Indonesia: 'green water navy'

ChestnutTree

Active Member
The way I interpreted the news so far, Odense still own the design. However if PAL need Odense help for construction, they can't give it. Thus has to work with Babcock that already taking over construction projects of the design.
I stand by my opinion that they should really just get 2 more FREMMs instead of an Iver Huitdfelt variant. I don't see how working with Odense (IP owner) and then having to contact Babcock (lead builder) is somehow more efficient and cheaper than simply going to a single supplier like Fincantieri to just build 2 more AAW frigates on top of the order of 6 FREMMs. I am not confident PAL has enough experience to construct an Iver Huitdfelt on their own without some help from another established builder let alone building 2 FREMMs from the order of 6 simultaneously.
 
Last edited:

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
I stand with opinion that they should really just get 2 more FREMMs instead of an Iver Huitdfelt variant. I don't see how working with Odense (IP owner) and then having to contact Babcock (lead builder) is somehow more efficient and cheaper than simply going to a single supplier like Fincantieri to just build 2 more AAW frigates on top of the order of 6 FREMMs. I am not confident PAL has enough experience to construct an Iver Huitdfelt on their own without some help from another established builder.
I was actually thinking the same, 8 FREMMs instead of 6 FREMMs + 2 Iver Huitfeldts are more cost effective to build for PAL and building two different classes at the same time for a shipyard with not much experience with the manufacturing of frigates, is quite complicated, which also certainly slow down the production rate.

Besides that, 8 FREMMs with each a 16-cell Sylver A50 VLS + 16 Aster 15 or 30 is already AAW enough.


Forgot to post this...
Last month some navy officers already finished their training, and last week TNI-AL received the Insitu ScanEagle after some years of waiting.
 
Last edited:

Ananda

The Bunker Group
stand by my opinion that they should really just get 2 more FREMMs instead of an Iver Huitdfelt variant.
The problem is we still don't know the situation on the two Iver Based Frigates. Are those actually already in contract or they're still in discussion.

The local forums, FB and blogs also talk on 16 Full size Frigates. This come from a leak from MinDef session with Parliament. If this is true then it's changing the paradigm from Naval fleet concept with base on Corvettes/OPV size fleet (as TNI-AL have today) to larger greenish blue water concept.

We are building the fleet for green water concept, that's why the bulk of the fleet consists of Large Patrol/Corvettes size vessels. The bulk of our fleet still based on Ex DDR Parchim, which fall on that catagorise.

Can we afford to operate 16 Full size Frigates ? What I mean not afford to build or procured that full size Frigates, however afford to operate. TNI including TNI-AL still annually owed Pertamina on back payment of the fuel. Mostly due to emergency operation or even prolong Patrol duties that exceeding time length.

This is only on the fuel costs. Can TNI afford more expensive parts and maintenance? Can the operation budget get triple or at least more than double from now? TNI-AL barely can afford Patrol Boats - Corvettes size fleet they have right now for operational tempo that being needed. To get operational with a fleet based on large Frigates size concept ?
Those Frigates can end up like Thailand carrier that spend much of her time in harbour.

Unsurprisingly, only very small minorities of Indonesian enthusiasts that even understand the implications on getting that 16 Full Frigates will be. As usual many in Indonesia (so called analyst in media) only thinking on how to procure and not how to operate.

Back to Frigates program, if those 6 FREMM can be procured and build, as Van Speijks replacement then it's already good thing. From Japan (as the rumours that on going talk still happening), instead of 8 30FFM, better build MHI design of Corvettes/OPV. Better co-op with MHI to build 16 of them as Parchim replacement.
As for that Iver base Frigates, if it's already on contractual stages, then they have no choice to go ahead. If not, I do agree to better change it to FREMM AAW version (if TNI-AL still adamant to have 2 AAW specialised Frigates).
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
The problem is we still don't know the situation on the two Iver Based Frigates. Are those actually already in contract or they're still in discussion.

The local forums, FB and blogs also talk on 16 Full size Frigates. This come from a leak from MinDef session with Parliament. If this is true then it's changing the paradigm from Naval fleet concept with base on Corvettes/OPV size fleet (as TNI-AL have today) to larger greenish blue water concept.

We are building the fleet for green water concept, that's why the bulk of the fleet consists of Large Patrol/Corvettes size vessels. The bulk of our fleet still based on Ex DDR Parchim, which fall on that catagorise.

Can we afford to operate 16 Full size Frigates ? What I mean not afford to build or procured that full size Frigates, however afford to operate. TNI including TNI-AL still annually owed Pertamina on back payment of the fuel. Mostly due to emergency operation or even prolong Patrol duties that exceeding time length.

This is only on the fuel costs. Can TNI afford more expensive parts and maintenance? Can the operation budget get triple or at least more than double from now? TNI-AL barely can afford Patrol Boats - Corvettes size fleet they have right now for operational tempo that being needed. To get operational with a fleet based on large Frigates size concept ?
Those Frigates can end up like Thailand carrier that spend much of her time in harbour.

Unsurprisingly, only very small minorities of Indonesian enthusiasts that even understand the implications on getting that 16 Full Frigates will be. As usual many in Indonesia (so called analyst in media) only thinking on how to procure and not how to operate.

Back to Frigates program, if those 6 FREMM can be procured and build, as Van Speijks replacement then it's already good thing. From Japan (as the rumours that on going talk still happening), instead of 8 30FFM, better build MHI design of Corvettes/OPV. Better co-op with MHI to build 16 of them as Parchim replacement.
As for that Iver base Frigates, if it's already on contractual stages, then they have no choice to go ahead. If not, I do agree to better change it to FREMM AAW version (if TNI-AL still adamant to have 2 AAW specialised Frigates).
Yes, one day those around 35 years old Parchim I class corvettes need to be replaced with new and decent armed corvettes. The MHI OPV-design can be a good base for that. But maybe PAL's own OPV-design is also good enough and it probably needs a lower budget.
Anyway, it has to be multirole, capable of ASW-tasks and able to defend itself against sea-skimming anti-ship missiles.
Sometimes you see TNI-AL 'anti-aircraft exercises' on videos, but the only thing you see is the crew aiming their manually operated guns on low and slow flying NC212 turboprop transport aircrafts at a distance of 200-300 meters. What kind of 'modern warfare' is that!?


Anyway, today the navy commissioned 2 new 29 meter long patrol boats, made by PT Palindo Marine Shipyard at Batam.


This sentence really draw my attention.
Usai pelaksanaan serah terima kedua KAL tersebut, Kasal Laksamana TNI Yudo Margono mengukuhkan Kapten Laut (P) Juswan Simamora sebagai Komandan KAL Pandang I-1-72 yang bertugas dibawah komando Lanal Tanjung Balai Asahan dan Kapten Laut (P) Fidel Castro sebagai komandan KAL Sarudik I-2-18 yang bertugas di Lanal Sibolga.

 
Last edited:

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
My apologies for the slightly off-tangent reply below.
Sometimes you see TNI-AL 'anti-aircraft exercises' on videos, but the only thing you see is the crew aiming their manually operated guns on low and slow flying NC212 turboprop transport aircrafts at a distance of 200-300 meters. What kind of 'modern warfare' is that!?
Agreed.

Look at Exercise Pacific Griffin 2017, 2019 and 2021, to see the air and naval assets brought to bear by the USN and the RSN to increase the level of difficulty for fleet defence actions by the task group defending against air and underwater attack. China’s rise and the design range of its air-to-air missiles (and the PLA(N) strike complex ensures that all air forces and navies need to evolve at a system design level). The F-35B to be acquired in 2026 and beyond for Singapore has four basic missions: air superiority, or offensive and defensive counterair; suppression or destruction of enemy air defenses (known as SEAD and DEAD); close air support; and strategic attack against high-value strategic and mobile targets. Block 4 also adds a fifth basic mission, Winter said: “extended surface warfare.” Upgrades will enhance radar “for maritime surveillance, identification and targeting.”

"Exercises like Pacific Griffin emphasize cooperation while building competencies in a complex and technologically-advanced training environment," said U.S. Navy Capt. Chase Sargeant, commander, Task Force 71. "This exercise demonstrates the trust and expertise we have built over the years with the Singaporean navy through increasingly complex and integrated training and live fire events.”
(i) RSS Fearless is tasked to deploy modules for UAV (and in future USV for multi-static active sonar use to hunt and defend against the Los Angeles class attack submarines playing the role of Red Force).​
(ii) Growlers are being used simulate for the fight for dominance of the electric spectrum to increase the level of difficulty for the F-15SGs in their maritime strike role. Certainly in the late 2030s, F-15SG’s CONOPS for WSO training program or EA-18G CONOPS for training the 2nd crew member, both in a maritime strike/SEAD role is going to be increasingly copied or replicated in a systematic fashion by various countries in the Indo-Pacific.​
Anyway, today the navy commissioned 2 new 29 meter long patrol boats, made by PT Palindo Marine Shipyard at Batam.
I actually like these very small, 29 metre boats for inshore and coastal actions. If ship stabilisers are installed, these will be way superior to the stupid tank boat. Stability of a mono-hull form in adverse weather is important to hit shore targets. The catamaran tank boat is only stable in calm weather — I don’t think good planning relies on good weather for fire support.
 
Last edited:

Ananda

The Bunker Group
Exercise Pacific Griffin 2017, 2019 and 2021, to see the air and naval assets brought to bear by the USN and the RSN to increase the level of difficulty for fleet defence actions by the task group defending against air and underwater attack.
The kind of thinking that TNI (from all services) has human resources capabilities to absorb all modern thinking is still strong in many Indonesian public. However when I have some occasionall talk with IT vendors that also being used by TNI on their Projects (some of them also used by financial Industry). Basically they talk on capabilities gap within TNI on absorbing latest tech.

It's not TNI problem alone, all sectors have that Tech Gap. Seems young and Middle rank officers have good technical capabilities to absorb latest tech trend and thus have better understanding on level of technology challenge on latest trend in modern warfare. They also talk on how the senior officers still has problem on bridging the Gap, and the Juniors sometimes have difficulties to provide their point to get through. Good thing some of the high ranking brass realise this.

However the big problem is the quite significant tech gap with non-officers/enlisted core. This related with TNI has relative good recruitment process and training for their officers, while not on enlisted recruitment. This's make big problem when TNI gearing up for modern defense assets. The officers are the one in command, while the enlisted are the ones that operate them.

That's why building and procurement of latest tech defense items will have challenge on how to prepare the human resources on operating them. The tragedy of Nanggala for example create considerable set back on preparing that (for Submarine forces). Both the original 209 Cakra and Nanggala are being prepared to provide training ground on developing crew set for future submarines. Now they can only relied to Cakra as the other three DSME 209 are geared for operational purpose.

The light Frigates/Corvettes of 3 Fatahilla, 3 Bung Tomo, 4 Sigma 9013, and 2 Sigma 10514 are the ones that TNI-AL can relied for relative modern surface combattan. Thus they also the ones that has to produce human resources for future Frigates. They can't relied on the Parchim for example as the Tech Gap is too big compare to FREMM as example.

Many in Public, Media, and Political circles seems not realizing that. It's just the same in commercial sectors when it used mainly training their officers and managers, but forgot to provide better training for their staff. More technology getting on day to day operation, which make the staff now has to be upgraded also. Thus just like in commercial sectors now that train their staff (not only the managers), TNI has to catch up with better training for their enlisted ranks.

Until then, TNI will be left behind on proper modern warfare operation. No matter how expensive and advance their new assets will be.

these very small, 29 metre boats for inshore and coastal actions, which are superior to the stupid tank boat.
For me, I just hope they are being relegated to Bakamla/Coast Guard. This is related to the focus of TNI-AL as Navy. I prefer them to concentrate with That KCR-60 above. Preparing their human resources for modern warfare doctrine. That kind of patrol boats only good for constabulary duties, something that should be Coast Guard duties. Those boats just represent in my opinion TNI-AL stubborness and reluctantly to give constabulary duties altogether to Coast Guard.

Their budget for those patrol boats should be taken. Their personnel that running those boats should be transferred to Coast guard. Those guys are not train with modern warfare anyway. They only good on doing constabulary duties. So why keep them (both the assets and personnel) within the Navy ?
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
I actually like these very small, 29 metre boats for inshore and coastal actions. If ship stabilisers are installed, these will be way superior to the stupid tank boat. Stability of a mono-hull form in adverse weather is important to hit shore targets. The catamaran tank boat is only stable in calm weather — I don’t think good planning relies on good weather for fire support.
They are indeed very suitable for inshore and coastal actions. Specially to guard naval bases, transports between the shore and large naval vessels, support during disasters and for logistical tasks between bases, these light armed 28 kts boats are perfect for it.

Im sure that the X18 Antasena will be only used for operations near the coast, in and around rivers and for amphibious operations.

But like Ananda already said, for serious patrol duties, larger vessels like the 40 m boats or even better the 60 m ones are needed for it.
 
Last edited:

swerve

Super Moderator
Reading the discussion about the uncertainty of the future of Indonesian frigate & corvette purchases led me to review what Indonesia currently has. I'd forgotten how old the Ahmad Yani (van Speijk) class frigates are. Replacing them must be the first priority in this area. The ships discussed are all capable, & I see the important factors as when replacements can be delivered, provision of crews & support, & especially a solid plan for their use, rather than exactly which type. FREMM would certainly do the job. Precise fit-out should depend on exactly how they're planned to be used.

Much the same for replacing the Fatahillah & Kapitan Pattimura (Parchim) classes. More Sigmas (perhaps a couple of variants - more 9113 & some 8313) could be the logical choice, but there are also other possibilities. There are arguments for commonality, but that doesn't necessarily require the fitting of identical weapons & systems to all ships. It depends on role. It looks to me as if improved ASW capability is needed, but I don't feel qualified to say exactly how it should be provided. For local air defence I can't help wondering if Indonesia will go from VL Mica to VL Mica NG.

As I said, the most important thing is what the ships are needed to do. I get a feeling (please correct me if I'm wrong) that this isn't being discussed enough.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
the most important thing is what the ships are needed to do. I get a feeling (please correct me if I'm wrong) that this isn't being discussed enough.
This's my question too. As I have mentioned before they (TNI) info that being leaked to public is talking to build a fleet of 16 Frigates. That's more than double what they have in the 90's up until present time.

Eventough old, Van Speijk (A Yani) Class were once front line full Frigate under NATO classification. They have other Frigates before like US Claud Jones and British Tribal, however both can only considered Light Frigates or Corvettes Plus. Thus building 16 Frigates (if this's true of the plan) means changing the Fleet paradigm of operation. Like I said in my post, I don't know if TNI-AL ready or not.

What information that still unclear is whose going to be Parchim replacement. TNI-AL on their credit manage to operate those ex DDR Corvettes quite effectively, even though they have to spend quite substantial amount of their budget to modernize them. Still those become back bone on their patrol and naval duties throughout the archipelago. Those ships provide most TNI-AL presences over EEZ operation.

However their ASuW capabilities already outdated by the time they're operating within TNI-AL fleet. There's talk (based on the leak of MinDef/TNI discussion in Parliament session) that both more potent AAW and ASuW is what TNI-AL need to build. Off course the talk on achieve inter service network operational capabilities is Paramount in TNI plan. How to achieve it, that's not really clear yet.

The procurement plan on integrating Euro and US based electronics and system seems what the TNI planners aim for. This why they're engaged Greece's Scytalys to do that. However what type of assets (especially Naval Surface) fleet that going to be build and procured is what not clear yet.

Aside the talk of Fincantieri FREMM which seems will be Van Speijk replacement, the other replacement for the rest of the Fleet still not clear yet.

The Patrol duties is clear going to be fill by bunch of local build 28m-44m patrol boats. They are only good for constabulary duties, which is why I'm ranting they should be reassign to Coast Guard. President already talk that constabulary jurisdiction on Indonesian waters should be handle by Bakamla/Coast Guard. However like always in Indonesia the implementation of Political talk will not always consistently done in the field.

Why I'm talking on this, cause it will determine the focus of TNI-AL operational doctrine. If all coastal patrol and constabulary duties are already left to Coast Guard, then they can focus to rebuild their fleet for Green Water operation. This's in the end why this thread talking on Indonesia green water Navy. However I must say what they have and what their doctrine still Brownish-Green Water Navy.

Until they're clearly redefine their doctrine to be consistent as Green Water Navy (or even Greenish-Blue) then their Procurement still patching things up. There's already studies by Indonesian Technological Development Bureau (BPPT) saying that TNI-AL should focus only with vessels 60m-80m above to be effective to do their job as guardian of Indonesia Maritime borders. If that being done then they are going to replace Parchim with 90m Corvettes/OPV. This will make it more in line with 12 relative modern Light Frigates/Corvettes they're having right now.

It's back to consistently defining their doctrine. So far I'm still see they're not very consistent on that yet. Hopefully it will change, and defining the work share and rules with Coast Guard is one big step the Administration need to put their feet down.
 

spoz

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
In general terms, and very much as an outsider, I would have thought it better to go for more Sigmas; both the shipyard and the Navy are familiar with them, and they wouldn’t introduce yet another approach to ship design, and requirements for another logistics support structure. However, if you are not going to, then pick one design and stick with that; building two different designs from two different countries that doing essentially the same job would seem to make life after they are delivered unnecessarily complicated.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
would have thought it better to go for more Sigmas; both the shipyard and the Navy are familiar with them, and they wouldn’t introduce yet another approach to ship design, and requirements for another logistics support structure
From what the info from MinDef sites and Media including online sites, I don't think they will go with Damen Sigma anymore. Seems PAL (as leading SOE yard) wants a deal similar with what they got with Daesun on Makasar class LPD, which is share ownership of IP rights. This like in Makasar based LPD able for PAL to redesign the base and come out with design with their own IP rights. Damen from what I heard reluctance to give that.

Odense on the other hand wiling to be more flexible with their StanFlex design. So expectation before is for PAL getting on StanFlex frigate or even OPV design with Odense. However then come Fincantieri (which already have longer term talk with PAL on national corvette program). There's still much speculation what actualy Financantieri offer (asside workshare of 4+2), however it's rumours (I heard from SOE guys) that they will give PAL IP rights for OPV/Corvette design base on their own (for Parchim replacement).

Other potential dark horse still MHI due to Japan rumours investment packages, including their packages to improve local shipyards. Moreover Japan commercial interest in Indonesia already being build for decades. Something that can't be ignored.

Point that I make, it's logical to focus on one design. However political, Investment and Commercial factors from several 'interest' can still create few design will be taken afterall. However the decision will be taken later on by end of year at most in my opinion. The administration still focus on COVID development. I suspect they will taken time until later part of this year when they expect 50%+ of Java and Bali population already being fully vacinated.
 
Last edited:

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
In general terms, and very much as an outsider, I would have thought it better to go for more Sigmas; both the shipyard and the Navy are familiar with them, and they wouldn’t introduce yet another approach to ship design, and requirements for another logistics support structure. However, if you are not going to, then pick one design and stick with that; building two different designs from two different countries that doing essentially the same job would seem to make life after they are delivered unnecessarily complicated.
Yes go with say 6 ASW and 2 GP FREMMS, don’t quite understand why you would go with 2 completely different designs. Extra Aviation and ASW capability into the first and a better AAW fit for the 2nd. Makes far more sense,
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
FB_IMG_1625472105710.jpg

Got this from Kris FB on the Google Earth photo of KRI Pati Unus that hit hard object during their entry into Belawan Harbour. That close to 5 years ago. I don't know why they're not scraping this vessels, as it's already total lost.

Just like Norway Helge Ingstad, the cost to rebuild the vessels are already much more than it's worth. There'are scap mettal yard around the area that I believe can take the vessels away. Some value still can be raise from the metals.
 

kato

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Odense on the other hand wiling to be more flexible with their StanFlex design. So expectation before is for PAL getting on StanFlex frigate or even OPV design with Odense.
Odense does not have any ("recent") OPV designs.

The Knud Rasmussen class 72m-long Stanflex arctic OPVs for the Danish Navy were built...
- by Karstensens Skibsværft (in Skagen, Denmark - business focus is mid-sized fishing trawlers)
- with most work done at their Polish subsidiary shipyard (like all their ships)
- to a design originally provided by Rolls-Royce
- which was adapted by SMK (a German engineering company of former Blohm+Voss employees).

The design would probably also require a full work-over to adapt to Indonesian requirements, such as to remove the unneeded ice capability.

Stanflex is a bit overrated as regards flexibility. The only reason Denmark still uses it to the extent it does is because - well, they paid money for those modules 30 years ago, and the "bathtubs" on Absalons and Iver Huitfeldts are a cheap way to mount all those they had left over when they retired (and sold) the boats that originally mounted them.
While the relatively new Knud Rasmussen OPVs nominally have positions (or rather: spare space) for them most of these positions aren't wired to actually put modules in there adhoc.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group

Put this video from you tube, since it's talk on the testing of OPV 90 design. Sorry the video in Indonesia. The testing being done on Indonesian Research and Technology Bureau (BPPT) Hydrodynamic facilities. Seems according to this the design is indigenous base, and will be build by one of Commercial (non SOE yard) in Batam.

One thing that I want to comment in here is that they simulate the 80% speed of 24kt. Means this design can have max speed of 30kt. That's bit high for an OPV. Which means as I suspect they build more on Corvettes specs, rather then just OPV. Similar thing with PT. PAL Missile Boats (KCR) 60 that by PAL in their info graphics sometimes being call OPV 60.

Anyway those facilities being build in early 90's. At time Soeharto order Habibie (then Tech Minister) to build supporting infrastructure for domestic research. This includes Wind Tunnels and this Hydrodynamic facilities. Just shown as I have mentioned before in Indonesian threads, how Soeharto as a Dictator still have better visions compared to his democratic elected successors.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member

Put this video from you tube, since it's talk on the testing of OPV 90 design. Sorry the video in Indonesia. The testing being done on Indonesian Research and Technology Bureau (BPPT) Hydrodynamic facilities. Seems according to this the design is indigenous base, and will be build by one of Commercial (non SOE yard) in Batam.

One thing that I want to comment in here is that they simulate the 80% speed of 24kt. Means this design can have max speed of 30kt. That's bit high for an OPV. Which means as I suspect they build more on Corvettes specs, rather then just OPV. Similar thing with PT. PAL Missile Boats (KCR) 60 that by PAL in their info graphics sometimes being call OPV 60.

Anyway those facilities being build in early 90's. At time Soeharto order Habibie (then Tech Minister) to build supporting infrastructure for domestic research. This includes Wind Tunnels and this Hydrodynamic facilities. Just shown as I have mentioned before in Indonesian threads, how Soeharto as a Dictator still have better visions compared to his democratic elected successors.
Thank You for sharing, sadly the background music is louder than the voice of the talking persons. I didnt expect that PT DRU already had the knowledge and expertise to design and construct combat warships that size.

I think it was almost 20 years ago that Indonesia planned to build corvettes based on the Comandanti class with ToT from Fincantieri, but from which i remember the plan was to construct the ships at PAL.

Not only the Project 1331 Kapitan Pattimura corvettes need to be replaced, but TNI-AL needs just a lot more larger vessels with longer endurence.

Not in the priority list, but still urgently needed is at least one submarine rescue and support ship. Because of the special design, requirements and equipment, a contract with a foreign shipyard is almost certain, which will make it a expensive procurement.

A program like the one from Vietnam can decrease the costs. The Vietnamese Navy will soon commision the Yet Kieu, a submarine rescue ship of the MSSARS 9316 design from Damen Shipyards, but built in Vietnam by Z189 shipyard.


And it seems that soon the ordered deep diving submarine rescue vehicle will be delivered, to be used by the Yet Kieu 927.


If Vietnam can have such a ship, then why not Indonesia?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

PTamb

New Member

Ananda

The Bunker Group
no one would make any money out of it. No one wants to touch it.
I'm bit has different opinion. That number can be call 'convinient number' by our Bureaucracy. Not big enough to attract too much attention (like Warship or Fighters procurement), but still big enough as side projects.

This can turn out being build without much media attention. Especialy if build in local shipyard. The type of vessels is something that most yards in Batam already familiar with. The costs will mostly come from foreign build equipments, especialy hyperbaric chambers and DSRV.

Just like the minehunters or survey ships build in German and French. Something they talk in minimum expose in media, then 2-3 years latter the construction already begin. The talk on the budgey is from last year. I suspect we can see the info progress on this project next year.
 

PTamb

New Member
I'm bit has different opinion. That number can be call 'convinient number' by our Bureaucracy. Not big enough to attract too much attention (like Warship or Fighters procurement), but still big enough as side projects.

This can turn out being build without much media attention. Especialy if build in local shipyard. The type of vessels is something that most yards in Batam already familiar with. The costs will mostly come from foreign build equipments, especialy hyperbaric chambers and DSRV.

Just like the minehunters or survey ships build in German and French. Something they talk in minimum expose in media, then 2-3 years latter the construction already begin. The talk on the budgey is from last year. I suspect we can see the info progress on this project next year.
Mostly agree with your points. But my opinion falls to only a few companies can manage to support this project.

yes the vessel can be made locally. IIRC, shouldnt cost more than 15 mil usd for the vessel.

now the problem lies with the dsrv, hyperbaric chambers, launch systems, and supporting systems.

two companies that I know of would offer the above as a package. JFD’s dsrv alone cost the whole approved budget, if not more. Let alone they’re not selling. They lease.

another company’s offer cost as much as the approved budget. No margins or very tiny at least.

i’m not being pessimistic since this project has just entered it’s early stages but I might want to lower my expectations.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
do believe that at least this Submarine can be still use for at least to end of this decade for training purpose of new submariners

Adding from my previous post on KRI Cakra, the PAL FB pages shown further assessment by TNI-AL on Cakra overhaul. I still think that overhauling this old submarine still worth while in order to provide vessels in building good Submariners. Something that many Indonesian public, media and enthusiasts seems forgot how important job that is.

Please don't forget to build proper Submarine support infrastructure, including the emergency rescue vessels.
 
Top