Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN) update

[navalord]

hello

Hi everyone!! I'm a student from National Defense University of Malaysia.

I'd just start new thread. here's the link : http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7409

Could you please help me by giving some ideas about my project research. It's about Integrated Bridge System in KD MAHAWANGSA ( logistic ship) . Thank you.

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[qwerty223]

A further reading for the post above

Test of the navy’s capabilities

By SHARON LING

THE Royal Malaysian Navy based in Teluk Sepangar, Kota Kinabalu, recently concluded a week-long series of exercises dubbed Ostex East in the South China Sea.

The first to be held this year, the exercise involved four navy ships – KD Kedah, KD Pahang, KD Baung and KD Sri Tiga – and more than 300 personnel, including those from the navy special forces.

A merchant vessel, mv Mahsuri, was involved as a hospital ship during the exercise.

Naval Region Two commander Rear Admiral Datuk Ahmad Kamarulzaman Ahmad Badaruddin said the purpose of the exercise was to test the capability of navy personnel in conducting operations at sea, including warfare and humanitarian relief.

“One of the aspects incorporated into the exercise was military operations other than war, focusing on humanitarian aid and disaster relief.

“This is because there is a heightened risk of disasters in this region, and we want to ensure we are prepared to provide humanitarian aid whenever a disaster occurs,” he told reporters after closing Optex East on board KD Kedah at the Pending wharf in Kuching on Saturday.

Kamarulzaman said the navy also tested its capability to include civilian ships in its operations during the exercise.

“In this case it was mv Mahsuri. This is in line with the concept of Hanruh or total defence, whereby defence is not just the responsibility of the armed forces but also of other sectors such as the private sector.

“It is a part of our objective to test interoperability between military and non-military vessels,” he said.

KD Kedah commanding officer Commander Chan Peng Cheong said the ships tracked 680 nautical miles and covered a vast area across the South China Sea starting at the Teluk Sepangar naval base and ending in Kuching.

He said the exercise was carried out with zero incidents and zero defects.

As part of the exercise, armed forces personnel gave free medical and dental treatment on board mv Mahsuri for the public in Kuching.

I am quite happy to see they are actually are continuing to benefit ppl with materiality actions since OSTEC East 07. Humanitarian is a good approach.

 

[weasel1962]

Deleted

 

[weasel1962]

Article:

Deleted

 

[qwerty223]

Hrm... i thought the contract was sealed for quite sometime?
And the article is... contradict? "particularly those plying the Straits of Malacca", means the pirate source is from south china sea instead of the southern exit of the Straits?

 

[qwerty223]

Some update, interesting to read if you are also aware that the new Navy cheif hint that second batch of NGPV will be ASW configurated.

April 10, 2008 18:26 PM

Navy Plans To Acquire Anti-submarine Choppers

By Umi Hani Sharani

KUALA LUMPUR, April 10 (Bernama) -- The Royal Malaysian Navy is looking at acquiring anti-submarine warfare (ASW) helicopters in the future to complement its brand new submarines and enhance its force multiplier assets.

Navy Chief Datuk Abdul Aziz Jaafar told Bernama that the Navy will require at least six of the ASW helicopters in order to operate comfortably to accompany the newly acquired French-made Scorpene submarines.

"In order to operate in a more economic sense, we need to have at least six ASW helicopters," he said in an interview recently after taking over the top brass position on April 1.

He said, however, the plan to buy the ASW helicopters are still at the preliminary discussion stage and will be proposed to the government for inclusion in the 10th Malaysia Plan (10MP).

Asked which ASW helicopter model is likely to be the favourite, he said there are a few in the market that are suitable for the purpose.

He said the Navy, however, is comfortable with the British-made Super Lynx from the stable of AgustaWestland, and that it has been proven capable as ASW helicopter.

Nevertheless, the Navy Chief welcomed proposals from all firms, adding, "the better the technology they can offer, the better it is for the Navy".

It was reported yesterday that the Navy has entered into informal talks with AgustaWestland to purchase helicopters following their intention to beef up operations.

The Navy currently has two squadrons of helicopters, six units of the French-made Fennec for lead-in training and another six units of the Super Lynx for operational purposes.

"When you have ASW helicopters, you can work effectively with and against submarines. Both are force multipliers, and their sheer presence will undoubtedly enhance underwater and anti-submarine warfare capability," said Abdul Aziz.

"This is very conducive considering the fact that Malaysias large maritime area has vast economic potential that needs to be protected," he added.

He said while it is difficult to detect submarines, the same goes for the ASW helicopters.

"A submarine will not be able to detect helicopters. When you have ASW helicopters, you can be the force multiplier in efforts to track submarines," he said.

"When we have force multiplier assets such as the ASW helicopters and submarines, you will require less surface assets," he added.

-- BERNAMA

 

[paskal]

Hi everyone!! I'm a student from National Defense University of Malaysia.

I'd just start new thread. here's the link : http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7409

Could you please help me by giving some ideas about my project research. It's about Integrated Bridge System in KD MAHAWANGSA ( logistic ship) . Thank you.

ur from UPNM???

 

[weasel1962]

Article:

Deleted

 

[renjer]

Some update, interesting to read if you are also aware that the new Navy cheif hint that second batch of NGPV will be ASW configurated.

Yes, it is interesting. Particularly, the last part of the article about needing less surface platforms. I suppose additional Lynxs could be shore-based in the same manner the Omanis are employing their ASW-capable versions.

If I recall correctly, the original purchase of 6 Lynxs for the RMN includes an option for another 6. Then there was the news that out of the 12 AW101s being considered 4 might be the maritime version destined for the navy.

 

[contedicavour]

Yes, it is interesting. Particularly, the last part of the article about needing less surface platforms. I suppose additional Lynxs could be shore-based in the same manner the Omanis are employing their ASW-capable versions.

If I recall correctly, the original purchase of 6 Lynxs for the RMN includes an option for another 6. Then there was the news that out of the 12 AW101s being considered 4 might be the maritime version destined for the navy.

Well the -139s are good replacements for the Lynx eventually.
I had missed the EH101 (or AW101 as is now known, yes) purchase by Malaysia, gooood news for the folks in the Venegono factory north of Milan :dbanana

cheers

 

[qwerty223]

April 30, 2008 12:14 PM

Navy Needs Medium-range Missiles, Command Ships, Says Navy Chief

SEREMBAN, April 30 (Bernama) -- In a move to upgrade defence apparatus in tandem with latest advancements in defence technology, the Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN) needs to acquire medium-range missiles, command ships and transport carriers under the Ninth and 10th Malaysia plans.

In outlining the needs of the navy, its chief Admiral Datuk Abdul Aziz Jaafar said the "Starbust" missile systems being used to defend navy bases currently had become obsolete and were unable to cope with threats of the enemies' fighter jets.

"We don't want short-range missiles like Starbust. Even now jet fighters of our enemies can launch long-range attacks with an optimum 25km distance and there are systems that can fire long-range missiles from as far as 60km," he told Bernama.

Abdul Aziz said the radar installed in the National Air Defence System can even detect enemies' planes from hundreds of kilometres away and hence, the missiles to be bought must have the capacity to counter attacks within the range of between 20 and 40 kilometres.

He, however, admitted that the navy had not tested any defensive guided missiles available in the market now as procurement and evaluation were done by the Air Defence Artillery Group under the purview of the army.

"The navy will not evaluate the missiles as we place our trust and confidence in the Air Defence Artillery Group. The navy will not have defence missiles of different models as we need to integrate our missiles with the National Air Defence System.

"So, the three defence services -- army, navy and air force -- will use the same system," he said.

Abdul Aziz expects the procurement to be made under the 10th Malaysia Plan as the missile systems need high-capacity radars and in big numbers as they would be used by the navy, air force and army.

The navy also needs "Close In Weapon System" defence system as the last "shield" to deflect a missile that has been shot heading to the command ship, he added.

-- BERNAMA


********
Hrm... the interesting part is that MA had put their emphasis on SHORAD instead of longer range systems while having AF cheif strongly oposed and hope for a med range system. I wonder where navy stands after all? And probably Navy cheif is too optimistic of the "army,navy and air force -- will use the same system"...

 

[swerve]

...I had missed the EH101 (or AW101 as is now known, yes) purchase by Malaysia, gooood news for the folks in the Venegono factory north of Milan :dbanana

cheers

No, good news for the folks in Yeovil, in SW England - all AW101 production has been moved there.

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[kaybee]

That really takes the cake. Instead of buying ships that have adequate SAM systems that can defend their own bases and themselves, he spins this into the army's fault and responsibility for not acquiring/acquiring medium ranged SAMs. Coming from an admiral, doesn't really inspire much confidence in that level of intelligence.

Seems to signal that the navy has no intention of acquiring medium ranged missiles. Looks like air defence is going to be very much land-based.

Also, its quite strange to say that the NADS can't cope with multiple types of systems. Considering that IADS based in Butterworth has coordinated all the various weapons systems of the FPDA participants, that's definitely a political rather than technical statement.

Why do you want the ships to defend its bases? The Navy needs land base system to defend naval bases. Ship's SAM is mainly for their self defense. Right now point defense is mostly under PUTD and Navy PPU will just follow whatever SAM system choosed by Army's PUTD. Anyway, MRAD is under the purview of RMAF.

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[swerve]

...
That really takes the cake. Instead of buying ships that have adequate SAM systems that can defend their own bases and themselves, ....

Naval bases should never rely on ships to defend them from air attack. What happens if the base is under attack and the ships are deployed elsewhere? Ships are mobile. A ship tied to defending a fixed spot is pointless: might as well not have spent the money building it & bought a much cheaper land-based SAM battery.

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[swerve]

...
My gribe is that it doesn't make sense that once ships leave port, they are as vulnerable as ducklings but in port are better protected. Then, you have just justified tying ships to port just because port defence is better than ship ..

Agreed. Ships should be able to defend themselves, wherever they are.

 

[qwerty223]

My gribe is that it doesn't make sense that once ships leave port, they are as vulnerable as ducklings but in port are better protected. Then, you have just justified tying ships to port just because port defence is better than ship defence. Humbug...

Well the i have to disagree with this one... Ships is not necessary to be more vulnerable when it is floating out of no where. In some point a mobilized battle formation is more effective then the ships static at the port.

But i do agreed that it is all about politics here. When it comes to system that all the 3 divisions share, for the case here the NADS, wrestling is everywhere. Each of the division has a difference approach therefore it is not strange to see such an incident. What I am interested is that the 20-40km requirement seems to be in the middle of the army's actual requirement, the VSHORAD and the AF requirement, the MidRAD. To me, it seems that the Navy is more incline to a MidRAD but tried to balance their relationships with both the army and the AF.