfer.
One more thing on sungei besi airbase. What is the next plan for the Airforce Museum?
Reply
The PTU has said it will be in Malacca, exactly where and when, is still unknown
Redsot “U have any idea wat the golf courses are?well ur southern neighbour use it to hide their rotary aircraft well camo under tree shades…in any emergency cases..they do have these xcersies now n then…so incase of emergency where ar u going to hide ur planes if the area of intrest hard shelters…”
Well, Sendayan does not have any airside facilities, not even a POL farm. If we did disperse aircraft there, sortie rates there would be similar to at a field site that operates entirely from trucks. If we wanted to get into dispersed operations, we could make better use of the facilities at our many small civil airports.
Not that dispersed operations would be easy for us. Having different types would make it difficult to disperse our stores and operate interchangeably. Having small numbers of each type makes it silly in the first place.
Anyway, now you know why one of Singapore’s highway strip is next to the air base. They literally taxi the planes out of the shelters, through the gate and on to the strip. Btw, that base will be expanded. The current highway strip will likely be enveloped by the base. What I’m curious about is whether the runway will be relocated since the forest South of the base will soon be built up.
The other highway strip has a car park at each end and a golf course and the Guards camp next to it. The trees are palm trees and will be easily cut down.
Chua “Really? You mean there are helicopter shelter, maintenance and fuelling facilities hidden in SG golf courses? Then where do SG execs do their golfing? And how will this be affected by future plans to eliminate all golf courses in SG?”
No to the first question, but the golf courses are logically near air bases and airports because of height restrictions.
Singapore also plans to phase out PLAB, which will not only free up the base land but also lift the height restrictions around it. To compensate they are expanding TAB which may get a second runway. SBAB already has a new runway that can take fast jets.
Btw, that highway strip I’m taking about is Lim Chu Kang Road, located in the most rural part of Singapore. It is parallel to the TAB runway, equally long, excessively wide for local traffic and could easily have been incorporated into the base. Particularly when the exercises first started in the 80s and land was not an issue, especially in that area. It was probably done as a proof of concept and partly as a propaganda showcase in the name of the “Total Defence” ideology.
Nowadays it is called Exercise Torrent and is held every four years.
Azlan “That battalion, in addition to being a ceremonial unit, also is combat capable.” “The RMN and RMAF also has units for ceremonial purposes; smaller than the army’s of course and like 1 RMR and 7 RRD; also have a non ceremonial utility.”
If there is a battalion on royal guard duties then there is practically no hope they can be deployed anywhere else. I wouldn’t spend funds to put them in the field to halfheartedly maintain “combat capability”.
AM,
The whole battalion is never deployed at once on ceremonial duties; only elements. They rotate. Same with most other infantry/combat units abroad, which also have a ceremonial duty, in addition to being a line unit, like the units that comprise the British army’s Household division. 1 RMR still retains a combat capability and like other units; participates in exercises such as Semangat Bersatu and others.
“A runway does not neccessarily mean a need for a control tower. A runway does not even need instrument landing systems. The advancement of consumer electronics mean that you could even have flight instruments on your ipad to guide you to an airfield. A small runway for light training aircrafts is adequate for sendayan, something around 400-600m in length.”
Is this a joke? utterly surprise Marhalim let this pass. What happened to you?
@ m
Plenty of small airfields does not have a control tower.
Now with technologies such as ATIS and other remote tower systems, you don’t need a manned tower for an airfield with not much air movements.
Not many 400m runways have full ATC services unless it is a busy operational airfield with plenty of movement to and from other airfields.
IMHO, with such a strategic location in proximity with major army bases in PD and Melaka, Sendayan AB should have a major runway dedicated for transport planes, not just a college. I think that will be far more useful in terms of rapid deployment of our forces. At least it should cater for a heliport or a STOLport.
Sendayan does have a landing spot for helicopters. Given that no squadrons will be based there and that the base is not more than a couple of hours drive from Subang [if there’s a need due to an emergency KLIA is even closer]; not having a runway there is not an issue and does not in any away compromise the ability to rapidly deploy units; none of which are actually based at Sendayan but at Terendak, PD and other places. If we want to make the argument that Sendayan needs a runway because it’s located in a strategic location; the same can be said of other – non RMAF – bases which houses units like 10 Para, Gerak Khas, etc.
FAREDS “IMHO, with such a strategic location in proximity with major army bases in PD and Melaka, Sendayan AB should have a major runway dedicated for transport planes, not just a college.”
Are we an expeditionary army? With units that are easily airlifted?
For argument’s sake, PD does have several training institutions but not that many line units. 10th Para is very close to Melaka airport which is complete with infrastructure. So near that if the brigade is ever airlifted from Melaka, it will surely use the airport instead of Terendak’s own dirt strip. I don’t know how the cash can be justifiably spent on an airstrip ahead of so many other things that we need.
Assalamu’alaikum.
Why did we buy the md3 aerotiga in the first place if we did not plan to use them throughout their useful lifespan?
Still talking about military, why did ATM bought so many different types of service rifles in the span of 50 odd years, namely FN SLR, M16a1, Baretta AR70, HK33, Styer AUG3 and now M4?
The UK armed forces only uses 2 types within the same period of time, the FN SLR and S80 as a comparison.
Cheers.
Reply
For the ARs, the more the merrier! Steyr and M4 were the result of national interest same as the MD3 a policy by the greatest leader the country ever had. The AR70/HK33 we bought as we wanted to change to a lighter rifle but the M16 was not yet exportable to our country. The MD3 was canned after the TUDM realised that Dear Leader does not really care whether it is canned or flying
The MD3 Aerotiga
A classic example of why a local manufacturing without a viable business plan and continous support is does little to develop the said industry. The MD3 design rights was bought by BAe and given to malaysia as part of the transfer of technology for the Hawks, as is the design rights for the BAe Bulldog. But there is of little use if those designs are not being marketed and sold, the MD3 if modernised and upgraded with latest Garmin G500Txi touchscreen electronic flight information displays (EFIS) and jet a-1 drinking engines like the Continental CD-155 piston engines would make it a really attractive primary trainer for lots of flying schools around the world.
So why MD3 is abandoned by TUDM? Because the manufacturer (SME Aerospace) does not support its own products anymore and is not interested in selling more of those planes (is that something to do with dear leader?). Where would TUDM buy the parts for landing gear or if need a replacement canopy for example? If there is a new technical problem found, is SME Aerospace would bother to attend to and solve those problems, and do the relevant Airworthiness Directives (AD) for it?
That is just for a simple aircraft like the Aerotiga. Yet some thinks that we could design and manufacture every single component of a 6th gen (whatever that means) fighter aircraft by ourselves.
Dhuan,
We ditched the SLR because most were converting to 5.56mm and it was a bit too heavy and long. Only a small batch of AR70s were bought and were issued to a few units; for evaluation.
The Steyr was ditched because the JV between Steyr and SME went sour. If it hadn’t; SME would have produced the AUG A3 which was displayed at DSA. BTW, prior to the AUG being selected; we actually preferred the M-16A2 but licensed production was an issue. Steyr was more than happy to allow licensed production.
Under Dr. M priority was always the local industry and how arms deals could benefit the country as a whole. Given that we were unlikely to actually be involved in a real war with a neighbour; he felt that this was a risk worth taking. The result is that the MAF got screwed and the taxpayer didn’t get his/her ringgit’s worth. Neither the MKMs, Fulcrums, PT-91,Jernas, Laksamanas and various other equipment were the armed services preferred choice; it was political.
Dato2 and Tuan-tuan, salam bahagia.
I really enjoyed all the inputs in this blog. What’s wrong with the way we are handling about our defense purchases and our defence industry aim and achievement? Our dear leaders and politicians had never shared our defense forces aspirations. ATM’s hierachy, officers corp and ranks and files are very professional due to good training, quility in leadership and proven doctrines. MBTs and submarines should have been introduced into ATM services as early the 70s when even less prosperous and developed countries like Nigeria had already acquired mbts. Why can’t we emulate nations like Pakistan and Singapore for having matured and extensive defence industries? Indonesia is the next defence powerhouse within ASEAN with much bigger allocation of defence spending money, various joint ventures with South Korea and other nations, and unrelenting pursuit in R and D. Indonesian defence related industry are now moving towards an export based activities and will probably surpass Singapore in term of worth of export values. Indonesia has started exporting LHD type of naval vessels and now is beginning to construct submarines in their local shipyards. As a vast nation they are heading in the right direction in being self- reliant where technology transfers are taken seriously by their military and civilian authorities. All is not well in our beloved nation though.
Dhuan,
Whatever it is, It won’t be happen as these Politician Thinks Defence is not their Priotiry according The Goverment. Well, i was really hope they could Focus on Defences.
Dhuan – ”ATM’s hierachy, officers corp and ranks and files are very professional due to good training, quility in leadership and proven doctrines”
Like any other military organisation the MAF has its share of dedicated officers. Unfortunately it also has its share of officers who are where they are not because of merit but for other reasons. Also, like other peace time militaries [even ones with much more resources] the MAF is forced to focus on certain things at the expense of other things. Yes it does plan for various contingencies but there is a limit as to what it can realistically do and focus on.
As for ”proven doctrines”, what do we have apart from a doctrine based on experiences from the 2nd Emergency? We have yet to establish or formulate a proper doctrine [in the truest sense of the word] to deal with other types of threats we presently face. For that matter, do we actually have a counter insurgency manual or doctrine to deal with non state threats? Training and experience is one thing; having an actual doctrine is another thing.
Dhuan – ”MBTs and submarines should have been introduced into ATM services as early the 70s ”
There was no need for MBTs in the 1970’s as out threat perceptions didn’t call for one. Thailand had a need for MBTs during that period as they were worried about the Vietnamese in Kampuchea. As for SSKs we simply did not have the manpower or shore support infrastructure in the 1970’s.
Dhuan – ”Why can’t we emulate nations like Pakistan and Singapore for having matured and extensive defence industries?”
Both those countries have different threat perceptions and allocate much more on defence and R&D. Pakistan spends a lot on defence at the expense of other areas. The state of its economy, education, healthcare and other areas also leave a lot to be desired in Pakistan; a country dominated by the military.
Dhuan – ” Indonesia is the next defence powerhouse within ASEAN”
Just because Indonesia is spending on defence doesn’t make it a ” defence powerhouse”. The TNI has large operational commitments [the country is a huge archipelago] and despite all the recent buys; the TNI still lacks a force projection capability or even the capability to engage in high intensity, protracted conflicts. Like the MAF, the TNI’s focus is till mainly on self-defence. Sure, it looks great when the TNI-AL gets a few ships but first look at the TNI-AL’s vast peacetime, day to day commitments and take into account that a lot of what the TNI-AL currently has should have been replaced a while ago.
Dhuan – ”are heading in the right direction in being self- reliant where technology transfers”
Great but at the end of the day; the vast majority of components still have to be imported or are of a foreign design. Given that almost everything is imported; how ”self reliant” can one be? Take SME for example; it produces/license manufactures a vast range of ammo but all the raw materials and components [chemicals to fuzes to brass caps] still have to be imported.
Take the AV-8 as an example; everything, from the tyres to the filtration system to the turret to the gear box is foreign : so what ”self reliance” are we talking about? If were honest; what we’re doing is actually producing or assembling under license and the license or agreement to do that has to be paid by the taxpayer. Even if one has reached a stage where a ship or a MBT can be designed locally without foreign help; the various sub systems still have to be foreign; unless of course one has the political will and the cash needed to embark on a long term programme to design and produce various systems.
…,
I have comment of should Sendayan have a tower, or not. Although an airbase without a proper aerodrome does makes it unique. But everything you talked bout safety shows how much you should not pretend to be a pro in the subject.
@ dhuan
Great to see a new person here and hopefully be able to participate in discussions here regularly.
Malaysian defence industry…
As of now there is really no attempt to really make a sustainable defence industry. It was close before with the AUG and bullets and cannon shell manufacturing, but that dissapeared and now we are even buying 57mm shells from overseas when we once made them ourselves. Most of the ToT and local manufacturing are mostly only excuses for getting money out of the government coffers into the pockets of those who have the “know who”.
But there are some highlights. Like the MMEAs NGPV and OPV projects. Things like the submarine overhaul should be taken as a stepping stone to enable us to at least assemble our own submarines.
@ m
Yes of course i am not someone who know every single thing about aviation unlike you, an insider with contract with TUDM.
Yes if Sendayan is to have an airstrip, a control tower is needed.
Hope that statement satisfied you.
“Nontowered airports—those not served by an operating air traffic control (ATC) tower—are much more common than towered fields. In fact, nearly 20,000 airports in the United States are nontowered, compared to approximately 500 that have towers.
Millions of safe operations in all types of aircraft are conducted at nontowered airports in a variety of weather conditions. The process works because pilots put safety first and use recommended procedures.
A word about procedure: There are several sources of information that explain official FAA-recommended pocedures at nontowered airports. FAR 91.113 cites basic right-of-way rules, and FARs 91.126 and 91.127 establish traffic-flow rules at nontowered airports. The Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) and FAA Advisory Circular 90-66A expand on the regulations. Together, these documents define procedures for nontowered flight operations.
Regulations and procedures can’t cover every conceivable situation, though, and the FAA has wisely avoided imposing rigid operating regulations at nontowered airports. What is appropriate at one airport may not work at the next. Some airports have
special operating rules due to obstacles or hazards, while other rules may promote a smooth and efficient flow of traffic or keep aircraft from overflying unsympathetic airport neighbors.
Right-of-way rules, along with nontowered airport traffic patterns and procedures, exist to prevent collisions in the air and on the ground. There are other benefits to adhering to the rules, such as an orderly traffic flow, noise abatement, and defusing potential right-of-way conflicts. However, traffic separation is the prime concern. This Safety Advisor covers the “rules of the road” at nontowered airports.”
“Non-towered airports may lie inside or underneath controlled airspace. In that case, some or all aircraft arriving and departing require clearances from a remote air traffic control unit, such as terminal or center control, even though there is no control tower managing landings and takeoffs. Pilots may be able to obtain those clearances by radio, by phone, or through a company dispatcher or local Flight Service Station; in some cases, departing aircraft (IFR or VFR) take off and level out below the floor of controlled airspace, then radio for a clearance before climbing further. Some countries establish low-altitude VFR corridors for non-towered airports in large urban areas so that VFR arrivals and departures can avoid controlled airspace altogether.”
… – ”now we are even buying 57mm shells from overseas when we once made them ourselves.”
It could be that buying off the shelf from abroad is cheaper and has less hassle than actually producing the stuff locally; especially given that we have no economics of scale and practically everything that goes into making the shell has to be imported anyway.
…. – ”Things like the submarine overhaul should be taken as a stepping stone to enable us to at least assemble our own submarines.”
It really depends.
– Will assembling it locally be more expensive than having everything done abroad?
– Will assembling it locally really benefit the local industry in the long run – in terms of knowledge – or will be more of a cosmetic/PR move with the tax payer having to pay for it but having no long term tangible benefits?
Whilst I can see the need for a shore support infrastructure to support the Scorpenes [which the RMN has done] I’m not sure about assembling future subs here. If I’m not mistaken Pakistan’s Agosta 90’s were constructed/assembled locally in Karachi in the 1990’s but whether the whole exercise really provided benefits is the question.
Reply
Yes it’s cheaper to buy the 76mm, 57mm and even 40mm rounds from overseas as well as faster. This goes the same for the 25mm and 30mm rounds. Why economic of scale of course. The only things being bought locally are the small arms ammunition though special rounds like for sniper applications are also sourced from overseas. Despite the support infrastructure for the Scorpene some parts are still done in France that’s why they two contracts for it, one in RM and the other in Euros
Assalamu’alaikum and go day! Thanks for all the refreshing replies gentlemen. Wish I could know all the commentators’ background other than Tuan Marhalim Abbas which is publicly known.
The Styer AUG a1 that we purchased early 1990s, were alleged to be a politically influenced purchased. USD800 for an M16a2 then, vs at least double that for a Styer AUG a1 rifle.Is this true? Some say some parties benefitted from it. Technology transfer wise, had we gained anything other than to impress the public and our shadow government that all is well and money were well spent? At a demo to the pioneer infantry unit using the Styer assault rifles, the demo team insisted that the rifles to be broken into parts on a table instead on a ponco on the ground. Sr Ranks present had the impressions that the weapons were ‘manja’, if that were the case, we were doomed from the beginning in case of a prolong conflicts. Already in exercises, we’ve seen pics of our soldiers carrying the Styers with the gas regulator control knobs covered with electrical wire tapes fearing losing them in the field and worse still in real operations.
Look at the ADF using their Styer rifles, still using it till now with various further improvements. Why did we abandoned a good rifle systems so early? The US forces are now converting their M4 carbines to a newer improved version that are using the short stroke piston recoil system that is less prone to carbon fouling and stoppages. Are we to follow suit, and waste more public funds? Wassalam.
Reply
There is no need to replace the M4 Carbines for the foreseeable future. I don’t think buying new firearms as a waste of public funds, even if we buy new guns to replace the M4 they will soldier on as war reserve.
Yes the M4 will soldier on for a forseeable future.
Next IMO if the need comes would be the minimi. The USMC are replacing theirs with M27, an AR15 variant that is optimised for full auto fire. It weighs half the weight of a fully loaded minimi, and with mags such as the beta c-mag, full auto fire suppression could still be done with adequate bullets to feed the gun.
Btw those aussie rifles IMO are newbuild but still retaining the AUG heritage.
Dhuan – ” USD800 for an M16a2 then, vs at least double that for a Styer AUG a1 rifle.Is this true?”
The actual cost for SME produced rifles had to have various costs factored in. Same like the M-4, after paying Colt royalties and factoring in what we spent to set up the assembly line how can a SME produced M-4 be cheaper or compete with a M-4 direct from Colt?
Dhuan – ”The Styer AUG a1 that we purchased early 1990s, were alleged to be a politically influenced purchased.”
We wanted the M-16A2 by Colt was not ready to give us production rights. Steyr was. We also trialed the FNC.
Dhuan – ”Technology transfer wise, had we gained anything other than to impress the public and our shadow government that all is well and money were well spent?”
The answer is plainly obvious. We spent cash to enable the Steyr to be assembled/produced here and we spent cash also on the various equipment needed to assemble/produce it here. It was intended to be a national project but the reality is that we didn’t really benefit; nor did SME ever come up with any improvements or upgrades beyond what the OEM gave it. So in the end it was a total waste …..
Dhuan – ”Why did we abandoned a good rifle systems so early?”
Because the agreement between SME and Steyr for production of the AUG to be shitted to Malaysia collapsed. That’s why. SME wasn’t able to further support the AUGs we had. We then looked around and colt [for a price] was willing to allow us local production.
Colt was more than willing as their patent on the ar15 platform is expiring. Now everyone, even FN herstal and H&K build versions of the ar15.
If SME is smart, design a full auto ar15 similar in function to the M27 and build them using all those M4 toolings as the minimi replacement. Yes it won’t have a cool brand name on it but who cares?