Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN) update

C

contedicavour

New Member
Overall assessment of RMN

I believe the RMN is a strong regional navy with very strong ASUW capabilities, vastly improving ASW (with the arrival of Agosta and Scorpene) and a good short-range air defence (Aspide on Laksamana and Sea Wolf on Lekiu).
What puzzles me is the lack of homogeneity since the navy has too many different classes of ships and weapons systems, which complicates maintenance and lowers operational availability.
If I look at the question of this thread by starting from Malaysia's needs, I am puzzled by the choice to start a submarine force instead of consolidating the surface fleet with a mix of light multi-purpose FFGs and corvettes/OPVs, with a much higher number of Super Lynx helos (or other types). I don't envisage a SSK threat for the moment, while dominance of the EEZ could become more difficult in the future given all the disagreements over control of offshore oil in the area.

cheers
 
gf0012-aust

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
weasel1962 said:
whilst RSN taking the incremental approach with 2nd hand Swedish subs first before replacing these eventually with subs (then probably with some understanding of operational requirements).
Click to expand...
In actual fact the RSN subs are regarded as some of the most sophisticated SEA platforms in the region.

they are using an export version of the aust localised sig management suite developed for Collins - and we know that they have also been fitted with some very tricky israeli sensors as well.

in addition, the Sings have some UDT sig management tech in place which so far are only used by the US, UK, France and Aust. The tech we've exported has prev only been put on nukes owned by our allies - so Sing is the second conventional owner to get the (export version of the) technology.

we know that they are an order of magnitude better than any of the regional Kilos - and we also regard them as being a match for the export Scorpenes. In real terms we also regard them as being a better platform than the modified Pakistani A-90's.
 
C

contedicavour

New Member
weasel1962 said:
The purchase of submarines in RMN and RSN was borne out of a recognition that the 2 countries lacked sufficient ASW to managed several sub-surface priorities.

These priorities include:
(i) detection & tracking of known/unknown submarines transiting through the very busy Malacca Straits;
(ii) prosecuting potential sub-surface threats eg from Indonesia, China, India, etc (for Malaysia including the vicinity of the Spratleys).

Despite some improvements in surface ASW capabilities eg wasp, super lynx etc, surface ASW will never be as capable as subs in tackling submarines.

However, the 2 countries diverge in their approach. RMN deciding to plunge into high-tech with the purchase of state of the art Scorpenes whilst RSN taking the incremental approach with 2nd hand Swedish subs first before replacing these eventually with subs (then probably with some understanding of operational requirements).
Click to expand...
Yes and undoubtedly the 2 governments have identified a threat and brought forward a solution. My point is more in relative terms : given the much higher threat from enemy surface vessels (ranging from PLAN destroyers down to small pirate fast armed crafts), I would have first completed my surface navy, then moved on to the submarine threat.
Singapore has done it that way IMHO : the 6 modified Lafayette FFGs are the best in the ASEAN area, so why not invest in upgraded ex Swedish SSKs.
Malaysia has fully invested in SSKs (Agosta class Ouessant, then the 2 Scorpene) even before arming its Meko100 corvettes (currently equipped only as gun OPVs...) or adding a few sisterships to the Lekiu FFGs.

cheers
 
S

Subangite

New Member
weasel1962 said:
The RSN operates in 6 ship squadrons. The 2 Vastergotlands ties in to complete the 6 ships so I think that was a small factor in the purchase.
Click to expand...
Press releases from Gov. of Singapore Mindef, quotes that the Vastergotlands are to replace some of current Challenger-class submarines, not be an addition to the current fleet.

Source: Singapore Ministry of Defence.
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_events/nr/2005/nov/04nov05_nr.html

Bear in mind though that these ships will not be operational until 2010 and that the RSS Challenger was built in 1968, which is strikingly odd, since it's a highly old vessel relative to the RSN's new fleet. That said, the Challenger class has been noted as performing well during exercises with the RAN.

weasel1962 said:
I don't think the AIPs are included. If it was, it would likely have been announced. No official announcements were made.

Quote:
"With Kockums' special competence, virtually any conventional submarine can be upgraded to Stirling AIP standard."

However the challenger were not fitted with AIP
Click to expand...
The AIP is not for the current Challenger class which used to be known as Sjöormen class in the Swedish service, the AIP conversion is speculated for the new RSN Vastergotlands, which are yet to be inducted into service.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsub/articles/20051107.aspx

We will have to see if the Vastergotlands are to be upgraded to the Sodermanland which are Vastergotlands but with the Sterling AIP's and stealth features when transfered to the RSN. As of yet I think it remains speculation, but that it is a possibility the RSN would upgrade these vessels to the Sodermanland specifications, or can do so if or whenever it sees fit.

weasel1962 said:
I think that AIP is not needed because the added range is not a "must-have". Singapore isn't too big in any case.
Click to expand...
It is entirely subjective what is a must have, are the 6 La Fayette class stealth frigates a must have?
 
C

contedicavour

New Member
Subangite said:
Press releases from Gov. of Singapore Mindef, quotes that the Vastergotlands are to replace some of current Challenger-class submarines, not be an addition to the current fleet.

Source: Singapore Ministry of Defence.
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_events/nr/2005/nov/04nov05_nr.html

Bear in mind though that these ships will not be operational until 2010 and that the RSS Challenger was built in 1968, which is strikingly odd, since it's a highly old vessel relative to the RSN's new fleet. That said, the Challenger class has been noted as performing well during exercises with the RAN.



The AIP is not for the current Challenger class which used to be known as Sjöormen class in the Swedish service, the AIP conversion is speculated for the new RSN Vastergotlands, which are yet to be inducted into service.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsub/articles/20051107.aspx

We will have to see if the Vastergotlands are to be upgraded to the Sodermanland which are Vastergotlands but with the Sterling AIP's and stealth features when transfered to the RSN. As of yet I think it remains speculation, but that it is a possibility the RSN would upgrade these vessels to the Sodermanland specifications, or can do so if or whenever it sees fit.



It is entirely subjective what is a must have, are the 6 La Fayette class stealth frigates a must have?
Click to expand...
Other sources confirm the 2 Vastergotlands will be fitted with AIP before transfer (Janes 06-07 for example) and that they will replace the 2 oldest Sjoormen/Challenger SSKs.
What I find even more interesting is that Singapore is likely to participate to the Viking/A26 programme. With Norway and Denmark out of that programme, it will be an entirely Swedish-Singapore affair. I definitively look forward to more news on that.

cheers
 
C

contedicavour

New Member
weasel1962 said:
"given the much higher threat from enemy surface vessels"

Actually, I don't see a surface threat to the Malacca straits or territorial waters. The pirates operate more in Indonesian waters rather than Malaysian or Singapore because of the lax state of the Indonesian navy. Some speculate that the military itself is in the piracy business. This has been resolved by joint air-sea cooperation established recently.

State military surface threats can also be countered by air assets such as Harpoon armed F18Ds, F27s, F16s or maverick armed F5s. Both countries have more than adequate air arsenal+munitions to make surface incursions costly. The chinese "threat" is overplayed. Even operating in the Spratleys, the PLAN is going to be a little light on air cover. In any case, China has signed up to a Spratleys treaty that resolve to settle the ownership issue by diplomatic means (thks to Taiwan).

In any case, you don't need missile armed craft to tackle pirates. Both countries have more than sufficient patrol craft to patrol its own waters. If this is insufficient, it doesn't cost much to buy more light patrol boats. Mostly its an identification and deployment issue. The global move in the implementation of AIS has far more impact on identification of illegal vessels.

ASW capability is a little more light in the 90s. It has been boost up esp after the rest of the region has started to concentrate on subs eg China, India, Australia. So the focus on ASW is understandable and probably worth the monies put in.
Click to expand...
I agree with what you state. Singapore has got enough air and surface assets to face whatever comes at it, so focusing on ASW makes sense. My point was more on Malaysia : I would complete surface and air assets before investing so massively on SSKs (buying Scorpene costs hugely more than second hand Sjoormen or Vastergotland, even more so in relative terms as Singapore's naval budget is higher than Malaysia's)

cheers
 
S

sevven

New Member
The significance of the SSK program is to build a submarine warfare capability, which takes time. RMN has been asking for submarines since the 1980s. Looking at past history, it would be quite some time before the government would agree to buying a next batch of SSK, hence the decision to buy new boats.

Yes, there is still much to do with regard to surface and air assets, but the necessary infrastructure and skills are already there; it's only a matter of expanding existing capabilities.
 
F

f2000

New Member
agreed,
we need advance ssk like scorpene as deterrent in facing any conflict in the future.we also want to balance RSN n TNI-AL in term of under surface warfare capability.it will be a huge disadvantage for RMN if she didn't has good under surface warfare capability although maybe has strong surface fleet.
 
S

Subangite

New Member
contedicavour said:
Other sources confirm the 2 Vastergotlands will be fitted with AIP before transfer (Janes 06-07 for example) and that they will replace the 2 oldest Sjoormen/Challenger SSKs.
What I find even more interesting is that Singapore is likely to participate to the Viking/A26 programme. With Norway and Denmark out of that programme, it will be an entirely Swedish-Singapore affair. I definitively look forward to more news on that.

cheers
Click to expand...
exactly, I see it as highly likely that the Vastergotlands would be fitted with AIP, upgraded to a similar standard to that of the Sodermanland class.

Singapore participating in the Viking program? Wow!! :jump2 this is great news! First I've heard of it. Whats your source contedicavour?
 
R

renjer

New Member
f2000 said:
agreed,
we need advance ssk like scorpene as deterrent in facing any conflict in the future.we also want to balance RSN n TNI-AL in term of under surface warfare capability.it will be a huge disadvantage for RMN if she didn't has good under surface warfare capability although maybe has strong surface fleet.
Click to expand...
Developing on the deterrent factor, I would think an SSK like the Scorpene is a potent force-multiplier. Here I thinking of the lone Pakistani submarine that managed to keep the IN at bay in the 1971 (?) war. I don't have the full details so I wouldn't be at all surprised if I were wrong on this. Anyone?

A submarine's stealth also gives it the ability to project power by mining enemy harbours, support raid & recce missions as well as launch land attack weapons. Here, I would be very interested to see if there will be further developments to the SM-39 along the lines of the MM40 Block III in terms of capability.

Its force-multiplier and power projection characteristics make the submarine an ideal weapon-system to carry out the Deterrence and Forward Defence doctrines under Malaysia's National Defence Policy.
 
C

contedicavour

New Member
Subangite said:
exactly, I see it as highly likely that the Vastergotlands would be fitted with AIP, upgraded to a similar standard to that of the Sodermanland class.

Singapore participating in the Viking program? Wow!! :jump2 this is great news! First I've heard of it. Whats your source contedicavour?
Click to expand...
Janes's 2006/07 clearly says that Sweden has offered participation to Singapore on the A26. It is true that Sweden has lost all its other potential partners (Denmark, Norway) and that Singapore could now be Sweden's last hope of getting Viking going...

cheers
 
C

contedicavour

New Member
weasel1962 said:
Noted and very interesting. Will take a look at Janes Naval Forces 06/07 when I get the chance.

More info on Viking:
http://www.kockums.se/Submarines/viking.html

I confess I haven't followed the Viking program news. Anyways the viking project has been terminated and the new program is termed as the A26 according to FMV.

http://www.fmv.se/WmTemplates/Page.aspx?id=1242

The annual report does cite consultations with "international partners". It does shed some light on a potential future direction of the RSN sub-surface intentions.
Click to expand...
Yep indeed, Viking as such is terminated. Official name is A26.

cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top