I think you mean LCS?

Yeah basically it all started when BHIC are in charge of ship spefikasi then RMN. They also goes for custom made rather than off the shelf design then go buy those IP which blow the cost. Then as the price got to high Then they fought RMN for weapons & system to be onboard to reduce the overall cost.

Then oil crisis comes, ringgit go GG, BHIC quickly paid out her overseas suppliers while the RM is strong which is quite a good thing but unfortunately to the system & weapon RMN didn't want.

Now they are out of money as most money had been use to prepaid stuff. Their only hope is gov top up but Then the change in gov comes and politicians are more interested in highlighting salah BHIC.

It's not much of a case of corruption, as after 3 gov on no one are charged by MACC. So it's mostly a case of incompetence.BHIC can avoid lots of problem if they were 'nicer' and not be a dick. They really think RM going to stay quiet, not fight and let them take full advantage of RM selling them ship that they didn't want.

But then again, they decide to be a dick and thus got fucked for being a dick.

hmm what is this?

Hmm coming soon to TLDM

Well RMN used to do those things when MMEA wasn't around utilizing assets that are meant for coastal defense mostly With the fleet of 36 FAC. And that's probably where 18LMS + 18 OPV comes from. So it's not a question of either or, since the same asset can perform both tasks.





To be fair they kinda need too.

The reason why TUDM 18 OPV + 18 LMS plans seems like duplicating MMEA 8 OPV + 14 NGPC plans is because it is. It is just 2 agencies fighting each other to do mostly the same jobs. Ie law enforcement during peacetime.

The difference is at wartime. Simply due to the the then need of mMEA being mostly a police at sea & aren't responsible towards coastal defense Then the NAVy do need those 18 small size LMS + 18 OPV to defend the coast while MMEA need those 14 NGPC to do law enforcement exclusively.

If MMEA are responsible towards law enforcement during peace time and coastal defense during war then there's no need for those 18 LMS. Just transfer out the 4 Chinese LMS and buy MMEA some time to acquired 14 NGPC through RMN SLEP of their FAC.

Of course that's would mean MMEA NGPC may need to be fit for but not with ASUW missiles. Or they don't, just let TD took care of it with land based ASUW missiles.

Don't think the need to have MMEA operating as mostly a civilian organization is much of a thing now since Chinese CG is now operate under their military police.







Look carefully at the original 15 to 5. The remaining 6 LCS is ordered 20 years after the original 6, like the subs are ordered 20 years after the original Scorpene it's a replacement rather than addition.

with the navy number of smallish ship has been cut from 36 to 12. They should have enough money for other type of assets now.

Navy usually get half of what TD get and MMEA usually get half of Navy get in development budget, so it would be better to utilize MMEA budget for smallish ship.

Again There's nothing wrong with equipping 14 MMEA NGPV + 4 Chinese LMS with fit for but not with ASuW missiles. Then you get yourself 18 missiles boat at our disposal during wartime.




BHIC being a bigger dick then the Chinese is an already know facts. In this case they tying to sell a gunboat at missiles Corvette price.

I say its fair because missiles aren't cheap. A single mica cost RM 6.75 mil. A 36 cell mica cost RM 243 mil add in a tun Fatimah OPV and you get yourself a RM 500 million vessels. Of course using ESSM would cut the cost for 36 cell to be just RM60 -80 mil.





The fearless class are retain for now but would be replaced by 2025. She and her replacement mostly there as a gunboat to do coast guard jobs. So in our case the fearless & her replacement is probably best suited as a MMEA responsibility.

Like i said,of you seperate the law enforcement & defense duty then be prepared to buy 2X the numbers of ship. At the end, you end up with plenty of small ship and not much big ship or even submarine.

The defense & internal security on land are seperated because army man due to their training regime is really horrible at dealing with the public. Just look at Thailand, the army is a wee bit too trigger happy. Nor is great to train your police like the army as in the US. So it's not really something you want to do to your own citizens. In the EEZ like the border regiment they mostly interact with foreigners. So the incentive to be nicer to foreigners just isn't there. That's why most country coast guard are establish as paramilitary organization, they do coastal defense on top of law enforcement while their navy goes to the open sea.



That's why I think absalon class is a perfect mothership for MMEA, it's is a RORO afterall.

A RoRo for MRSS is great idea for self defense not much of a great idea if you want to be parts of an alliance. Being part of an alliance allowed us to get some commitment from others to defense ourselves but we also need to be committed to help them with their war efforts.There's no such thing as a free lunch after all. As it is all FPDA members has a LPD.






More like them singkie want some abilities to shoot at us and Everyone else rather then just to not be seen as american bitch. US weapon afterall can't be use for things that US disapproved. They can't use their amraam,F16V,f15,f35 to shoot at us. But they can shoot use their M346 to shoot at us with their MICA. Or use LMV and shoot MICA at our/ other people plane.

Ok my point is, UK like US, unlike the french are selling us stuff below market price. They are also quite generous in their MRCA offered back in 2015. And as I say, there's no such thing as a free lunch. They ain't giving discounts out of the pureness of their hearts. They do want something in exchange for that discounts.

The only difference is UK unlike the US as LKY had pointed out are more refined and not too forceful in trying to push their agenda simply because their excellent diplomacy skills. US even though not as bad as PRC, has horrible diplomacy skills.

You like to throw out words. But what do you really mean by this thing:

Coastal Defence

What is coastal defence that you understand?

We need to defend our coasts from whom? What kind of war will they bring to us?

Why TLDM OPV - "Offshore" patrol vessels that are designed to operate near to the 200 nm limit of our EEZ are needed for your so called coastal defence?

TLDM wants 18 large LMS (the RLMS) with helipad and 40mm gun, plus 18 large OPV of Kedah class with just 57mm gun and 30mm gun. All TLDM RFI points out to ships with no missile fitment at all with the very high costs. For example the Kedah Batch 2 is devoid of any FFBNW systems to reduce the cost from original batch 1 cost of 1 billion ringgit to the proposed 500 million ringgit. What can those ships without a single missile or even fitted for them can do in your so called coastal defence scenario?

Again I want to ask you what can the kind of ships RLMS and Kedah Batch 2 that TLDM wants can do differently when compared to the MMEA Tun Fatimah class?

Also what do you think a future conflict in South China Sea will look like?? Knowing how a possible future conflict will roll out is important to plan what kind of response we are going to prepare for.

This post has been edited by alexz23: Sep 15 2021, 11:56 PM

Your understanding is wrong. Every 5 years development budget from our recent history:

Usually TLDM gets 2 billion dollars. TLDM always gets the biggest allocation.

TD 1-1.2 billion dollars

TUDM 0.8-1 billion dollars


so far MMEA development budget, which is under Home Ministry is expected to be 0.5 billion dollar every 5 years.

.


I would like to know where did you get all those cheap ESSM...


ESSM price for USN 2021 buy is 1.795 million dollars each. Which is RM7.518 million.


https://www.stratvocate.com/files/2021/WPN_...9/WPN_Book.html


If even the Gowinds can carry just 16 VL MICA, it is impossible for tun fatimah OPV to carry 36. It just can't. Even Indonesian Sigma Frigates carry just 12 VL MICA.


ESSM could be quadpacked inside mk41 vertical launchers. That is the advantage of ESSM. Thai Daewoo DW-3000F Frigate has 8x mk41 with maximum possible ESSM loadout of 32 missiles.

ni bukan Naza puya projek ka

Technically the navy never talk about OPV/ NGPV for now, infact the LCS itself was once known as 2GPV. They only talk about RLMS and it indicates that it is indeed a missiles Corvette. most of those manufacturer that reply to the RFI didn't really send out traditional missiles Corvette design. They mostly send out a Kedah size ship design that's halfway between OPV & Corvette which is basically what LMV is.

As for what something like LMV can do that tun Fatimah can't do? Well it got AAW missiles that can shoot thing out of the sky. It can protect other ship , protect Petronas installation from Arial attacks, it can also enforce an ADIZ. Even if you go for a modest fit of 8 MICa, it's just 50 mil more on top of the cost of tun Fatimah.

It's no secret that type 31, MRCS & FREMM are at those size, because those are the size needed to carry patriot missiles. We can't go around trying to put patriot on a LCS size ship (also that's another good reason why absalon is a good candidate for MMEA mothership)

The only missiles that can fit into ship smaller than Kedah is ASW & ASuW missiles. But those things can be put in a bagan datuk size ship as well. Since we would be ordering 14 NGPC for MMEA. There's really no need to order 18 ship of those size to be a missiles boat exclusive for RMN on top of 14 exclusive for law enforcement for MMEA.

Doing those mean we are getting twice the number of ship for peacetime law enforcement on lictoral zone. Twice the ship also mean twice the cost in staff, maintainece and so on. if RMN is not doing the peacetime law enforcement what should they do during peacetime? Sit around as reserve around our coast and wait for a time they are needed? Them sitting around aren't exactly free, wages, maintainece all still need to be done.Not to mention you already sunk in the cost of the ship that now isn't being use. Plus the lost of opportunities to operate further offshores because most money is being use for lictoral purposes. Why do that? How is that a good policy? How is it a good use of resources?

PRC already put their CG under military administration and giving them the go ahead to shoot at civilian ships. So that pretty much mean we too don't have to keep our CG as mostly a civilian law enforcement organization. And it's also mean it fully justified to deal with CCG with the navy. US pretty much had indicate that they are treating CCG as a military anyway and would deal with them in a military way.

Personally i don't really see a point in missiles boat FAC for countries that can afford a proper air force. Countering Chinese boat with a boat of our own isn't a sustainable policy, they have more ability to build more boat. What you want is more plane that can shoot boat. Simply because due to the distance,them bringing them jet here is unsustainable policy for them. Also Having lots of jet discouraged them from bringing them boat here in the first place. Off course, if you have stealth jet, quantity is less of a concern. People can't shoot things they can't see.it would further discouraged them to be here. Or put those NSM on a truck or something. But if we do need but if we do need such missiles boat FAC, just let MMEA do it.


Assuming that 15 to 5 like CAP 55 is a rigid unchanging plans that would be followed to the letters is not the correct thing to do. If 15 to 5 are follow to the letter, we would not get anything more than 6 LCS & 2 subs at one time.

changing plans are ok to do particularly as the conflict at SCS has become very dynamic and ever changing since there's way too many actors operating and the interaction between each of them and the subsequent decisions each would makes would require a constant changing of plans to meet those new dynamic.

If anything over these few years, It's no longer just a borders dispute, It's inching towards a new cold war. Infact recently US marine are talking about installing patriot on islands all over the SCS and going around in a diplomatic mission to countries to join in to containing china. How is that not a cold war mentality?

In a cold war scenario in the SCS theaters, we aren't just responsible towards our own security but also to secure our Allies. And that the reason why US are so sooo generous with free radar, free missiles, 1/3 the price for MQ9B and so on. Not just them are being generous, the Chinese once had offered to put missiles here to shoot at singkie and offered free coastal radar to Indonesia. UK then had offered to give hibah jet if we order jet from them easily doubling the number of jet from what we could afford.

They are generous Because at the end those asset also guranteed their safety. Guaranteeing their safety to operate here safely using their equipment that we bought/ get for free is the same as us joining them in their war efforts. Their war efforts are there so they can set the rules of trades. Rules that heavily favor them. Rules that makes them richer than they already is.

But of course, with MY & ID choosing US hibah over china. Thus the action that secure them angmoh to operate safely over here would also discouraged Chinese activity over here just like how western fleet mostly avoid the Taiwan straits. And thus the reason the Chinese doesn't operate here as aggressively as they did near Philippines. It's just not safe here for them compared to there.

Our security did not depends on us having the capabilities to counter china, we would never be able to. But we have distance to our advantage, we can distrub their supplies lines, we also have potential Allies who share common interests and we can precure more cutting edge equipment due to bigger access to suppliers. So why do we want to play a game that give the Chinese an upper hands by playing kedekut, buy cheap stuff, priorities quantity over quality, don't works with others? Why not counter them with strategy that's to our advantage?


.

This post has been edited by darth5zaft: Sep 16 2021, 07:05 AM

Oh sorry my mistake.

that was the price of Amraam.
Essm cost at least double or same price of MICA

36 Is just an example. technically you could fit lots if you design it for such purpose. Just that you won't have space for anything else like living quarters or so on.

At 16 cells, be it MICA or ESSM you are spending upward of 100 million for those missiles alone. You probably need FCS,radar,CMS upgrade and so on to make firing those missiles possible in the first place.

Add more if you want CIWS, ASuW,ASW or EW capabilities.

Some says SCS is the place where 2/3 of the world submarines operate, so you might want to at least put in a sonars, towed away sonar off course would cost more.

Those LMS still then need additional equipment if they intend on dual roles it as minesweeper or hydro ship or so on.

A budget of 500 million aren't going to buy you any top of the line canggih Corvette.


Hard to say

Looking at Original 15/5 plan

RM12 they pay 6 billion for LCS & 2 billions for LMS. Thought their original budget is more to 3 billions for LCS & 1 billions for LMS

RM13 they originally intended to pay remaining 3 billions for LCS, another 4 LMS at 2 billion, and no one sure how much MRSS cost. But even at 500 million each. It's still just 6 billion

RM14 plan only called for 6PV & 8LMS and some heli.
LMS estimated was rm250 mil each while a PV cost rm500 mil.
So 5 billion without the heli?

This post has been edited by darth5zaft: Sep 16 2021, 07:28 AM

Old man like me already retired.

I know you are outsider. At least troll with style. Go read some naval strategy book and back with new dupe.

Initially I want to write long explanation on how naval vessel works but nevermind I am lazy to engage.

These are real world examples: 1973 Ramadan war, 1971 Indo-Pakistani war and current Iran missile boat in Strait of Hormuz, also Taiwan 2021 Ta Chiang and Tua Chiang classes. Taiwanese missile boats are designed to face China carrier group. They are part of puzzle pieces.

keywords for you to Google and learn:
-open sea vs littoral shallow water battle
-hide near islands and civilian boats
-ambush in a small group of 3 or more
-Indonesia geography. Also, since you are Malaysian, then learn about Malaysia geography and how naval vessel fit in our unique environment. Buying a destroyer and operate in certain area in Malaysia is a waste of money. More VLS does not mean better. Pro and con needs to be evaluated base on environment you are operating the war machine.

Missile boat/corvette like the French combattante and the ones Indonesia want to buy from Turkey actually are the missile boat done right. The vessel that American wanted to perfect as in their LCS. Unfortunately American cannot get those right.

Iinm there was a pic of this vehicle posted here before but its was orange painted twith a red crescent logo together with other variant of this vehicle. The design is more like a Humvee.

This post has been edited by azriel: Sep 16 2021, 08:23 AM

Australia pivoting their submarine purchase plan from conventional sub to SSN. Will be interesting to see how they plan to do this.

This post has been edited by MKLMS: Sep 16 2021, 10:26 AM

Sorry. This is different than the orange one.



This is made by Deftech. The front bonnet opens without lifting the headlight.




This is made by Go Auto. Go Auto is not a company linked with NAZA.

Not surprising given that they have huge civilian and military benefits from the nuclear power sharing agreement

But I don't think they can back out of their French SSKs now? Maybe the next sub building programme only they can switch to nucs

if you are an ex navy, then your understanding is off, and you didn't learn anything about the advantages and disadvantages of those gas turbine vospers.

the strategy is right, the problem is the way you want to implement the strategy is wrong.

For example it is good to get rich. But getting rich by illegal means is wrong.

You talk about the American cannot get their LCS right. This is exactly what will happen if this Turkish FAC became reality in TNI-AL.

That Turkish FAC is the same size and can do everything that our Laksamana class can do as designed. But it has a top speed of 50 knots instead of the laksamana class speed of 35 knots. That should be an advantage right? But it is powered by 5 gas turbines, no diesel engines. How much fuel it is going to burn when doing patrol at 20 knots on those gas turbines? How many days can it patrol before running out of fuel? 3 days?

Missile boat/corvette like the Greek Super Vita and our own Laksamana Class when it was tiptop and with its full armament actually are the missile boat concept done right. Missile boat/corvette like the ones Indonesia want to buy from Turkey actually are the missile boat concept done wrong.

Sometimes I wonder why TLDM future plans still cannot take into account basic things like the existence of MMEA, wanting a slow big patrol boat for LMS batch 2 and wanting more slow no missile big OPVs in kedah batch 2.

We should never buy a destroyer. We don't have the money anyway.

My understanding of what you ask me to Google is why i am against this weak ship for LMS batch 2. What is the pro and con of this LMS Batch 2? What is the use if TLDM is filled with 18 of this weak ships?


Which is why as I have posted before I want LMS Batch 2 to be a smaller, faster, longer ranged ship than the Chinese LMS 68, but it should not be a 1 mission only FAC/Corvette of the traditional sense.

This is want i want for an ideal LMS (at least 24 of these)

alexLMS
- 50-60m length
- price RM100 million including anti-ship missile module, RM60 million without modules.
- maximum speed more than 28 knots
- range at maintained maximum speed at least 2500 nm
- Crew 24-30 only
- 1x 30mm gun
- 1x 6-7m RHIB
- Inflatable anti-ship decoy system, chaff/flare decoys
- up to 4 containers location for the placement of anti-ship missile module, low cost towed array sonar module, unmanned mine countermeasure modules, SAR/HADR module, Decompression modules and others.
- missile module (2x TEU side by side footprint) consisting of 8 AShM of C-705 size and price and 24-36 small vertical launched missiles of VL Hellfire or CM-501GA.
- low cost towed array sonar module (1x TEU) of SEA thin line KraitArray towed Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) sonar. SEA is the manufacturer of Maharajalela torpedo launchers.

Operational mission profile

- as patrol/FAC in melacca straits, Langkawi archipelago. Off mersing, tawau and sandakan waters. Fast, high maneuverability, small size will make this possible, while also hiding near islands and civilian boats to do ambush.

- as wingmans to Maharajalela frigates in ASW missions. 1x Gowind and 2x alexLMS. 1x CAPTAS2 TAS and 2x KraitArray TAS deployed. A better operational concept than to depend on ASW helicopter using dipping sonar.

- MCM missions, using future unmanned MCM modules. 1x MCM mothership (OSV ship bought used) and 2-4x alexLMS.

- long range shadow, chase of all foreign naval ships in malaysian waters+EEZ. the ability to sail full speed for at least 2500nm is crucial for these missions.

Is this impossible? There are actually existing ships that can do this. My ideal alexLMS can more than do all the missions and more of what you ask me to google. Do you think what TLDM wants in its next LMS Batch 2 better than this?



This post has been edited by alexz23: Sep 16 2021, 01:05 PM

Ni bukan Dong Feng jugak ke?
eh Go Auto takde kaitan ngan Naza?
aku rasa mcm nampak anak dia waktu tu
hmm I could be wrong

Anak tan sri drpd bini lain. Bukan geng2 berfoya2 tu. Xdpt harta NAZA yg disapu bini pertama.

Your fantasy ship and the price very mismatched

High speed is useful for sprint and shoot

Hellfire VL for what lol. Might as well pack more antiship missiles

C-705 for what lol. Use shitty China antiship missiles to chase China CSGs. Lmao.

Ohh patut laa

betul la ni based on dong feng tu kan?