dragonfire
New Member
Will it be sold or retained ?
Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN) update
- Thread starter Ding
- Start date
The plan is to have a fleet of submarines in which the 2 scorpenes are the 1st step. I remember reading somewhere that the MD wants a fleet of like 12 submarines. I think the RMN wants to control the South China Sea, and have the ability to deter a Chinese unilateral movements to secure the Spratley's all for themselves, and a fleet of Submarines are an effective way of deterring them.
If you want to go head on against the growing Chinese Navy, it would be tough, so Submarines is the smart power, of being able to deliver a big blow with small numbers.
Which is why I think it should be wise for the Gov to diversify its Sub fleet and acquire Kilo's as well to boost its sub fleet. The latest Kilo's are also AIP capable.
If you want to go head on against the growing Chinese Navy, it would be tough, so Submarines is the smart power, of being able to deliver a big blow with small numbers.
Which is why I think it should be wise for the Gov to diversify its Sub fleet and acquire Kilo's as well to boost its sub fleet. The latest Kilo's are also AIP capable.
How much did they buy that Agosta's for? Why cant they lease used foreign subs to train instead of buying 1, just to retire it later?
Not sure there is an MOD plan to build a fleet of 12 subs, it may have just been a study showing the optimal fleet requirement and I woundn't put too much emphasis on any plans, RMN in the past have been stated as looking for a fleet of 6 Lekius and so far only 2 are in service.Not sure on the cost but the Agosta was part of the entire package,if I remember correctly, reason why Agosta was purchased was because training was being conducted by French Navy and naturally it would have to be a French sub to be trained on as the instructors also have to be familiar with the training sub and in any event since we were buying french subs, it's also natural for the RMN crew to be trained on a french sub, I don't think the French wanted to lease the Agosta, just wanted it sold.
Last edited:
I think hard bargaining should have anabled the gov to lease a sub instead of buying it. Its not impossible since the French wants to sell their Scorpenes, and with the Russians in the market, they would have agreed. But you know the gov, very good in wasting money on useless defence purchases and inflated defence purchases.
Russia came nowhere in the equation in the sub competition, only the Germans were close and I don't think they wear able to provide as much training as the French, could have been worse, Malaysia could have bought the dutch subs languishing then at Lumut
, also there may have been the impetus to buy given there was some talk about the Agosta going to Pakistan, which operates the same boat so possibly there was a need to pre-emept that which may not have left Malaysia in a good position as to the negotiations.
, also there may have been the impetus to buy given there was some talk about the Agosta going to Pakistan, which operates the same boat so possibly there was a need to pre-emept that which may not have left Malaysia in a good position as to the negotiations.
Last edited:
Alright, didn't know the Russians were not close, which I find as surprising, considering they are going around the world trying to sell the Kilo's. I remember the russians tried to sell the Kilo's way back b4 Malaysia started to make the deal happen.
Also do you know what is the deal with the NGPV? I thought it was planned to have 20+? in service but with so many delays, I'm not sure if they are even operational at all? Is it due to corruption? So much money pumped into the project and nothing to show? Is this the same fate faced by the Lekiu's? Coz there are pictures of the next batch of Lekiu's in this very DT website. It has a different mast to the 2 operational now. Aren't they on track?
Also do you know what is the deal with the NGPV? I thought it was planned to have 20+? in service but with so many delays, I'm not sure if they are even operational at all? Is it due to corruption? So much money pumped into the project and nothing to show? Is this the same fate faced by the Lekiu's? Coz there are pictures of the next batch of Lekiu's in this very DT website. It has a different mast to the 2 operational now. Aren't they on track?
RMN is Western-European centric in terms of selection of ships and equipment so it's been difficult for the Russians to convince them otherwise.
Two PVs are in operation, KD Kedah and KD Pahang, the third, Perak will enter service next month, two more KD Kelantan and KD Trengganu have been launched while the sixth, KD Selangor will also be launched next month. While the long-term plans were for 27 ships, the agreement at the start back in the 90's was 6 ships would be built and if they were satisfactory then the shipbuilder would be approached to build further ships otherwise Navy would look elsewhere. Naturally all the problems with the previous management etc let to the delays, you can read about in the Auditor-General's report 2006here at http://www.audit.gov.my/index.php?T...NSxqOCC33=Z2MmUcE80SrXT9oC&L2twbCyC=N0yqNCNC#
Select 2006 and download the top file (close to 10MB) which is in Bahasa, and read the entry on Ministry of Defence and OPV project, since then most of the issues have been fixed under the shipbuilder's new management and the company renamed Boustead Naval Dockyards. The RMN would like a heavier armed batch II OPV but funding is tight for that.
The batch II Lekius have been put on hold due to current financial situation, cost is the issue as Bae added a risk coverage due to the requirements that the ship be built locally at Labuan Shipyards.
Two PVs are in operation, KD Kedah and KD Pahang, the third, Perak will enter service next month, two more KD Kelantan and KD Trengganu have been launched while the sixth, KD Selangor will also be launched next month. While the long-term plans were for 27 ships, the agreement at the start back in the 90's was 6 ships would be built and if they were satisfactory then the shipbuilder would be approached to build further ships otherwise Navy would look elsewhere. Naturally all the problems with the previous management etc let to the delays, you can read about in the Auditor-General's report 2006here at http://www.audit.gov.my/index.php?T...NSxqOCC33=Z2MmUcE80SrXT9oC&L2twbCyC=N0yqNCNC#
Select 2006 and download the top file (close to 10MB) which is in Bahasa, and read the entry on Ministry of Defence and OPV project, since then most of the issues have been fixed under the shipbuilder's new management and the company renamed Boustead Naval Dockyards. The RMN would like a heavier armed batch II OPV but funding is tight for that.
The batch II Lekius have been put on hold due to current financial situation, cost is the issue as Bae added a risk coverage due to the requirements that the ship be built locally at Labuan Shipyards.
dragonfire
New Member
Any country in the vicinity of the south china sea who consider china a threat / anticipate future issues should build credible anti-ASW as well as sub fleets as china has a major nuc-sub base there in Hainan island
Doesn't that show that China is also desperate to control the South China Sea.
....As discussed earlier in the thread by nevidimka (at post #324)
Batch 1 Lekiu's...
http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/showphoto.php?photo=13459
Batch 2 Lekiu's...
http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/showphoto.php/photo/31408
To attempt to address your "issue" with the differences in the mast design.
It is likely that the original Batch 1 design was probably frozen away back in something like 1992. It's now 17 (YES SEVENTEEN!) years since then. Added to the fact that the ships have officially been the property of the RMN for nearly 10 years now (as they were handed over in 1999 !).
Technology has moved on at such a pace, that to try & build identical vessel to the batch 1's would be nearly impossible, & with each year that passes, the same thing is happening, meaning that the design / equipment baseline has to be redrawn.
By using this newer technology, it means that having x2 search radars (Sea Giraffe & DA08 in Batch 1), is not required as technology / operational mentality / ethos, has progressed to dictate that only one, 3D radar is required.
Thankfully, the RMN has had the foresight to try & design / procure the most up-to-date systems it can to fit to the ships (e.g the Batch 2 model has the BAE ARTISAN radar on the foremast). In doing this, it may well mean more structural changes to accommodate the equipment.
Finally, the Batch 2 picture is of course a model, a mock-up of what can be achieved with the "current" design. It's highly likely that this will change again to match current technology within the financial reach of the Malaysian govt...
SA
Batch 1 Lekiu's...
http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/showphoto.php?photo=13459
Batch 2 Lekiu's...
http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/showphoto.php/photo/31408
To attempt to address your "issue" with the differences in the mast design.
It is likely that the original Batch 1 design was probably frozen away back in something like 1992. It's now 17 (YES SEVENTEEN!) years since then. Added to the fact that the ships have officially been the property of the RMN for nearly 10 years now (as they were handed over in 1999 !).
Technology has moved on at such a pace, that to try & build identical vessel to the batch 1's would be nearly impossible, & with each year that passes, the same thing is happening, meaning that the design / equipment baseline has to be redrawn.
By using this newer technology, it means that having x2 search radars (Sea Giraffe & DA08 in Batch 1), is not required as technology / operational mentality / ethos, has progressed to dictate that only one, 3D radar is required.
Thankfully, the RMN has had the foresight to try & design / procure the most up-to-date systems it can to fit to the ships (e.g the Batch 2 model has the BAE ARTISAN radar on the foremast). In doing this, it may well mean more structural changes to accommodate the equipment.
Finally, the Batch 2 picture is of course a model, a mock-up of what can be achieved with the "current" design. It's highly likely that this will change again to match current technology within the financial reach of the Malaysian govt...
SA
Dokdo is old news from 2007, came about mainly because then defence minister Najib visited the dockyard on his trip to South Korea in 07, Najib later told parliament when asked whether Malaysia was buying Dokdo that no decision was made yet on buying any LPD platform (nor any tender out for that matter). Boustead Naval Shipyards has been offering it's own frigate design.
@SA,
Thanks for the info.
As discussed earlier at post #330 on potential Batch 2 Lekiu systems, I know that BAE won a £100M contract in August 2008 to supply the Artisan 3D maritime Medium Range Radar (MRR) and replace existing systems on Type 23 frigates. Have you seen any of the radar specifications or a report indicating its capabilities?
Thanks for the info.
As discussed earlier at post #330 on potential Batch 2 Lekiu systems, I know that BAE won a £100M contract in August 2008 to supply the Artisan 3D maritime Medium Range Radar (MRR) and replace existing systems on Type 23 frigates. Have you seen any of the radar specifications or a report indicating its capabilities?
Ahh ic, thanks for the clarification.
Mmmm....
I may have to agree with you in certain respects, especially when you look at the picture I referenced in my last post of the the Batch2 model, in comparison to that of the SMART-S (see below).
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/radar-05t.html
Also, I found another site which does make reference to what may be included in the design...
http://www.mdc.idv.tw/mdc/navy/othernavy/f2000.htm
However, not reading Chinese, I don't have a clue what the script is getting at. But, in my defence, like most contracts that are not legally binding / signed up by both parties, it's possible that (dependant on the time frame / monies available), things could have changed in the proposed design, prior to steel being cut, whenever that may be....
SA
I haven't seen anything from the MoD about expanding the submarine fleet beyond the 2 that was ordered. However, I do recalled an article where the current navy chief at that time said that the navy had a future requirement for between 8-10 boats.
With those numbers indigenous construction would be viable. With 2 classes of 4-5 boats each built a generation apart.
In this hypothetical situation, submarines would play a more prominent role to dissuade larger regional navies like the Chinese or Indians. Would the Scorpene then be a better basis for a lead class or would it be wiser to look at the Turquoise for the opportunity to switch power generation source? I am thinking of the recent Franco-Brazilian submarine deal.