SHAH ALAM: The Joneses. The Philippines Navy(PN) is set to buy more ships – 19, according to the Inquirer newspaper. Eleven of these ships will be the Israeli-made Shaldag Mk. V missile boats, nine of which will be built there with another four to be built in the Philippines. The US$188 million deal for the 11 boats include the missiles which is likely be the Spike NLOS capable of hitting land and sea targets. The PN already operate a number of smaller patrol boats armed with the missiles.
According to the Inquirer:
the Department of National Defense (DND) is expected to soon sign contracts for two landing docks and six offshore patrol vessels costing an estimated P35 billion (US$660 million, RM2.9 billion).
The Navy is looking at the secondhand vessels while waiting for these new ships.
The new vessels, including those whose contracts were signed earlier, are expected in three to five years—quite late as replacements for the World War II-era ships that the Navy has been retiring since 2020.
An Indonesian shipbuilder has been chosen to supply the two landing docks, or landing platforms, for the Navy for P5.56 billion, according to a June 5 notice of award from the DND to PT Pal Persero. The contract is expected to be signed in the coming days or weeks
These ships would be used by the Navy for its amphibious landing missions and transport tasks.They are expected to be improved versions of the Navy’s two Tarlac-class strategic sealift vessels—the BRP Tarlac (LD-601) and BRP Davao del Sur (LD-602)—which were also built by PT Pal Persero.
he Navy is also looking at secondhand vessels as it awaits the deliveries of the new ships.A Navy inspection team was recently in Bahrain to look at the US Navy’s offer of two used Cyclone-class patrol boats for transfer, or donation, to the Philippines, an official told the Inquirer.The Navy is also expecting the transfer of a decommissioned Pohang-class corvette from South Korea in September, at the earliest. Seoul donated a similar ship three years ago, the former ROKS Chungu (PCC-672), now called the BRP Conrado Yap (PS-39).
The government will spend for the refurbishing of donated ships.
The Navy said it will receive the first of two new corvettes amounting to P25 billion ordered last December from South Korea’s Hyundai Heavy Industries in 2024.
The same shipbuilder was chosen to build six offshore patrol vessels for the Navy for P30 billion. A notice of award and contract signing are expected to follow.
Note the two LPD are basically the same design as the MRSS as offered by PT PAL to Malaysia, though the ones offered to us is a bit longer and higher tonnage. According to a Google check, the cost of the two LPD will be around $105 million or RM661 million. As for the six OPV it will be P30 billion (US$566 million or RM2.4 billion). This means this ships, will be much cheaper than our own LMS Batch II.
— Malaysian Defence
They are making up for lost time after decades and decades of neglecting the needs of the PNP. The Shaldags makes sense given the PN can’t afford the number of frigates and corvettes it needs and that a lot of the waters they operate in are very shallow.
The order for LPDs is expected given the country is a large archipelago which has a lot of areas which [unlike here] are not easily accessible by road during natural disasters.
Good for PH Navy as the govt agreed and put monies to replace old vessels with new.
which brings us to the point,
how can we have a better plan when compared to the original 15/5?
Why do we still need 8x LMS batch 2 at RM833 million per ship? When now the LCS Gowind is officially a go? Why not more OPVs instead for APMM at just RM246 million per ship?
Do we really need a landing dock ship? Or what we actually need are fast transport RORO ships for logistics between east and west malaysia?
Spanish navy recently bought this for just 7.5 million euro
http://pbs.twimg.com/media/FRbBXSdX0AAC7BD.jpg
http://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52035120182_188b9cc1f7_b.jpg
Something that is not expected
Norway has terminated its contract for the NH90, and will return all helicopters while demanding full refund.
This comes after Australia to retire all their NH90 and replace them with new Blackhawks.
If currency exchange is correct, their new LPD only cost RM 230mil each. Well within our budget if we order for 3-4 ships.
I think we made the right move not to arm our fast attack crafts with missiles. Cannot fathom under what scenario they are going to be effective against state actors. There is no maritime threat from non state actors. How do you maintain a line of sight from a fast moving craft to fire that Spike NLOS missile at another moving target?
It has automatic tracking once you lock on target, the missile will go to that target only. Of course the boat driver must maintain the optimum course to ensure that the missile hit the target. Its like an Air to Air missile which will go to the locked target despite its manoeuvring. Also the missile operator has the option to disengage if need be
Hasnan – ”I think we made the right move not to arm our fast attack crafts with missiles. Cannot fathom under what scenario they are going to be effective against state actors. ”
Different operational requirements and threat perceptions…
Hasnan – ”Cannot fathom under what scenario they are going to be effective against state actors.”
In a littoral setting they can be very effective.
vader – ”we have a better plan when compared to the original 15/5?”
A ”better” plan would need cabinet approval and would require the government to spend more [as likely as the sun not rising tomorrow]. The 5/15 was approved because it was politically expedient; as has been explained before elsewhere here; it governed by its times and anything more ambitious would not have been approved by a government which is extremely reluctant to spend cash.
vader – ”Why not more OPVs instead for APMM at just RM246 million per ship?”
Someone else also mentioned/asked this. OPVs are for the MMEA [a non military entity] to perform peacetime constabulary roles. LMSs are for the RMN [a military entity] to perform specific roles in operational conditions which don’t require a LCS and are not an overkill for the LMS. As such the requirement for RMN LMSs and MMA OPVs should not be conflated.
vader – ”Why do we still need 8x LMS batch 2 at RM833 million per ship? When now the LCS Gowind is officially a go?”
Both ships are for different purposes; both for different operational setting; same reason why the RMAF needs both MRCAs and LCAs – not to be conflated. Having the LCS does not do away with the LMS; just like having a GPMG does not do away with the need for an assault rifle.
vader – ”Do we really need a landing dock ship? Or what we actually need are fast transport RORO ships for logistics between east and west malaysia?”
The ”multi role supply ship” as its name implies is intended to perform a variety of tasks : transport men and material [amphib transport and not so amphib assault’ which is different]; act as tenders, HADR, etc. A ”fast transport Ro/Ro’ will obviously be good for ”transport” but not other roles.
@vader Despite official approval from the government, can we and the navy be certain all 6 ships are completed? And even then the original plan calls for 12 frigates, does the government have the cash and will to purchase 6 more gowinds? It seems to me that the navy plans to beef up the fleet with the 8 missile armed lms batch II incase we only get 6, and even then 6 is already a miracle, we needed 12.
Jason – ”And even then the original plan calls for 12 frigates, does the government have the cash and will to purchase 6 more gowinds? ”
As was explained previously it’s still very early days to talk about LCS Batch 2s. Very early days. Priority for the next few years will be the initial batch of 6 LCSs and LMS Batch 2s; as well as stuff like the ASW configured helos.
The Philippine now is entering on their Horizon 3 modernization.They will acquired 4 to 6 Frigate 4,000 to 4,500 tons…Submarine and MRF
@vader
“we actually need are fast transport RORO”
If we need RORO, no need to get such ships as we have plenty of commercial RORO services which Govt can charter/commandeer if needed. No, the MRSS will need to be more flexible than that, having amphib ability to land where docks are unavailable or during HADR.
@Marhalim
“automatic tracking once you lock on target”
The problem is trying to get a lock manually, if the system is not electro stabilised to compensate for moving seas & the speeding boat, getting a lock is like the missile version of spray & pray.
@Jason Lo
“be certain all 6 ships are completed?”
5 ships are on the slipway in various stages of built and I believe steel for the 6th ship is also ready. The Govt committed to getting 6 ships and based on precedent, they will by hook or by crook get all 6 ships. Whether there will be followup order or not is another question. We don’t usually follow on from a troubled project so even if there is push later on to get another 6 more, it might not be Gowind due to this project stigma. OTOH TLDM has no issues to have more Kedahs despite that project’s own troubles & delays as well.
Acquiring surface ships to progressivesly improve capabilities and replace the various 5/6 decade old PN ships in service is one thing. Acquiring subs is a completely different thing.
Buying the actual subs is merely part of the problem. The other problem is to create a shore support and training infrastructure to sustain those subs; extremely resource intensive – that’s something the government here did well; allocate the resources needed to establish a short support and training infrastructure [dry dock, test/maintenance facilties,simulators,etc] at Sepanggar. Subs are also inherently expensive to operate and maintain and will soak up a lot of the PN’s resources.
The Spike NLOS on the fast Israeli craft do have the means to locate and track targets in all weather and high speed.
This is off topic but I wonder if the recent controversy between India and Muslim nations is going to affect the Tejas’s chances in the LCA tender.
Don’t think it was ever being a possibility of being chosen. So any current issues will not be a factor. We could still buy India made things like the air to air missiles already integrated into the MKI
Mr M and what about that our CN235 currently in Bandung? Any updates?..
Tom Tom,
Unlike some other countries Malaysia did not officially issue a statement condemning what was uttered by the Indian officials and we did not summon the Indian ambassador – all that is telling. India may be led by a ultra nationalist Hindu government but realpolitik dictates everything – we have significant tade/investment with India.
No, updates
The biggest joke is…
Our chinese built LMS cost us RM 262.5 million each, when the Philippines bought a much bigger LPD for just RM 230 million.
We could achieve so much more if we don’t buy stupidly priced things for our defence.
It was a political decision to buy these ships from China to forge better relations with them, and to pay those prices for the TOT as we were supposed to build 2 ships locally as starters for subsequent batches. Obviously that did not pan out.
cheekuchai – ”when the Philippines bought a much bigger LPD for just RM 230 million.”
To be a devil’s advocate what level of DC standards does one get for that price; what sensors will it have and does the price include various types of equipment needed?
cheekuchai – ”We could achieve so much more if we don’t buy stupidly priced things for our defence.”
We ”could achieve so much more” if the politicians had the will to acknowledge that our decades long policy of placing emphasis on national interests [mainly the local industry] is self defeating; ill logical and flawed. The defence policy needs a deep fundamental holistic apolitical revamp and a thorough appraisal of the geo strategic/political calculus as we perceive it; in order to ensure the armed services get the capabilities they need and the taxpayer gets his/her cash’s worth. The reason we buy ”stupidly priced things” is due to the policy we have and the attitude and mindset we have regarding defence…
Until that happens the MAF will have to get by on a penny pinching budget; will have a bit but not enough of anything and will have capabilities which don’t reflect all we’ve spent.
Well, since everyone is so keen for the LCS to be funded by hook or by crook, there will be no money for MRSS anytime soon. Just to illustrate the enormous waste of funds the LCS program has become, RM9b (including the funds approved recently) is for work already done – not new work. RM9b, zero ships, official project progress at 57%. If 57% is RM9b, then 100% is RM15.8b – excluding the current exchange rate and inflation. Assuming 10% add-on due to inflation, then total LCS cost for 6 ships will be RM17.4b. Hence to fund the MRSS, LCS might need to stop at 2 maybe 3 ships. To insist funding all 6, it will drain the Navy’s ship building funds for the next 2 RMK.
@Azlan
To play devil’s advocate to your devil’s advocate, if the DC standards and sensors are typical for these types of vessel and the situation for its uses, then the specs for Pinoy Navy could also be used for our MRSS needs.
@azlan
Blaming localization that increase the cost by 10% but paid for in local currency but closing one eyes to gold plated specialized varient rather than off the shelf kind kinda missing the forest for the trees to be honest
Joe – “To play devil’s advocate to your devil’s advocate, if the DC standards and sensors are typical for these types of vessel and the situation for its uses,”
I have no idea what the DC standards are on the PN ships but I do question the level given the overall price and I do know for a fact the RMN has specified a certain standard.
The PN Navy is not fitted with a main gun and the main radar, under the FFBNW concept. It is only fitted with two nav radar. I have no idea of the DC standard. But I assume it will be similar to ones on the Indonesian ships. I toured one of the Indonesian LPD, it looked very similar to the Oz, Japanese and French LHD though those ships had more water tight doors in areas above the waterline
Philippine LPD Project spec.
MaxDefense released a blog entry discussing the Technical Requirements of the new Landing (Platform) Docks being tendered by Philippine navy.
A summary of the important parts of the Tech Requirements are as follows:
Capabilities:
* Safely operate to up to Sea State 6
* Being able to launch at least 2 Landing Craft Utilities (LCU) from the well deck, at least 2 RHIBs or MPAC Mk. III to and from the cradle, and AAVs to and from the well deck and side ramps.
* Accommodate at least two 10-helicopters in the helideck
* Helicopter hangar for at least 1 10-ton helicopter
Dimensions and Characterisrics:
* At least 120 meters long
* At least 21 meters breadth
* Displacement at least 7,200 tons (payload compliant)
* Ship operation up to Sea State 6
* Helicopter operation up to Sea State 4
* LCU, RHIB and MPAC operations up to Sea State 4
* AAV operations up to Sea State 4
* Complement of 138 officers and men including 16 females
* Non organic complement for 1 VVIP, 8 VIPs, and 33 officers and men
* Allow accommodation for a marine battalion of 500 men
The LPDs will be used as platforms to launch the Amphibious Assault Vehicles similar to the ones above. Photo taken from US Navy.
Performance
* Cruising speed of at least 13 knots
* Maximum speed of at least 16 knots
* Maximum Range of at least 9,000 nautical miles without refuelling
* Ship circling diameter of not more than 5 ship lengths
* Operate at temperatures between – 10° to 45°C Air Temperature, -2.2° to 32°C Sea Temperature, and 10% to 100% Humidity
Equipment Support:
* 2 Collapsible Cradles for 2 MPAC Mk.3
* Storage for up to 24 rounds of Spike-ER missiles
* Well deck provisions for 2 LCUs
* Flight deck for 2 10-ton medium helicopters specifically AW139 and including AW159
* Flight deck with deck locking grid or landing grid helicopter securing system
* Hangar for a 10-ton helicopter specifically the AW139
* Storage for up to 24 Spike-ER missiles, 48 Spike-NLOS missile rounds and 48 2.75″ aerial rockets
* 7-meter, 40-ton capacity tank turntable to turn vehicles on its own radius
* Space to fit at least 8 AAVs
Ship Design
* Future space and munition storage for a 76mm gun, port/starboard/aft 30mm guns, CIWS, decoy launching systems,
* Fitted for but not with Hull Mounted Sonar, Air/Surface Search 3D Radar, Electronic Warfare System, Combat Management System, Electro-Optical Tracking System, and Gyro Compass
* Powered by 2 Main Propulsion diesel engines
* Bow thruster and controllable pitch propellers
* 4 Service generators, allowing 3 to be fully capable to power the entire ship including all Fitted for But Not With items
* 2 Reverse Osmosis Plants for freshwater production
* Replenishment at Sea Capability using STANAG 1065 standards
Sensors and Weapons:
* X and S-band solid state Navigation Radars
* Forward Looking Infra Red (FLIR) Camera
* 8 nos. of .50 caliber machine guns with mounts
A .50 cal gun mount on a Tarlac-class LPD. Eight similar guns and mounts are required for the new LPDs.