weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited:
Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN) update
- Thread starter Ding
- Start date
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
But the Air Force I'm sure does this already. Certainly RAAF and RAN work "hand in hand" all the time.
I'm sure the Air Force would take a dim view of anyone attempting to take it's "assets" from it and establishing a completely separate training, support system etc is going to be costly.
I just don't see how this move benefits the Malaysian Defence Force as a whole. If the RMAF isn't supporting the RMN in the manner you've described, then it's an issue of "jointness" (ie: the ability of your forces to work as a "joint force") and is an issue the Chief of the Malaysian Forces would be seriously addressing I suspect.
A tactical fighter is not a maritime patrol aircraft and does not have a significant loiter capability, even long ranged fighters like Sukhois do not. With a small air combat fleet, such as Malaysia possesses, they are not going to be capable of providing 24/7 combat air patrols above your fleet, especially at longer ranges, but rather will seek to establish "temporary" air dominance where the strike capabilities of both your air force and navy can be maximised and your forces can manoeuvre freely.
Personally I think the Hornets in Malaysian service will mostly be used for anti-shipping strikes, night time attack/strike missions and air combat duties where necessary. Attempting to force them into some sort of "fleet defence" role is something a short squadron of 8x aircraft is not something that is realistically achievable in my opinion.
This idea you seem to have that since the RMAF operates the Hornet in the maritime strike and attack role, Navy should therefore operate the aircraft, doesn't hold up to me. Operating fixed wing fast attack/air defence aircraft should be primarily an air force role in my opinion, unless you are fortunate or perhaps unfortunate enough to operate an aircraft carrier.
Mr Ignorant
New Member
The more I look into this idea, the more holes I want to blow right through it. It's just not feasible to move the F/A 18s to the Navy, no matter how interesting it is. And in fact, the Royal Malaysian Navy is in need of other items on the shopping list than F/A 18s. My idea is just plain silly and a flight of fancy at the most.
Aussie Digger,
I am going to move on to another interesting thread. This idea of mine is fundamentally flawed.
BTW
Excellent AEGIS cruisers the RAN is planning to get. These are the Alvaro de Bazan class type. Something I was looking at the web today. I think I'll shift my attention there.
Let's move on.
Aussie Digger,
I am going to move on to another interesting thread. This idea of mine is fundamentally flawed.
BTW
Excellent AEGIS cruisers the RAN is planning to get. These are the Alvaro de Bazan class type. Something I was looking at the web today. I think I'll shift my attention there.
Let's move on.
Since we had established the Joint Forces Command, i dont think it is necessary to do so.
OK the move of Hornets to the Navy is a bad idea. Not only will it duplicate many process etc, it will also make jint command that more complicated.
Perhaps the best way to deal with the Hornets are to let them finish of the rest of thier usefull life n retire them. But that would mean that the weapons aquired for the Hornet will go to waste and unexploited. And that makes me believe there might be more to Malaysia's plans on operating US jetfighters, n that all is not lost.
Looks like the preffered scenario of having 2 sqdn of flankers n 2 sqdn of hornets will materialise sometime in the future.
Also i was wondering on the subject of subs. The 1st sub was named Tunku Abdul Rahman. What about the second sub? Wouldnt it be proper to name it KD Todak? As in "Singapure Dilanda Todak"... Just thought it would sound fun.
Perhaps the best way to deal with the Hornets are to let them finish of the rest of thier usefull life n retire them. But that would mean that the weapons aquired for the Hornet will go to waste and unexploited. And that makes me believe there might be more to Malaysia's plans on operating US jetfighters, n that all is not lost.
Looks like the preffered scenario of having 2 sqdn of flankers n 2 sqdn of hornets will materialise sometime in the future.
Also i was wondering on the subject of subs. The 1st sub was named Tunku Abdul Rahman. What about the second sub? Wouldnt it be proper to name it KD Todak? As in "Singapure Dilanda Todak"... Just thought it would sound fun.
They are classified as the Perdana Menteri Class in service with RMN, the second hull will name after the 2nd PM KD Tun Abdul Razak, and we dont make fun of other country as so.
Hello everyone..
Hello..
I'm newbie here. I'm student from a national university in Malaysia. Now I have to submit my proposal to my lecture. But i got problem here. The proposal suppose to be on Royal Malaysian Navy problems especially about ships, training, capabilities and so on. I have not on board RMN ships so far. So I'm facing a lot problems. I on my proposal about the bridge that old ships in RMN still use. What do you think about my proposal. Should RMN replace their ship's bridge with a new ones? My English not so good so I'm sorry: .Hopefully you guys out there can help me. Or do you have any idea about problems that RMN facing today.
Hello..
I'm newbie here. I'm student from a national university in Malaysia. Now I have to submit my proposal to my lecture. But i got problem here. The proposal suppose to be on Royal Malaysian Navy problems especially about ships, training, capabilities and so on. I have not on board RMN ships so far. So I'm facing a lot problems. I on my proposal about the bridge that old ships in RMN still use. What do you think about my proposal. Should RMN replace their ship's bridge with a new ones? My English not so good so I'm sorry
: .Hopefully you guys out there can help me. Or do you have any idea about problems that RMN facing today.
Greetings navalord !
I hope that while you may have some problems in discussing / writing in English, like most Malaysian's, you'll have no problems understanding it, along with the 4 or 5 other languages that you no doubt already speak !
#1. Your proposal....
Can I first of all clarify what exactly you're trying achieve.
Are you proposing that the RMN should modify the layout of the Bridge on all their older ships, or actually replace the ships?
#2. Have you thought this through?
I ask this as the costs of undertaking such a task across a batch of ships could in theory run to as much as it cost to build 1 new ship !
In addition the work involved would take a reasonable amount of time per ship, meaning that the ship could be out of service for up to 6 months.
Finally, am I correct in saying that some of the ships in the RMN fleet are 15+ years old?
...So, would spending a considerable amount of cash on a ship which may only have 5 - 10 years(max.) useful service be worth while?
I hope that you are not disappointed or upset by my comments & will instead use them to help shape the idea.
I await your response.
Systems Adict
I hope that while you may have some problems in discussing / writing in English, like most Malaysian's, you'll have no problems understanding it, along with the 4 or 5 other languages that you no doubt already speak !
#1. Your proposal....
Can I first of all clarify what exactly you're trying achieve.
Are you proposing that the RMN should modify the layout of the Bridge on all their older ships, or actually replace the ships?
#2. Have you thought this through?
I ask this as the costs of undertaking such a task across a batch of ships could in theory run to as much as it cost to build 1 new ship !
In addition the work involved would take a reasonable amount of time per ship, meaning that the ship could be out of service for up to 6 months.
Finally, am I correct in saying that some of the ships in the RMN fleet are 15+ years old?
...So, would spending a considerable amount of cash on a ship which may only have 5 - 10 years(max.) useful service be worth while?
I hope that you are not disappointed or upset by my comments & will instead use them to help shape the idea.
I await your response.
Systems Adict
I do not see why you want to upgrade the bridge if you aren't going to buy new weapon systems. Its easier to buy a new ship. It isn't as if the bridge or CIC's computers wear out, its the engine and propulsion systems that wear out.
Would adding a new dashbord make your car better? Does your dashboard wear out quicker than the engine? I didn't think so.
Would adding a new dashbord make your car better? Does your dashboard wear out quicker than the engine? I didn't think so.
Sagem Défense Sécurité to Supply Malaysia With Naval Optronic Systems
Sagem Défense Sécurité to Supply Malaysia With Naval Optronic Systems
(Source: Sagem Défense Sécurité; issued Feb. 11, 2008)
PARIS --- Sagem Défense Sécurité (SAFRAN Group) has signed a contract to supply several VIGY 10 Mk III optronic systems to modernize the MMEA’s (Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency) surface ships.
The contract also includes training operators and maintenance for the systems, which will be delivered mid-2008.
Faced with intense international competition, VIGY 10 Mk III’s performance (range, image quality, gyrostabilized sighting, ease of use) was crucial in MMEA’s choice to reinforce its resources for rescue operations, policing and fighting criminal activity in Malaysia’s territorial waters.
VIGY 10 Mk III is a day/night optronic surveillance system developed and produced by Sagem Défense Sécurité to meet the needs of light vessels.
Sagem Défense Sécurité has provided naval forces in over 30 countries with more than 600 optronic units and systems. This contract confirms its position as a worldwide leader. The company offers surface ships and submarines equipment and systems that are capable of meeting a wide array of needs: navigation, alerts, surveillance, reconnaissance, engagement and self-protection.
Consisting of two divisions, Sagem Avionics and Sagem Optronics and Defense, Sagem Défense Sécurité is a high-technology company in SAFRAN Group. It is among the worldwide leaders in its respective businesses.
Sagem Avionics Division is present in two main areas: inertial navigation, where it is the leading European company and the third largest worldwide, and aeronautic systems, where it is the worldwide leader in helicopter flight control.
Sagem Optronics and Defense Division designs and develops thermal vision equipment and air-land systems. It is the European leader in surveillance and fire control optronics.
Through SAFRAN Group, Sagem Défense Sécurité is present on all continents.
-ends-
Source : www.defense-aerospace.com
(Source: Sagem Défense Sécurité; issued Feb. 11, 2008)
The contract also includes training operators and maintenance for the systems, which will be delivered mid-2008.
Faced with intense international competition, VIGY 10 Mk III’s performance (range, image quality, gyrostabilized sighting, ease of use) was crucial in MMEA’s choice to reinforce its resources for rescue operations, policing and fighting criminal activity in Malaysia’s territorial waters.
VIGY 10 Mk III is a day/night optronic surveillance system developed and produced by Sagem Défense Sécurité to meet the needs of light vessels.
Sagem Défense Sécurité has provided naval forces in over 30 countries with more than 600 optronic units and systems. This contract confirms its position as a worldwide leader. The company offers surface ships and submarines equipment and systems that are capable of meeting a wide array of needs: navigation, alerts, surveillance, reconnaissance, engagement and self-protection.
Consisting of two divisions, Sagem Avionics and Sagem Optronics and Defense, Sagem Défense Sécurité is a high-technology company in SAFRAN Group. It is among the worldwide leaders in its respective businesses.
Sagem Avionics Division is present in two main areas: inertial navigation, where it is the leading European company and the third largest worldwide, and aeronautic systems, where it is the worldwide leader in helicopter flight control.
Sagem Optronics and Defense Division designs and develops thermal vision equipment and air-land systems. It is the European leader in surveillance and fire control optronics.
Through SAFRAN Group, Sagem Défense Sécurité is present on all continents.
-ends-
Source : www.defense-aerospace.com
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited:
Sea Skua performed pretty well in 1991, against the sort of targets it was intended for, i.e. FACs. You need a pretty big helicopter to carry a Harpoon or Exocet, & AFAIK no helicopter capable of carrying either has ever been equipped with Sea Skua, or AS.15TT, which is a rough equivalent. Penguin is smaller than Harpoon or Exocet, but may still be too big for the RMNs helicopters. It's well over twice the weight of Sea Skua. Marte may be feasible, but perhaps still too heavy.
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited:
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Bugger that.
Skip a generation and opt straight for the NSM...
BTW, the Penguin ASM only has a 250lbs warhead (125kg). The NSM actually shares this warhead...
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi everyone..thanks for replied...
i have submitted my proposal to my lecture last week. and he want me to change the topic.actually to change the bridge is impossible to all RMN ships. so he want me to decide my new proposal which is base on the integrated bridge system.
so i have choose my proposal..ii know i'm not an expertise on this field. that's why i came here to ask the expert.
Project Title : Integrated Bridge System for KD MAHAWANGSA
Problem Statement : KD MAHAWANGSA is one of important asset in RMN to play certain role as logistic support ship to all the combatan ships. She always involve in peace mission and natural disaster support. Even she is important to RMN, she is out of date compare to other country's support ships. She is support ship. The are no capabilities in her. So why not we change the old bridge to the new bridge. Navigation is her main role and bridge is the place where navigation process is commence. By replace the old design bridge with the new integrated bridge, hopefully RMN personnels on board KD MAHAWANGSA can perform their job well especially in navigation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
what you guys think? do you accept my proposal if you are my lecture.
any ideas?thank you
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
I'm sure it's further along then MBDA's upgraded Sea Skua variant and I'm sure more capable, given it's LO design and extended range...
Greetings navalord !
I think that this will be a big project that will require you to do a lot of research, especially on-line, at various OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturers) websites.
Here are some links to start looking at for information...
http://www.raytheonmarine.de/highseas/pdf/brochures/IBSNaval.pdf
http://www.kelvinhughes.com/equipment.htm
Think about the layout of the equipment.
How will you group things / lay them out?
What systems do you have to include?
What systems do you not need/would be nice to have?
Do you have to go down the Military route ? What about the commercial equipment these companies offer ?? (costs may be cheaper !)
Have another look at the Raytheon site again (page 4 of the PDF), examine the black line drawing of the equipment layout. Think about why it has been done this way.
Some of the things you will have to consider in your design are in the text below...
General Ship operation :
Throttle control & Autopilot, Fuel management, ballast & fluid controls (Data inputs (pressures/temperatures/volumes & flows) to manage HP & LP Sea Water / Black & Grey Water systems / LP & HP Air/ Hotel Services including Fresh water & Domestic hot water), Alarms & warnings (Fire Fighting & Fire suppression / Door control & monitoring throughout the ship) Navigation & Warning lights (including the ability to switch from White to Red lights for sailing at night).
From a more Naval point of view...
Navigation Radar & it's requirements / capabilities (does it need inputs from GPS/DGPS, Gyro Compass & Magnetic compass as a back up??).
AIS / Echo Sounder / Magnetic Compass / GPS.
Do you require ECDIS (Integrated Marine chart systems that can be displayed / overlayed (electronically) with live radar pictures.
Your communications suite : V/UHF comms, GMDSS, Inmarsat B/C or Loran C, to replace older Decca/Transit navigator systems, Fax & satellite telephone, Voyage Data recorder (the spy on the bridge, as it can be set up to record all voice commands/orders, as well as data inputs from helm /throttle controls).
Finally, paper charts. Do you want the Navigator to have the facility to be facing fwd, looking at his chart, then look directly up & out a fwd bridge window ??
These are only SOME of the things you will have to take into account, (it's not a definitive list !).
You will also have to look at possibly how long the ship will be out of service while this work is being undertaken, (probably about 1 year !), & costs versus life left in the ship (will a ship that is say 15 years old, be able to last another 10-15 years in the new configuration / will it be worth while ?).
There are also other factors....
Structure constraints: Number of windows(which will affect the width of the consoles, height (the space below the floor & whether it will affect overall head clearance), height of the consoles & whether they will block some of the viewing area, systems that cannot be moved (possibly pipework from things like window washers & pre-wetting systems & whether they will affect the depth of the units & thus the available floor area within the bridge??), additional weight of all this equipment & whether the general structure can bear it / is strong enough.
Practical management / constraints:
Is there enough surplus power supply availability within the power generation system, never mind enough spare slots in existing fuse panels within the vicinity of the bridge.
Do you have the right power generation facilities? (115v AC / 24v DC / 115v - 400Hz supplies, rather than just 240v / 440v AC)
Cable runs & separation of specialist signal / supply cables, as well as actual space through transit glands in the cable runs.
This list is not everything, but should cover most of the ground that you may want to research / discuss with your lecturer.
At this point, I think it may be worth your while starting a new Topic / Thread (possibly in the General Military Defence section), as depending on how much information you want to research on this subject / your lecturers point of view, you may need to conduct a lot of discussions with others within this site.
I hope that this will help & not put you off undertaking the task.
Kindest regards,
Systems Adict
P.S.
...Have you considered writing to the RMN, going to Lemut Naval base to see if it's possible to get a tour of the bridge of the vessel your researching, as well as one of their newer vessels (the Meko's or one of the Lekiu's), while discussing / listening to their thoughts on what you're doing??
Nothing ventured, nothing gained....
Last edited: