Sep 14 2021, 11:01 PM
QUOTE(alexz23 @ Sep 14 2021, 10:04 AM)
1. TLDM should not have a replacement for the Kedah class. OPV should be operated by MMEA. Not TLDM
2. Lekiu class should be replaced by NEW FRIGATES. Preferably Type 31. LMS rebooted should not be a Kedah/Lekiu replacement.
You don't buy ships for the sake of buying ships.
What is the mission of TLDM?
TLDM is the main force to defend and strike back at any enemy forces that attack malaysia from the sea.
What is the misson of MMEA?
MMEA is the main force to uphold the security and safety of malaysian waters and EEZ in peacetime.
If a rebooted LMS is an OPV, what can it do in war situation? Operating in confined waters of melacca straits and south china sea, with future profileration of anti-ship ballistic missiles, anti-ship hypersonic missiles, stealth fighters, how can such ships bring the fight to the enemy? Can TLDM afford to lose these large expensive rebooted LMS in war?
If the main function of your LMS rebooted is just patrol, it should not be under TLDM, and we should buy cheap large OPVs for MMEA instead. TLDM keeps buying ships that has little value in future war situation, like the LMS 68, FIC, and the rebooted LMS is just going in the same direction.
In this case, I disagree with what TLDM wants. What TLDM wants is a duplicate function of MMEA mission, and does not increase the future warfighting capability of TLDM.
All those ships design that responded to RMN RFI, capability-wise is exactly similar to the Tun Fatimah Class of MMEA but with at least double the price. Why do you want more expensive ships in TLDM with the capability of cheaper ships in MMEA?
Instead we could give MMEA 3000-4000 tonne 140m OPVs that would perform better than what TLDM RFI can do.
If warfighting capability is what TLDM wanted, smaller, faster, cheaper LMS can do much more warfighting than slow large OPVs. With more smaller ships, we can do distributed lethality operations, with targeting and missile firing from multiple different platforms to confuse the enemy, with the enemy cannot concentrate on just 1 big target. Missiles enemy wasted to destroy small inexpensive ships will be missiles enemy cannot use on our Frigates and MRSS.
What TLDM needs in the future
- Our Gowind frigates, to track and hunt submarines
- More Scorpenes, UUVs, as our underwater deterrent.
- A large multi-purpose frigate to replace Lekiu/kasturi. able to do long range patrol/escort of our Sea lines of communication (SLOC), with bigger numbers of missiles than what the gowind can carry.
- rebooted small LMS that is cheap, fast, able to carry modular missiles and other things. multiple ships running around at high speed from different directions to attack enemy forces at sea or amphibious landing attempts.
All of these things i put above can be bought by TLDM, with current TLDM budgets if we stop wasting money on expensive low performance ships like the Kedah class or LMS 68.
Well steel are cheap.2. Lekiu class should be replaced by NEW FRIGATES. Preferably Type 31. LMS rebooted should not be a Kedah/Lekiu replacement.
You don't buy ships for the sake of buying ships.
What is the mission of TLDM?
TLDM is the main force to defend and strike back at any enemy forces that attack malaysia from the sea.
What is the misson of MMEA?
MMEA is the main force to uphold the security and safety of malaysian waters and EEZ in peacetime.
If a rebooted LMS is an OPV, what can it do in war situation? Operating in confined waters of melacca straits and south china sea, with future profileration of anti-ship ballistic missiles, anti-ship hypersonic missiles, stealth fighters, how can such ships bring the fight to the enemy? Can TLDM afford to lose these large expensive rebooted LMS in war?
If the main function of your LMS rebooted is just patrol, it should not be under TLDM, and we should buy cheap large OPVs for MMEA instead. TLDM keeps buying ships that has little value in future war situation, like the LMS 68, FIC, and the rebooted LMS is just going in the same direction.
In this case, I disagree with what TLDM wants. What TLDM wants is a duplicate function of MMEA mission, and does not increase the future warfighting capability of TLDM.
All those ships design that responded to RMN RFI, capability-wise is exactly similar to the Tun Fatimah Class of MMEA but with at least double the price. Why do you want more expensive ships in TLDM with the capability of cheaper ships in MMEA?
Instead we could give MMEA 3000-4000 tonne 140m OPVs that would perform better than what TLDM RFI can do.
If warfighting capability is what TLDM wanted, smaller, faster, cheaper LMS can do much more warfighting than slow large OPVs. With more smaller ships, we can do distributed lethality operations, with targeting and missile firing from multiple different platforms to confuse the enemy, with the enemy cannot concentrate on just 1 big target. Missiles enemy wasted to destroy small inexpensive ships will be missiles enemy cannot use on our Frigates and MRSS.
What TLDM needs in the future
- Our Gowind frigates, to track and hunt submarines
- More Scorpenes, UUVs, as our underwater deterrent.
- A large multi-purpose frigate to replace Lekiu/kasturi. able to do long range patrol/escort of our Sea lines of communication (SLOC), with bigger numbers of missiles than what the gowind can carry.
- rebooted small LMS that is cheap, fast, able to carry modular missiles and other things. multiple ships running around at high speed from different directions to attack enemy forces at sea or amphibious landing attempts.
All of these things i put above can be bought by TLDM, with current TLDM budgets if we stop wasting money on expensive low performance ships like the Kedah class or LMS 68.
Those 700 tonne Chinese LMS, almost 2000 tons tun Fatimah OPV & the 12,400 tons Makassar class LPD all almost cost the same.
*I think those FIC is probably the CB90 replacement
Personally i think your mission statement mostly describe
1)a brown water navy. Brown water navy pretty much relied on fleet of gunboat & missiles boat FAC, mines warfare & plenty of subs for a hit and run approach. Basically what sweeden navy current is. Off course sweeden play that game as they are so scared of Russia but they didn't join NATO and such need to be prepared to defense themselves all by themselves.
2) a civilian coast guard, basically prioritizing their police at sea mission. Instead of trying to balance between the dualism of a paramilitary organization. Off course being police at sea during peacetime but at the same time responsible to Coastal defense is what RMN used to do mostly from their 2 kasturi, 36 FAC & 18 FIC.
RMN 15 to 5 seem that the navy are still confused as to what kind of navy they wanted to be. Brown water or green water. Seem they wanted to be both
But. If TUDM finally decided to be a green water, best if TLDM to copy RAN homeworkRAN assets
3 LPD
6 ASW frigates as replacement of their LCS size frigates
3 AAW destroyer
12 submarine from previous 6
12 OPV
RMN plan
12 OPV from previous 36 OPV + LMS
6 LCS ASW frigates
3 LPD
2 subs
So all they need to do is add few destroyers & a lot of submarines. Should be possible if they cancelled those 24 small size ships .
BHIC is a dick, we all know that. When we thought Chinese LMS is POS compared to tun Fatimah, here come BHIC charging twice for simply adding a heli pad & 50 tons on an already over expensive POS
But those others that reply to the RFI are pretty good. 500 mil a piece for the LMS to me seem like a fair price, remember someone post the calculation to fully equipped Kedah class to the teeth at Marhalim blog goes for 250 mil or something like that. Add in 250 mil in the cost of a tun Fatimah size ship then you get 500 mil.
As for why, probably the rebooted LMS would work like the LMV. Remember that LMV is a full Corvette but with the CIWS,ASUW,ASW weapon put in storage with space below heli deck for modules. For now it's parade around as a not too threatening AAW capable OPV since their missiles are pointed to the sky and not to the ship they are shadowing/tailings. But it would be a full Corvette the moment the need for a full Corvette appears.
For now, RMN need a replacement for 4 minesweeper, 3 hydro ship. The laksamana & lekir pretty much are obsolete by next MP. Without SLEP the Kedah too would be obsolete by 2025. So about 13 ship from 4 class need replacing (19 if we included Kedah). So a rebooted LMS is a good way to replace them all. If purchase are spread over 2 MP, they can afford 4 this MP and another 8 next MP. This would leave enough budget to complete LCS this MP and at least 2 MRSS next MP.
By 2030, both the kasturi & FAC SLEP program would hit expiry date. Thus they have the option of either ordering replacement for their FAC or forget about those tiny FAC and just get a destroyer as kasturi replacement. RN type 31 would only be completed by 2027. So 2030 look like a good time to order it. Doubt they have the money to order both types.
I say the likelihood of navy going for a green ocean strategies is high, since
1) they do donate almost nak roboh 16 FAC to MMEA B4, they kept 16 to themselves. Thought all of those donasi are already sunk to the bottom of the sea by MMEA. the change in gov in 2018 bring with it changes of priorities.rather than replacing those FAC with Chinese LMS as they originally intended, They are extending their shelf life by 15 years. Seem RMN wants to maintain a FAC fleet but MMEA want to have monopoly on FAC size fleets and the gov are siding with MMEA. if RMN do indeed transfer those Chinese LMS to MMEA, then I can say for sure that FAC size crafts would likely be a MMEA responsibility.
2) The CN235 MSA would operate under MMEA eventually and MPA & ASW MALE are operated by RMAF instead of RMN. All of surface Coastal radar too are operated by MMEA not RMN. Which Pretty much indicated that TUDM is not responsible for any surveilant in our territories.
3) NSM like brahmos being a long range precession guided missile is not something brown water navy bought. It's more suitable for open water warfare or as Coastal batteries be it by truck or jet.
4) MRSS Is in itself unneeded if all we care bout is self defense, it's more cost effective to use commercial vessels if we need to send asset between the east & west MY. Even if we need it, we don't need anything more than a glorified ferry like the Makassar class. But seem like the navy budget for MRSS is twice the cost of Makassar.
5) we actually do have a supply ship. 2 of them infact.for now we are using it as patrol ship, a good way to blow money considering the maintenance & fuel cost of such big ship.
As for MMEA, with the bagan datuk, tun Fatimah, mothership CN235 MSA, AS365 Dauphin probably they are copying USCG Integrated Deepwater System Program or something
Again, I'm not TUDM. Neither am i advocating for green water navies nor advocating for expansionary power, force projection & alliance with others etc etc. I'm just stating an opinion on what are their intension based on their actions. Again i could be wrong, the amount of information provided to the public realms aren't really plentiful.
I think ATM show a lot of intension to be part of an alliance while TNI want to be their own man, abilities to do stuff alone or with another like the french. Being your own man like what ID intend to do come at a steep price. You need to purchase free to use as you wish platforms like Scorpene, FREMM & Raphael to have such capabilities. Despite our residents singkie love to shit on them, i say they are doing exactly what they needed & wanted to do. If anything our residents Sinkie are being overly nationalistic applying sinkie logic to ID and comes out unimpressed and think they are dumb. Never bothered giving them a 2nd look and rethink why they act the way they does.
F35 like type 31 are cheap. But good luck being your own man if you buy it. Being cheap in itself has a price, there's no such thing as a free lunch afterall, in this case you are trading Abit of self interest for some monetary savings.
Quote
0.0228sec
0.28
6 queries
GZIP Disabled