Malaysia Eyes ASEAN, Middle East with Homegrown Armored Vehicle

W

wzhtg

New Member
Malaysia Eyes ASEAN, Middle East with Homegrown Armored Vehicle

AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
Tue, 25 Apr 2006, 00:09
http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/article_002952.php

A Malaysian firm launched the country’s first homegrown light armored vehicle April 24, with plans to export the fighting machine to Southeast Asia and the Middle East.

The Deftech AV4 is designed and built by Deftech, a wholly-owned subsidiary of conglomerate DRB-HICOM Bhd, which supplies vehicles to the Malaysian armed forces.

Deftech’s marketing chief Godfrey Chang said the diesel-powered armored vehicle with a maximum speed of 110 kilometers (69 miles) per hour was built with the help of foreign partners.

”It is a purely Malaysian product with some foreign expertise in areas such as communications, weapons and engine,” he told reporters at a defense exhibition outside the capital Kuala Lumpur.

”We are looking to sell the vehicle to the Malaysian army, Southeast Asian countries and the Middle East,” he said.

Chang said that a demonstration for the Malaysian military would be conducted next month at the military training school in Port Dickson south of Kuala Lumpur.

Some 560 companies including BAE Systems Plc. from Britain, Sukhoi Co. from Russia and Thales Group from France are participating in the four-day military show.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
R

renjer

New Member
We might not be seeing the AV4 in Malaysian Army service. There have been numerous reports in the local media about the army's continuing preference for 8 x 8 vehicles over 4 x 4 or 6 x 6 vehicles. This much has been stated by both the Commander of the Army as well as the Director of the Armoured Corps. Unfortunately, this information comes from a variety of publications and I am unable to provide a link to any of these.

In fact, there is an ongoing requirement to replace its entire fleet of Class A vehicles. The program is expected to eventually replace the existing Condors and Sibmas currently in service. Between 600-800 armoured vehicles are expected to be purchased under this program. I have copied an article from Janes about the latest development.

The two generals were also quoted as saying that by selecting an 8 x 8 the army would have the flexibility of mounting 105mm cannons and 120mm mortars in future without having to purchase an additional vehicle platform type. This would obviously have advantages in terms of maintenance and logistics.

Here is the article from Janes:

DSA 2006: Malaysia trials trio in search for 8 x 8 requirement

By Christopher F Foss Jane's Land Desk Contributing Editor
Kuala Lumpur

The Malaysian Army is starting a six-week mobility trial of three 8 x 8 vehicles to meet a potential requirement for an initial acquisition of 98 vehicles, which will be sufficient to equip one cavalry regiment.

The three vehicles to be evaluated are:

* the Finnish Patria Vehicles Armoured Modular Vehicle (AMV), fitted with an Oto Melara two-person turret and armed with ATK GunSystems Company 30 mm MK 44 cannon;

* the Swiss Mowag Piranha IIIC, also fitted with an Oto Melara two-person turret; and

* the Turkish FNSS Pars, fitted with a one-person Sharpshooter turret armed with an ATK Gun Systems Company 25 mm M242 cannon.

Defence sources indicated to Jane's that of the total 98 vehicles some 82 are required to be fitted with a turret armed with an automatic cannon.

http://www.janes.com/defence/news/jdw/jdw060428_2_n.shtml
 
D

dreamwarrior73

New Member
IMHO either one of the three vehicles would be an excellent choice for Malaysian Army.

unfortunately, Boxer MRAV won't be available to the Malaysian Army. if not it would be an excellent choice also. :(
 
W

wzhtg

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #4
re

Of the above 3 mentioned i like the patria the most. Though perhaps buying Turkish FNSS Pars would allows to extend coorperation with them in terms of defence. They have a fast attack craft that looks awesome which i would like to see in service in RMN. For the IFV, i think we should consider the CV90 too. What about the new german PUMA?
 
R

renjer

New Member
I believe Mowag already has several agreements signed with Deftech to produce the Pirahna IIIC in Malaysia if it is selected. While Patria has stated that it will arrange for a local partner to do likewise if its AMV is selected. I do not know about the FNSS Pars.

I agree with you that the Malaysian Army should consider the CV90 since it also comes in a family of vehicles types and can be configured for a range of missions. This is very advantageous logistically for a small army like Malaysia's.
 
S

sevven

New Member
For both logistic and cost considerations, why should the Malaysian Army look at the CV90 (which I do like, by the way) when they already have the ACV-300 Adnan in service? They can also look at the extended ACV-S.

I also think that the Deftech AV4 is best positioned as a Protected Infantry Vehicle (PIV) than an APC, very much like the Bushmaster in Australian Army service; the Condor APC to be replaced by a 6x6 or 8x8 platform. It is also interesting to note that two of the three 8x8 armored vehicles quoted in the Jane's article come with the 30mm MK44 cannon. It would be great if this weapon is selected, and retrofitted to the currently 25mm M242-armed Adnans.
 
W

wzhtg

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #8
re

For me the advantages of chossing CV90 are firstly the many configurations that it already has which gives us a wide range of choices to choose from to adapt the vechile to our needs. Also, it's a proven product with many users so we need not worry about supply of spare parts and all and might actually be cheaper due to economies of scale. Also, the swedish defense industry has consitently produced top quality products like Gripen, CV90, Visby and all and i feel Malaysia would do well to sign defence and research agreements with them to tap their expertise in the defence arena
 
S

sevven

New Member
As far as availability of parts, production economies of scale etc are concerned the ACV-300, ACV-S and MIFV are all based on the venerable M113 with thousands already in service around the world in many different configurations. The only think is the CV90 is newer and perhaps a bit more capable, but also more expensive.
 
R

renjer

New Member
sevven said:
I also think that the Deftech AV4 is best positioned as a Protected Infantry Vehicle (PIV) than an APC, very much like the Bushmaster in Australian Army service; the Condor APC to be replaced by a 6x6 or 8x8 platform.
Click to expand...
Is there anyone in active service who might be able to share with us if the Malaysian Army makes a distinction between an APC and a PIV? If it does not then this appears to be a moot point.

If there is a requirement for a PIV then the Condor should be re-tasked with this role after it is replaced by an 8x8. Any funds potentially saved could then be utilised to purchase more 8x8s.

sevven said:
The only think is the CV90 is newer and perhaps a bit more capable, ...
Click to expand...
These are overriding factors in the CV90's favour.

sevven said:
... but also more expensive.
Click to expand...
I would agree with you on this point. If we do not have the funds then we definitely should not buy it. Alternatively, we could utilise any funds saved not buying the AV4 to buy the CV90 or, as you pointed out, the ACV-S.

Overall, I am left wondering if Deftech had done a serious market study of the Malaysian Army's requirements before it started developing the AV4.
 
S

sevven

New Member
I really don't care much about the Deftech AV4. As a private venture it should be treated as such; the Army must not in any way be pressured to buy something it does not need merely to support a local producer.

The way I see it, why should we think about the more expensive, if more capable, CV90 when the ACV-300/S family already satisfies the Army's requirements?
 
R

Ramjetmissile

New Member
Mmm..pardon me for my ignorant! Malaysian's AV4 vs Singaporean's Terrex.
I thought it would be wiser 2 compare military hardwares developed within S.E.A region.
 
R

renjer

New Member
Ramjetmissile, we were discussing the merits of various types of armoured vehicles for the Malaysian Army. The AV4 is a Malaysian product and is being offered to the army by its manufacturer. What would your reasons be for proposing the Terrex for service in the Malaysian Army?
 
F

f2000

New Member
dont think malaysia will buy terrex. av4 is already available.why on earth should we consider terrex?singaporean will laugh at us.

for me av4 can be used or operated behind the line not frontline because adnan will be used for that role.av4 can carry infantry n logistic supply since they are small n light weight .this will make sure at the frontline we wil be fully backed up
 
N

nanotaku

New Member
Yeap, AV4 will have their owns function in the army. Other than forward command post, it can be used as ambulance, mortar carrier, scout car, perimeter defence/patrol vehicle, light strike vehicle, storm troopers carriers, and the list goes on, and the most important factor is, it's cheap. We cannot replace all 600-800 Class A vehicles at one go, as an interim measure, AV4 is what we can afford, to have numbers as many as we could with the small budget that we have, to be paralleled with the change in the army doctrine in modern warfare.
 
C

Chino

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
f2000 said:
dont think malaysia will buy terrex. av4 is already available.why on earth should we consider terrex?singaporean will laugh at us.
Click to expand...
Malaysia considers us (Singapore) as a potential aggressor, and of course, the sentiments are mutual.

Aside from this, it is also Malaysia's stated intention to compete economically with Singapore. So if we are selling weapon systems, they want to sell weapon systems too.

Their national slogan: Malaysia Boleh (Malaysia Can), is very telling of their determination.

I don't think the original suggestion on this thread was for Malaysia to consider "buying" Singapore's Terrex. I thought the suggestion was about comparing both vehicles as potential competitors in other markets.

As to Malaysia buying stuff from Singapore, here's the newsflash:

Singapore has sold weapons, vehicles, munitions or other military technical services to countries in this region including Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand, Burma and even Timor. Singapore has also sold a lot of weapons and munitions to Eastern European customers.

To my knowledge, Malaysia has not bought even a single round of ammo from us. Not that our stuff aren't good enough, but they just can't stand the idea that they have to buy stuff from us.

On the one hand, you can say that their pride is misguided.

But on the other hand, this principle of making wanting to outdo Singapore has spurred development in Malaysia for the past few decades.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top