Further questions on your answers:

- The point of these weapons is they should be ready to use for the units who use them. Wear and tear from peacetime patrols should be part of the equation and be taken into account. The analogy would be like soldiers only issued with knives in peacetime, as rifles would last longer in storage.

- According to the Kedah-class FFBNW design, all associated computers and electronic devices needed to control and launch the SeaRAM and Exocets are all readily installed on board the Kedah-class. All that is needed is the missiles' physical and electronical installation and they would be ready to use within 24 hours.

- "There is no current operational need for that". I find this statement somewhat naive, same as the sentiment of those who say "we are now at peace, who are we going to go to war with?" to justify reducing the defence budget.

For me, a country's armed forces should train and be operationally ready as if the country is going to war tomorrow at all times. So the training and the readiness of the armed forces should already be a settled matter and all that is left during wartime is to strategically and tactically order the forces to where they are needed for combat.

Peacetime maritime patrolling duties should be given to the APMM, but they themselves are ridiculously under-funded and are forced to perform the TLDM's patrolling duties with ancient cast-off TLDM patrol vessels better fitted for the scrapyard. If even the TLDM, with its better funding and more modern vessels is admitting that they are overstretched in covering Malaysia's maritime territories, how can the APMM take over this duty with their scant resources? But I guess that's another matter altogether.

Anyway, if the justification to keep the superior Kedah-class under-armed in favor of the older, less capable ships is one of cost-saving or such, perhaps in the case of any outbreak of war the enemy would agree to only fight us using their own 30-year old ships, to even the odds against Kasturi, Laksamana and Lekiu-class? Or perhaps they would instead send their best ships and latest weapons? Which scenario do you think more likely will happen?

Meanwhile the TLDM is literally using their latest, most expensive and most capable & modern surface vessels (sans missiles, of course) to intercept pilak boats, chasing off pirates and facing off against coast guard cutters. What a joke.

/endrant

KDN akan tubuhkan pasukan petugas tangani isu pencerobohan nelayan asing



Kabinet akan menubuhkan sebuah pasukan petugas khas diketuai oleh Kementerian Dalam Negeri (KDN) bagi menangani masalah pencerobohan nelayan asing di perairan negara, kata Menteri Dalam Negeri Muhyiddin Yassin.

Selain KDN, katanya, pasukan itu turut disertai Kementerian Pertanian dan Industri Asas Tani, Kementerian Pertahanan dan Kementerian Luar serta tujuh agensi penguatkuasaan.

Tujuh agensi berkenaan adalah ​​​​​​​Agensi Penguatkuasaan Maritim Malaysia (APMM), Tentera Laut Diraja Malaysia (TLDM), Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM), Jabatan Imigresen, Jabatan Perikanan, Lembaga Kemajuan Ikan Malaysia (LKIM) dan Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM).

"Mereka akan mengatur operasi khas dalam tempoh yang segera dan diharapkan dengan tindakan ini maka pencerobohan nelayan asing tidak terus berlaku," katanya pada sidang media di KDN, di Putrajaya, hari ini.

Turut serta pada sidang media itu ialah Menteri Pertanian dan Industri Asas Tani, Salahuddin Ayub dan Timbalan Menteri Pertahanan, Liew Chin Tong.

Menurut Muhyiddin, masalah pencerobohan nelayan asing terutamanya dari Vietnam pada tahun ini semakin berleluasa dengan 41 bot telah ditahan oleh APMM, manakala Jabatan Perikanan menahan sebanyak 26 bot.

"Kes ini bukan baru tetapi akhir-akhir ini semakin meningkat mengikut musim kerana sekarang musim sotong. Mereka (nelayan asing) masuk dan tidak mengendahkan undang-undang perairan antarabangsa," katanya.

Ditanya sama ada tindakan penguatkuasaan sebelum ini kurang berkesan, Muhyiddin berkata setiap agensi menjalankan tugas dan operasi mengikut bidang masing-masing.

"Kalau gerakan dibuat secara bersepadu, bila mereka (nelayan asing) dengar kita datang, diharapkan mereka tak berani masuk dan ceroboh peraiaran kita.

"Jika mereka ceroboh juga, dengan aset yang lebih dan tenaga manusia yang dimobilisasikan maka mungkin kita boleh tahan mereka secara lebih baik," jelasnya.

sos

Also all sides' government need to educate their fishermen to not intrude into other country's sea border.

Rise of the white hulls: Indo-Pacific coast guards become diplomatic tools


Vietnam coast guard personnel keeping a close eye on Chinese coast guard vessels

TOKYO — Nations in the Indo-Pacific region are employing “white hull” diplomacy, putting their coast guards to work to challenge China’s territorial claims at sea, a Philippine Coast Guard officer said recently.

Lt. Cmdr. Jay Tarriela described the growing strength and responsibility of coast guards in the western Pacific on April 19 while speaking to the Yokosuka Council on Asia-Pacific Studies near the home of U.S. Forces Japan.

“The rise of white hulls in the region has seen a noticeable uptick since the early 2000s,” he said.

Smaller Asian nations are responding to territorial challenges from China with their coast guards, rather than their navies, said Tarriela, a post-graduate student at the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies in Tokyo. That lower level response reduces the likelihood of a shooting war breaking out.

“Someday, somebody might make some mistakes and there will be a fight,” he said, quoting Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. “Some ships will be lost and there might be a war and we don’t want that.”

Tarriela focused his studies on the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia, countries that contend with conflicting territorial claims by China in the South China Sea.

“[The] China trend is a reason why the coast guard is getting bigger, but only in the last decade,” he said. However, “there are more important tasks for the coast guard.”

Coast guards should focus on search-and-rescue duties, law enforcement and environmental issues, he said, not duties that are more in line with a military mission.

However, China’s rising interest in the region accounts for most of the increasing coast guard presence, Tarriela said.

“Smaller ships should be the ones patrolling [the] South China Sea” he said. “Smaller countries need to patrol their own territories.”

China is a major trading partner for many Asian countries, which puts them in a precarious position in the region, Tarriela said. They don’t want to antagonize China with naval vessels, so they use smaller coast guard vessels, which are not technically military vessels.
related articles

The role of coast guards in the region today evolved from the model started by Japan in the 1960s, Tarriela said. The Japanese government used its coast guard to build regional goodwill and cooperation in four phases, he said.

First, the lighthouse-building phase, in which Japan built lighthouses and mapped the Straits of Malacca, the 550-mile-long body of water between the Malay Peninsula and Indonesian island of Sumatra. The strait is a major shipping channel that connects the Pacific and Indian oceans.

In the mid 1970s, after the Japanese tanker Showa Maru spilled oil into the Singapore Straits, the Japan Coast Guard shifted to an environmental protection role, teaching other nations’ coast guards the proper response to those types of events, Tarriela said.

In the early 2000s, with a rise in piracy, the emphasis shifted to law enforcement. Japan, still suspect in the eyes of neighbors who remembered World War II, adapted its approach to train the coast guards of the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia and Vietnam.

Finally, Tarriela said, comes a security phase that marks the emergence of territorial claims by China in the East and South China seas, claims that often overlap those of the four countries.

sos

This should be the main purview of the APMM, yet the navy is still getting roped into this venture.

Masuk hutan berkabus semua

ESSCOM PGA got use some pickup trucks with MG installed. There was a pic in earlier threads, I dun know which one though.

For those concerned, for all it's size the penetration point (i.e the hole) for an ATGM the size of a Hellfire missile is about 20-30mm only.

ATGMs are all about the penetration ability, not the power of the blast itself to destroy its target.



Ironically, in a shaped charge warhead, the majority of the explosive power of the warhead will vent to the rear, with the explosion mostly used only to vaporise and 'push' the shaped charge's copper lining forward and turn it into a jet of superheated plasma. Thus the explosive power of the missile itself will actually only minimally affect the target, with only the plasma jet (probably no more than the size of a pencil) projecting forward, penetrating the metal armor like an overpowered blowtorch cutting through metal.

Also, most of the damage done to the interior of a vehicle penetrated by a shaped charge will come from the 'spalling', the spray of molten armor metal, melted by heat of the superheated plasma jet rather than the penetrating plasma jet itself. The plasma jet itself will dissipate quite rapidly after penetrating the armor.




This post has been edited by MilitaryMadness: May 23 2019, 07:49 AM

Of course can penetrate, but probably be a waste though. A shaped charge warhead is good for pinpoint armor penetration, but pretty useless for general demolition duty. That's why Anti-ship missiles use a HE-Frag warhead (usually with an incendiary casing sleeve) for the best results. The small size of a tank's interior causes the small impact of the plasma jet penetrator to do a lot of damage, but warships are large enough to absorb that kind of damage. Most of the damage done on a shaped charge warhead penetration is caused by the spalling of molten armor metal rather than the penetrator itself.

IMO, hitting a warship with a missile with a shaped charge (like an ATGM) will probably cause much, much smaller damage than a similar-sized missile with an HE-Frag warhead. In terms of damage, the impact from a ship's medium-caliber cannon is probably far more damaging to a warship than an ATGM.

Some ATGM are supersonic (I think Hellfire reach 1 mach+) but I think most problematic is most ATGM is either line of sight or at least need to be launched at a relatively short range so that the launcher's targeting laser is unaffected by the earth's curvature. In naval terms, 30 km is considered 'short-range' already and any attacker would already be inside a decent warship's defensive envelope.

Damen shipyards launches the first of two Pakistan Navy Corvettes in Galati, Romania



The first of two corvettes on order for the Pakistan Navy (PN) has been launched at the facilities of Dutch shipbuilder Damen in Galati, Romania.

The service announced on its Facebook page that the 2,300-ton vessel, which had been previously described as an offshore patrol vessel (OPV), entered the water on 17 May in a ceremony held at the shipyard in Romania and attended by PN Vice Admiral Abdul Aleem, among others.

The contract for the two vessels was signed in June 2017, with the first corvette expected to enter service by the end of 2019, and the second one set to be delivered by mid-2020, according to the navy.

Vice Adm Aleem was quoted as saying during the ceremony that these platforms "will act as force multipliers in enhancing [the] navy's capability of safeguarding maritime frontiers and will offer more flexibility in the conduct of [the] Pakistan Navy's initiative of independent Regional Maritime Security Patrols in the Indian Ocean Region".

The multirole corvettes have been previously described by the PN as "state-of-the-art vessels" especially suited for anti-surface, anti-air, and maritime security operations.

Each of them features a helicopter pad to facilitate search-and-rescue missions, as well as surveillance and intelligence-gathering operations. No further details were provided about the systems or weapons set to be fitted onto the class.

sos



Clearly OPVs, but still call them Corvettes? Whatever floats your boats la.

Damen lays down keel for South African Navy's first Multi Mission Inshore Patrol Vessel (MMIPV)



On February 23, Damen Shipyards Cape Town (DSCT) has ceremonially laid the keel for the South African Navy’s first of class Multi Mission Inshore Patrol Vessel (MMIPV) at its shipyard in the Port of Cape Town.

As explained by Chief of the South African Navy Vice-Admiral Mosiwa Hlongwane, a keel laying ceremony is an important tradition for any shipyard. It is naval tradition that every ship constructed for service be honoured on four historical ceremonial occasions, being: the keel laying; the christening (or launching); the commissioning; and decommissioning.

Although most ships are constructed using a modular system that does not include a traditional keel, the keel laying ceremony is still an important part of the construction process. Traditionally, the ceremony is meant to invite good luck during the construction of the ship and continued good fortune throughout the life of the vessel, whereby a commemorative coin is placed into the area of the keel and welded into place. The event in a modern sense celebrates the first milestone of a ship’s construction.

As a reminder, the acquisition of the MMIPV under the R1.5 billion Project Biro was approved in October 2017. The new vessel, P1571, will be completed in 2021 and is expected to be commissioned in June the same year. The second and third platforms are expected to be delivered in 2022 and 2023 respectively.

The IPVs will be the first vessels of a Damen Sea Axe design to operate in South Africa. The Sea Axe is a revolutionary, Damen patented hull design, which offers exceptional seakeeping behavior. The straight-edged, axe-shaped bow cuts through the water, minimising slamming for improved safety and comfort on board and significantly reduced fuel consumption and emissions.

sos

For anti-ship missions, using an ATGM is not quite right. Although ATGMs can be guided accurately to their target, compared to specialist anti-ship missiles, they are quite 'dumb'. Anti-ship missiles have sea-skimming and defensive maneuvering capabilities, which make them harder to detect and intercept by their target.

Most ATGMs practically fly in a straight line, which could present a problem in naval conditions if launched from the surface. Launch from too far out, and most of the target ship will be hidden by the horizon, launch too close and you'll be in the target ship's defensive envelope.

What you want is an airborne platform.

They're basically coastal patrol vessels. Shallower draft, less endurance, less crew.

Malaysian Coast Guard initiates 'Op Naga', arrests 123 Vietnamese fishermen and seizes 25 foreign fishing boats



After launching a large-scale crackdown in Malaysian waters, authorities there have detained 123 Vietnamese fishermen and 25 vessels for alleged illegal fishing.

The Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency (MMEA) conducted “OP Naga” from May 2 to 16, which involved patrols in the waters as well as in the airspace over Pahang, Terengganu and Kelantan, VN Express reported. The operation led to checks on 266 vessels, of which 25 were seized.

On May 18, the Malaysian Home Ministry said the fishermen arrested were being investigated under the Fisheries Act for fishing without permission as well as entering the country without proper documentation.

The MMEA has stated that Op Naga will be continued to curb trespassing and illegal fishing.

From the beginning of last year, there have been at least 101 cases of Vietnamese vessels trespassing in neighboring countries’ waters. Between last year and late April this year, 163 vessels and 1,258 fishermen have been detained.

sos

I think that they are effective to a certain level only. I feel like the attitude for this is like: "Ffftthh as long as its a guided missile, it'll do", discounting everything that makes anti-ship missiles deadly to ships. Dedicated anti-ship missiles have far longer ranges, far larger warheads and have sea skimming & defensive maneuvering capabilities to be really effective in their roles.

Using ATGM to attack ships will also practically be pinprick attack on a target the size of a warship and I think a LOT of luck & skill will be needed to hit an important enough spot to disable them. Most ATGMs carry a warhead less than 10kg while most dedicated anti-ship missiles carry a warhead at least 15x that weight with exponentially far greater damage potential. For example a Kornet missile has a 4.6 kg warhead while a Harpoon missile has 220kg warhead.

This post has been edited by MilitaryMadness: May 24 2019, 10:11 AM

Ada org complain ke? Tunisian Navy ada 2 OPV Sea Axe jugak, Jugurtha & Syphax.


Syphax P611

Japanese Navy's 'Helicopter Destroyer' JS Izumo visits Port Klang



Japan’s biggest warship, helicopter destroyer, JS Izumo – DDH183 — arrives in Port Klang, (yesterday) morning. Izumo which is on four-day port call in Malaysia was escorted by another destroyer, JS Murasame – DD101.

The two vessels, part of the Escort Flotilla 1 of the Japan Maritime Self Defense Force (JMSDF) are in Port Klang, for port call and replenishment after they participated in ADMM plus maritime security field exercise 2019 and IMDEX 2019, which was held in Singapore. Both had also conducted an exercise with the Indian Navy and the French Navy carrier, Charles De Gaulle in the Bay of Bengal, prior coming to Malaysia.

In a press conference held on board Izumo, Rear Admiral Hiroshi Egawa said a Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Recovery seminar will be held on May 28 on board the ship. The seminar is held to enhance the bilateral defense cooperation between the Malaysian Armed Forces and the Japan Self-Defence Forces (JSDF) and the basis for further cooperation between both militaries.

Although technically the JS Izumo' ship class is a 'Landing Ship, Helicopter' (LHD), the Japanese refer the class as a 'Helicopter Destroyer'.

Dunno if serious of sarcastic.

Yeah, bcoz screw those pipul who actually volunteered to live a harsh life in order to protect the country, amirite?

Strictly speaking a remotely-controlled autocannon turret is not a CIWS.

CIWS are usually autonomously operating automatic systems that only needed to be activated to do their jobs. All have their own detection and targeting systems that engages targets automatically without the need for remote control.