Indonesia: 'green water navy'

Ananda

The Bunker Group
The specifications diagram that I put, if not mistaken is for PPA Full configuration. If the schedule as specific above, then P433 and P435 will be delivered to TNI-AL still in Light+ configuration (as being build to Marina Militare). For that, if the contract is for PPA Full configuration (as being talk and speculate before), then there's still more work will done in domestic shipyard Fincantieri partner toward that. Asside SSM I believe it's also include work on anti submarine modules.

Add:

Keris FB shown the condition of Daya Radar Utama/Noahtu Shipyard on last March. Shown they are still working on the two OPV 90. Noahtu Shipyard is what Fincantieri told in media as their prefer partner shipyard in Indonesia. Could Fincantieri then will work with Noahtu more on Corvette size design ?
 
Last edited:

ChestnutTree

Active Member
For that, if the contract is for PPA Full configuration (as being talk and speculate before), then there's still more work will done in domestic shipyard Fincantieri partner toward that.
This would make the most sense since it fulfills the entire "TOT or local workshare" law that parliament put in place. I'm also curious to see how it is going to influence future local ship designs, it's no secret that all of the new ships coming out have an obvious SIGMA/Damen design influence.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
also curious to see how it is going to influence future local ship designs, it's no secret that all of the new ships coming out have an obvious SIGMA/Damen design influence.
Don't forget, Fincantieri actually not a new player with Indonesian Naval Industry, especially with PAL. Remember Korvet National program should be with them.


kornas.jpg

Damen that actually come later on, but somehow manage to get better lobby and scope the deal from Fincantieri. So now with PAL busy with Babcock and NG for Frigate and Submarine, it is understandable Fincantieri find other Indonesian Shipyard as local partner.

With PAL limited capacity, it's also better to have few Batam's or Lampung's located shipyards got naval deals. It is better for diversification of capabilities and capacities.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group

Put this FB video on Yacht build by one of the private shipyard in Batam. This is not related to Naval MIC, however put it here just shown some of Batam's product already advance enough, and can rival products from PT. PAL that's so far being considered as most capable Naval Shipyard in Indonesia.

Thus unlike in Aerospace Industry, Indonesian Naval Industry actually shown more diversification capabilities. Considering SOE vs Private Shipyard, by recent productivity actually several Private Shipyard already surpass Most SOE shipyard productivity and capabilities (asside PT. PAL). Commercially few of them already shown better financial performance, against PAL (which so far still being hailed as Benchmark Shipyard). Shown diversification of Private Shipyards on Naval production should be more encourage.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group


For this past few years, there're tendencies that whenever MinDef put something on Assets in their online accounts, then it is ussualy shown their strong intention to bring that Assets. Few days back they already talk on getting Aster 15 for PPA. Now the talk is for Aster 15/30.

If they talk on Aster 30, then the Sylver VLS should be at least on A50 catagory and not the talk of A43. Also the indication before for Red-White Frigates will used Turkiye MIDLAS VLS and Hisar AA Missiles. Will this development on PPA can also switch the procurement from Aselsan-Roketsan to Thales-MBDA ? Or they want to keep 2 suppliers strategy.

Add:
FB_IMG_1713676564622.jpg

Add this aerial image from KERIS Reborn FB pages, on both SIGMA 10514 with one of the Van Spejik. Just shown how SIGMA 10514 are basically still in right size and capabilities to replace Van Speijk. Then again politics come to play, if not either 4 or all 6 Van Speijk should be replace by now with SIGMA 10514.
 
Last edited:

Redlands18

Well-Known Member


For this past few years, there're tendencies that whenever MinDef put something on Assets in their online accounts, then it is ussualy shown their strong intention to bring that Assets. Few days back they already talk on getting Aster 15 for PPA. Now the talk is for Aster 15/30.

If they talk on Aster 30, then the Sylver VLS should be at least on A50 catagory and not the talk of A43. Also the indication before for Red-White Frigates will used Turkiye MIDLAS VLS and Hisar AA Missiles. Will this development on PPA can also switch the procurement from Aselsan-Roketsan to Thales-MBDA ? Or they want to keep 2 suppliers strategy.

Add:
View attachment 51280

Add this aerial image from KERIS Reborn FB pages, on both SIGMA 10514 with one of the Van Spejik. Just shown how SIGMA 10514 are basically still in right size and capabilities to replace Van Speijk. Then again politics come to play, if not either 4 or all 6 Van Speijk should be replace by now with SIGMA 10514.
Great photo of the two 10514 and the Van Speijk shows just how much ship design has changed in the last 60 years.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
That 60 year old design still a handsome warship until now. It is still better design in my opinion compare to Type 21 Frigate. However yes, if we compare SIGMA design toward Leander/Van Speijk, clearly shown how the present design put more emphasis on better Helicopter facility for one thing. Well that's from my amateur eyes.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member


For this past few years, there're tendencies that whenever MinDef put something on Assets in their online accounts, then it is ussualy shown their strong intention to bring that Assets. Few days back they already talk on getting Aster 15 for PPA. Now the talk is for Aster 15/30.

If they talk on Aster 30, then the Sylver VLS should be at least on A50 catagory and not the talk of A43. Also the indication before for Red-White Frigates will used Turkiye MIDLAS VLS and Hisar AA Missiles. Will this development on PPA can also switch the procurement from Aselsan-Roketsan to Thales-MBDA ? Or they want to keep 2 suppliers strategy.

Add:
View attachment 51280

Add this aerial image from KERIS Reborn FB pages, on both SIGMA 10514 with one of the Van Spejik. Just shown how SIGMA 10514 are basically still in right size and capabilities to replace Van Speijk. Then again politics come to play, if not either 4 or all 6 Van Speijk should be replace by now with SIGMA 10514.
This is indeed a great photo to compare the Leander/Van Speijk design with the SIGMA 10514 one. As we know the SIGMA 10514 is 105 m long and the Van Speijks are 113 m long, but looking at the image, it almost looks like the KRI Oswald Siahaan 354 is slightly shorter at first sight.
Only later i saw the (ASW?) equipment on the most aft part of the helicopterdeck, which really limits/disturb the helicopter operations.
As you said in post #2648 they put more emphasis on better helicopter facility in the newer designs, which also allows larger and heavier helicopters.
 

x100 XKR

New Member


For this past few years, there're tendencies that whenever MinDef put something on Assets in their online accounts, then it is ussualy shown their strong intention to bring that Assets. Few days back they already talk on getting Aster 15 for PPA. Now the talk is for Aster 15/30.

If they talk on Aster 30, then the Sylver VLS should be at least on A50 catagory and not the talk of A43. Also the indication before for Red-White Frigates will used Turkiye MIDLAS VLS and Hisar AA Missiles. Will this development on PPA can also switch the procurement from Aselsan-Roketsan to Thales-MBDA ? Or they want to keep 2 suppliers strategy.
I was about to ask abt Sylver VLS version, Aster30 = A50. Or is it?

The Aselsan-Roketsan angle is certainly interesting, considering that the HISAR contract for the Army is effective (or is it really?). I also thought the Navy is going all-in on Turkiye's ATMACA, or is that one still up in the air as well? I read somewhere that the fast missile boats will all go MM40, instead of using the C705/C802 series or is it .... ? So much uncertainty, it's almost like a game show ..... Door number 1 .... it's MM40, door number 2 ..... :)

BTW, whatever happen to the replacement trimaran (Golok)? There is a random video on Youtube showing it on exercise, and brandishing its main armament of ...... a 20mm autocannon (cue the sad trombone here ...... ). Is it pretty much dead?

Program that I recall and their status - can anyone share what the real status are for below:
2nd batch of Chang Bogo class - dead?
Scorpene - contract effective
Chang Bogo 1st batch - under minor refit/ORE program
Surviving type 209 - soldiering on I guess, until the Scorpene is available?
PPA - contract effective, loadout who knows ....
FMP - contract effective, loadout unclear
Van Speijk - still soldiering on .. OWA has the experimental Yakhont VL, the rest have C802
Fatahillah - overhauled, effectively OPVs nowadays with the obsolescence of MM38
Bung Tomo - overhauled with same SEWACO as the Sigmas, VL MICA to replace VL Seawolf is ongoing (or is it .... ?)
Sigma 105 - capped at 2 boats
Parchims - look very active, omni-present on all sea-going exercise. Some even spotted with triple mk 32 ASUW torpedoes .... Soldiering on I guess

Have not listed the ships built at Batam shipyards .... y'all are more familiar with those .....

KCR40 - not sure abt these small boats. I read a long time ago about failed live fire performance with Chinese SSM
KCR60 - this class has some crazy mix, from old 40mm, to Chinese CIWS on the back, to Russian 3in auto cannon, to the new Bofors 57mm.
Trimaran - dead?
Old PSSM mk 5 - 3 left, the missiles have got to be obsolete by now ..... Practically coastal gun boats ....

Sigma 92 - capped at 4 boats
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
was about to ask abt Sylver VLS version, Aster30 = A50. Or is it?
Sylver_Launching_System_-_Types_of_Missiles.gif

This diagram, I don't know how long already circling around in online defense forums. Still I do see representative enough for Sylver VLS. This shown A43 is up to Aster 15. Aster 30 need longer A50. Thus if they only buy A43, then it is means they can only use Aster 15 and VL MICA. So let's see if MinDef PR make another mistakes (intentionally or unintentionally).

GLstCenbIAAgElC.jpeg

This is also already circle around on Indonesian defense enthusiasts forums or accounts. Shown TNI-AL chief presentation on what already in contract and which still in plan but not in contract yet.

The MPA shown PAL Aerospace P-6, While the destroyer shown Type 55. UAV and Marines AAV shown Turkiye products. However whether it will be in contract, that's going to be the question. So I always back to the basic on Indonesia procurement. Nothing certain until the contract execute and payment being made.

Bung Tomo - overhauled with same SEWACO as the Sigmas, VL MICA to replace VL Seawolf is ongoing (or is it .... ?)
So far that's what Navesbu sites said. After all the upgrade even tough done in PAL, but Navesbu become the main system vendor contractor.

 

swerve

Super Moderator
So as tonnyc put, as I also talk before, politics in Indonesia (and in many countries) are murkies. Indonesia is not the only countries where some in Political circles have put effort to 'hold' defense requirements. After all how many in NATO commit for 2% GDP on defense ? Even after Ukrainian war.
About 60% of NATO members this year. That's a big increase from a few years ago. Other countries will probably reach it in the next couple of years.
 

x100 XKR

New Member
View attachment 51284

This diagram, I don't know how long already circling around in online defense forums. Still I do see representative enough for Sylver VLS. This shown A43 is up to Aster 15. Aster 30 need longer A50. Thus if they only buy A43, then it is means they can only use Aster 15 and VL MICA. So let's see if MinDef PR make another mistakes (intentionally or unintentionally).

View attachment 51285

This is also already circle around on Indonesian defense enthusiasts forums or accounts. Shown TNI-AL chief presentation on what already in contract and which still in plan but not in contract yet.

The MPA shown PAL Aerospace P-6, While the destroyer shown Type 55. UAV and Marines AAV shown Turkiye products. However whether it will be in contract, that's going to be the question. So I always back to the basic on Indonesia procurement. Nothing certain until the contract execute and payment being made.



So far that's what Navesbu sites said. After all the upgrade even tough done in PAL, but Navesbu become the main system vendor contractor.

The Navy sure aims high ...... LHD and Destroyer? They have to arm-wrestle some higher ups to change the stack ranking with the AF's F-15EX, which is peculiar too, since I thought the AF wanted F-16V, but the political leadership aimed for more flashy/shiny objects in F-15EX. Although, as area denial missile truck over South China Sea, I can't think of anything better assuming there is budget to operate and to outfit IMO.

Interesting choice w P-6, or is that just for the sake of having a picture? I thought P-8 would be more attractive, bigger customer base, inter-operability perhaps with the neighbor down under, India too. I would think that the new Kawasaki MPA would be a super interesting choice as well with Japan loosening up their export restrictions.

BTW, whatever happened to the Mogami class acquisition?

Coastal defence is also interesting. I assume they mean SSM, not G-MLRS? It makes sense I guess for sea denial, but that means Navy planners are expecting some trouble off Natunas, maybe.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
Navy sure aims high ...... LHD and Destroyer? They have to arm-wrestle some higher ups to change the stack ranking with the AF's F-15EX,
As I mentioned before there's more assets can be acquire if MinDef and TNI agree to drop F-15EX. As LHD and Destroyer, I do suspect potentially one LHD can be in horizon sometime in end of Decade, as it is already in PAL pipeline. Destroyer will be different thing, as they are still short 6 Frigates from plan 12 (base on previous Prabowo's presentation).

As for MPA ? off course 737 base MPA will have better performance then Bombardier Business Jets base MPA. Still all back to budget. Just a thought, instead going to 737 base MPA and AEW, MinDef then decided for budget sake on Bombardier Business Jets MPA and AEW ?

About 60% of NATO members this year. That's a big increase from a few years ago.
Nato-Defense-Spending_Percentage_Site.jpg

My comment on comparing Politicians reluctance to goes to 2% threshold even in NATO is base on this NATO report. This after Trump antics five years ago, and Putin adventure 2 years ago. Yes current NATO estimates expect two third of members will meet 2% threshold by this year. However knowing how budget being prepare and implement, it is still need to be seen.

Anyway my point, even in Euro zone, it is hard to bring the political will to get in to that threshold. Getting politicians in Indonesia or ASEAN or much Global South to commit and get that threshold will be much harder.
 

x100 XKR

New Member
Thank you for posting the chart. It is telling, that NATO countries closer to Russia have mostly met the threshold, with Norway as the exception. Poland is definitely on a spending spree.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
The Navy sure aims high ...... LHD and Destroyer? They have to arm-wrestle some higher ups to change the stack ranking with the AF's F-15EX, which is peculiar too, since I thought the AF wanted F-16V, but the political leadership aimed for more flashy/shiny objects in F-15EX. Although, as area denial missile truck over South China Sea, I can't think of anything better assuming there is budget to operate and to outfit IMO.

Interesting choice w P-6, or is that just for the sake of having a picture? I thought P-8 would be more attractive, bigger customer base, inter-operability perhaps with the neighbor down under, India too. I would think that the new Kawasaki MPA would be a super interesting choice as well with Japan loosening up their export restrictions.

BTW, whatever happened to the Mogami class acquisition?

Coastal defence is also interesting. I assume they mean SSM, not G-MLRS? It makes sense I guess for sea denial, but that means Navy planners are expecting some trouble off Natunas, maybe.
This wishlist looks a little bit unrealistic, specially some items which are "belum kontrak", with exception of the UAVs and the LHD.
I have my doubts about the urgency of getting an LHD, but like Ananda already said, PAL should be able to build one (specially in FFBNW configuration, without advanced sensors, CMS and armament). The only problem would be the question if PAL has enough space and manpower for the construction of the LHD.

And yes, this Powerpoint presentation doesn't look very professional.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
The only problem would be the question if PAL has enough space and manpower for the construction of the LHD.
That's billions rupiah question. How far the real capabilities of Indonesian SOE MIC can be stretch. Personally considering their present facilities, they will be in good condition if they can finish 2+2 arrowhead 140 derivative and 2+2 Scorpene, by end of this decade.

WhatsApp Image 2024-01-09 at 19.32.46_16280082.jpg
200-4270682737.jpg

Remember this PAL CEO presentation? This is where that LHD coming from. Technically from those 4 amphibious assets, two of them already in production, the 3rd ones (163 LPD) already cutting steel for UAE order. Thus in theory their pipeline schedule in 2028 for LPD can be in progress.

However Destroyer? Where that capacity coming on ? Unless they simply agree to buy Type 55 from China as rumours China already offering that. Still can you imagine 3 type of VLS and AAW missiles? Thales-MBDA one in PPA, Aselsan-Roketsan in Arrowhead derivative, and Chinese ones in Type 55.

Madness in planning, but who knows in the end getting simplified due to budget reality. At least that's what happens so far.

FB_IMG_1713962207169.jpg

Add:
Babcock delegates visit PAL Arrowhead 140 modules fabrication facility (credit to PT. PAL FB). Rumours say that PAL will be in behind schedule due to some changes in design. For one thing the length is 140 vs 138+ in original design.
 
Last edited:

Ananda

The Bunker Group

TNI-AL put video shown infiltration operation using submarine. However seems for me, the video purpose is to shown all three DSME 1400 already back to operational. Is the ORE done by DSME/Hanwha Ocean and PAL already finish? Are the results already satisfied TNI-AL so far ?

Perhaps the video being used by TNI-AL to give that answer.
 
Last edited:

Ananda

The Bunker Group

There's this publication that mostly circulating within Navy Community in Indonesia. For several days some Indonesian forumers already talking on the 'advertisement' on the magazine latest edition.

1714134743048.png

Now Navantia is practically relative newcomers to Indonesiaan naval market, compare to the likes of Fincantieri or Damen. However seems they're quite active in lobbying for past few years.


So is this serious contender? I can only say so far the sign shown Navantia serious enough to enter one category that TNI-AL already for decades put in their plan. category of dedicated AAW Frigate/Destroyer.

In 90's Indonesia talk with Netherlands to gain both Tromp class AAW Frigate once DZP class AAW Frigate coming. East Timor and more importantly Asian Financial Crises plus Soeharto downfall close that chapter. During Jokowi's first term, Damen try to revive the offer using DZP derivative as AAW Frigate.

One thing for sure, neither Arrowhead 140 derivative currently build in PAL, or Fincantieri PPA is AAW Frigates. Both can be considered as GP Frigate even for PPA in full configuration. Which is back to my previous post # 2651 on TNI-AL chief. That destroyer he mentioned in presentation basically for this long awaited category.

Asside for budget, this Destroyer or Heavy Frigate AAW category have one political problem to solve. None of Indonesian Shipyard (at least by end of Decades or even early next one), have capacity to build one. PAL with their current capacity and capabilities, will be heavily involve with Arrowhead 140 derivative project. Seems sign shown the deal can be 2+2. However even that, as part of their learning curve, it is inevitable they will face some delays in their Arrowhead 140 production. Thus they can't from any angles that I can see involve with other Frigate projects within this decade.

Which is why Fincantieri now working with Noahtu Shipyard as their partner for next offer. There's rumours potentially the contract for Fincantieri will be reduce from 6 to 4. What's not clear whether this 4 already included current contract for 2 PPA or not. Noahtu now finishing 2 OPV 90 (which just PPA only OPV in name but have configuration of Corvettes). Thus any deal with Fincantieri will be done after those 2 OPV 90 being launch.

Both Noahtu and PAL so far that shown have capacities for manufacturing Corvettes or Frigate sizes vessel. There're other potentially one or two other Shipyard in Batam that potentially can work on Naval vessel that size, like Palindo which's manufacturer of Coast Guard Cutter/OPV. Still none have track record to work on full size Frigates let alone Destroyer sizes. Even if Noahtu come to calculation, it's in my suspicion going to be work under Fincantieri as main contractor.

Thus even tough they got budget for this "Destroyer" (something that in theory can be done if they ditch F-15ID), most likely has to be done in overseas yard. This means has the get most political factions agree as the mantra so far is to involve local industry.

Whether this F-110 from Spain or Type 052D from China (as I try to look all information, eventough in picture on Naval Chief presentation they put Type 055, but seems the serious offer so far is Type 052D), I suspect it is more likely for 2 vessel at most. AAW Frigate going to cost more then Arrowhead 140, PPA or FREMM. Wondering whether Fincantieri will try to counter Spain and Chinese lobby.
 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member

There's this publication that mostly circulating within Navy Community in Indonesia. For several days some Indonesian forumers already talking on the 'advertisement' on the magazine latest edition.

View attachment 51295

Now Navantia is practically relative newcomers to Indonesiaan naval market, compare to the likes of Fincantieri or Damen. However seems they're quite active in lobbying for past few years.


So is this serious contender? I can only say so far the sign shown Navantia serious enough to enter one category that TNI-AL already for decades put in their plan. category of dedicated AAW Frigate/Destroyer.

In 90's Indonesia talk with Netherlands to gain both Tromp class AAW Frigate once DZP class AAW Frigate coming. East Timor and more importantly Asian Financial Crises plus Soeharto downfall close that chapter. During Jokowi's first term, Damen try to revive the offer using DZP derivative as AAW Frigate.

One thing for sure, neither Arrowhead 140 derivative currently build in PAL, or Fincantieri PPA is AAW Frigates. Both can be considered as GP Frigate even for PPA in full configuration. Which is back to my previous post # 2651 on TNI-AL chief. That destroyer he mentioned in presentation basically for this long awaited category.

Asside for budget, this Destroyer or Heavy Frigate AAW category have one political problem to solve. None of Indonesian Shipyard (at least by end of Decades or even early next one), have capacity to build one. PAL with their current capacity and capabilities, will be heavily involve with Arrowhead 140 derivative project. Seems sign shown the deal can be 2+2. However even that, as part of their learning curve, it is inevitable they will face some delays in their Arrowhead 140 production. Thus they can't from any angles that I can see involve with other Frigate projects within this decade.

Which is why Fincantieri now working with Noahtu Shipyard as their partner for next offer. There's rumours potentially the contract for Fincantieri will be reduce from 6 to 4. What's not clear whether this 4 already included current contract for 2 PPA or not. Noahtu now finishing 2 OPV 90 (which just PPA only OPV in name but have configuration of Corvettes). Thus any deal with Fincantieri will be done after those 2 OPV 90 being launch.

Both Noahtu and PAL so far that shown have capacities for manufacturing Corvettes or Frigate sizes vessel. There're other potentially one or two other Shipyard in Batam that potentially can work on Naval vessel that size, like Palindo which's manufacturer of Coast Guard Cutter/OPV. Still none have track record to work on full size Frigates let alone Destroyer sizes. Even if Noahtu come to calculation, it's in my suspicion going to be work under Fincantieri as main contractor.

Thus even tough they got budget for this "Destroyer" (something that in theory can be done if they ditch F-15ID), most likely has to be done in overseas yard. This means has the get most political factions agree as the mantra so far is to involve local industry.

Whether this F-110 from Spain or Type 052D from China (as I try to look all information, eventough in picture on Naval Chief presentation they put Type 055, but seems the serious offer so far is Type 052D), I suspect it is more likely for 2 vessel at most. AAW Frigate going to cost more then Arrowhead 140, PPA or FREMM. Wondering whether Fincantieri will try to counter Spain and Chinese lobby.
F110-Class Multimission Frigates, Spain (naval-technology.com)
As a Destroyer? Its smaller than the F101/Hobart classes and is being fitted with only 1/3 of the VLS the F101 was built with. Though Spain might be up for a similar deal to the PPA, transfer ships already ordered. Spain would certainly be happy to build a couple of improved F101/Hobarts, and they are desperate for more work with nothing coming after the last F110.
 
Top