Okay to be fair for all side,
The contract is set to cap the maximum value rm9bil
Which does not means the ship have to cost at maximum value it could be cheaper than that depending on system made.

I dun really mind if sgpv equipe with mica and without proper ciws but the price tags have to be reasonable below usd400mil.

that's why i said previously we're buying a SGPV not a DDG

You miss the point here.
We are not asking for aegis system or paams.
We are having concern that the procurement does justified on the pricetag we are paying.

Keyword : CIWS

SIGH .....Why Bother ?

In the United Kingdom, systems represent the biggest percentage of the price of a warship 70% compared to 30% for the hull.

The same trend holds true in Australia where the costs are 33% for “platform design, hull,machinery, and equipment” versus 41% for combat systems. Logistical support and training and project management make up the remaining costs.

At the end the Australian Cost mimics the UK costs.

Source : RAND Corporation’s 2006 study “Why Has the Cost of Navy Ships Risen?

http://www.navalreview.ca/wp-content/uploa...ol8num4art6.pdf

We are more than likely to be looking at cost over runs in the future factoring in what we have spent on contracts thus far, essential contracts to be given out in the near future, ...Inflation (10 year development of the SGPV ) , Cost of Materials (10 year development of the SGPV ), Currency Fluctuation ( in the 10 year development ) , Project Management (in the 10 years of development), TOT/IP...... OH... JUST CONJECTURE AND JUST TROLLING !

This post has been edited by Phillip_x: Oct 30 2013, 11:07 PM

Lolz, SGPV issue got so hot until soon-to-be-mighty-destroyer USS Zumwalt got no attention to it.

Poor Zumwalt..

But, what are navy fag opinions on this ship?

we're paying frigate-level money for a (large) PV.

its an alien ship
this ship is so awesome, ayam thinking of buying a model of the ship
powered by linux!

you dont say.
My mind blew when i saw the displacement gonna be more that 14k tonnes.
Almost like ballictic missile subs already.

The vertical launching system got so awesome that i dont even cannot imagine how it works.
Peripheral VLS? Dafuq is that.

Still no rail gun, zumwalt a shit.

[quote=cks2k2,Oct 30 2013, 09:27 PM]
we're paying frigate-level money for a (large) PV.

[/quote

Lets call a SPADE A SPADE....in ( Dimension, Size, CMS, Sensors, Weapons and Capability ) ... Lekiu's are Light Frigates, Kasturi's are Light Frigates, NGPV's FFBNW are Light Frigates (once fitted they mimic the capabilities of a frigate and not a patrol vessel ) , the SGPV are Light frigates.

This post has been edited by Phillip_x: Oct 30 2013, 09:45 PM

[quote=Phillip_x,Oct 30 2013, 09:45 PM]
[quote=cks2k2,Oct 30 2013, 09:27 PM]
we're paying frigate-level money for a (large) PV.

[/quote

Lets call a SPADE A SPADE....in ( Dimension, Size, CMS, Sensors, Weapons and Capability ) ... Lekiu's are Light Frigates, Kasturi's are Light Frigates, NGPV's FFBNW are Light Frigates (once fitted they mimic the capabilities of a frigate and not a patrol vessel ) , the SGPV are Light frigates.

[/quote]

a light frigate with weapons better suited for a large PV.

solly no understandling ! Jokes aside ...each class is pretty well armed (except for the NGPV - weapons wise and its speed only ) but they all lack CIW's. And no one considers all these ships as OPV's or Corvettes but as VERY CAPABLE Light Frigates.

This post has been edited by Phillip_x: Oct 30 2013, 10:01 PM

PVLS is where the launcher is not stacked together in a block but separated along the hull of the ships

sgpv closer to corvette than light frigate.
heck, even dcns calls them corvettes.

Remind me of kri klawang burn in instant

[quote=cks2k2,Oct 30 2013, 10:05 PM]
sgpv closer to corvette than light frigate.
heck, even dcns calls them corvettes.

[/quote

All things being equal ....look at the classifications of Naval Ships ....Dimension, CMS, Sensor Suite, Weapons..... no one regards this anything but as a Light Frigate......no matter what we or any other person call it.......if you want this the ASEAN joke...!

This post has been edited by Phillip_x: Oct 30 2013, 10:28 PM

Cancelled CG(X) even bigger. 25k tonnes and powered by nuke.

CG(X) is too pricey, even DD(X) initially planned was to build 19 ships but only 3 units funded.
I cant imagine how many billions will be spended if all 19 DD(X) ships and some number of CG(X) were built.

Even 3 units DD(X) cost them the nation.

This post has been edited by ET-Force: Oct 30 2013, 10:36 PM

That because dcns design it with the displacement of 1100 tons to 2500 tons.
But malaysia is building to over 3000tons.
We even allocates additional space to add more vls in future.