If like that then iver huitfeldt & type 31 is totally seperate design then absalon. and RN are wasting money building type 26 for RM17 billion each when they can just use Absalon as ASW platforms.




Ntah

Murah lah tu
1 LCS dapat 4 sigma.

I thought the reason sea trial cannot be done is because propulsion software hasn't be install?The propulsion system hasn't been installed because gov doesn't give the sign off to do so.

Isn't that like buying a PC, then Sendiri didn't allowed the vendor to install windows then cry fault because the PC is not working?

*The Marhalim blog and other media reports that the rebooted LMS is going to be a missiles Corvette or at the very least tun Fatimah size OPV with a budget of 500 mil each. At the very least it won't be from BNS. Which from a news report also trying their luck in trying to add 50 tons to their Chinese LMS designs and wanted to sell it for 500 million each.

*The gov like ID seem interested to have multi agencies using the same equipment and Damen is likely in the leads since they are building tun Fatimah. If next year this proof to be the case, then whatever ship MMEA going to buy for their mothership is going to be the navy ship next MP.

*Currently the navy get around 7 billion in development budget every MP.
Hishamuddin recent statement that they going to order 8 LMS batch 2 in 2022, 2 MRSS in 2024, and 6 NGPV in 2026. The MRSS late order probably mean they going to be paid for by next MP. The 6 NGPV next MP would likely has a budget of at least a billion ringgit each, almost enough to buy a type 31. This MP at least 3 billions would be use for LCS.so that's left around 4 billion this MP for the RLMS. So 500 mil per RLMS do sounds plausible.

*For 500 millions a piece for a ship the size of Kedah/tun Fatimah. It has to at least have a missiles. But then again we do have a proud tradition of paying high price for a gunboat.so who knows.

As for the LCS, at least 2 are in the very advance stages pending sea trial. So ordering new ship after the sea trial won't be much of a controversy i guess. As for why they wanted a missile Corvette, well your guess are as good as mine.

Who knows, since the LMS batch2 increase in size from FAC to Corvette, the 2GPV (now known as LCS) increase from Corvette to frigates, the NGPV too may increase in size.

Personally, i think the 2LMS would likely follow LMV concept in being a AAW Corvette. That's would allowed the budgets for missiles & equipment needed to fire those missiles to be shared with the LCS. Basically a Bailoutception . another bailout of a bailout of a bailout.

I say that because it does seem the 1st 2 LCS are delay not by BNS but by the government themselves. It does seem 1 major reason for delay is the desire to change the MiCa to something else, particularly as UAE had ordered and thus paid for the cost of intergrating the ESSM to the gowind. So the cost of equipping our gowind with ESSM is not as expensive as it was before.



This post has been edited by darth5zaft: Sep 21 2021, 04:57 PM

True for ID but not for MY.

We already a member of FPDA, and lots of FPDA members have direct defense relationship with US. Not to mention MY is also a member of CPTPP & combined maritime force, US firm's also makes substantial chunk of MY FDI

Thus the risk of MY getting US embargoes is low because MY has limited ability not to do what US says anyway : 😆😂

Tak juga
Mica missiles cost 300% more than a ESSM.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-162_ESSM
https://www.flightglobal.com/india-approves...n%20per%20round.


There's an opportunity cost of +- RM 800 mil ( or +- rm130 mil per ship) available to retrofitted those gowind to be ESSM capable.

The R&D cost for the intergration of ESSM to gowind are already mostly paid for by the UAE. So It's basically now down to changing some equipment only.

1 of the cause of the 3 year delay of the LCS is the MICA vs ESSM issues. If the gov think the aaw missiles isn't important they wouldn't be the one who issue the stop order. As it is, they see it fit to postpone the ship completion to investigate further the possibility of ESSM. So saying they want to prioritize completion of the ship regardless of it fixture & fittings is probably not true.

Like it or not,even if we do get type 31. This ship is the most capable ship we would have for a very long time. unless we go get a FREMM which we likely won't because it's freaking expensive.

Because a single LCS cost as much as 4 LMS?. Not to mention this fiascos do impact the public mood for anymore LCS even if it's built by some other yards particularly since type 31 is around.

Yeah, i doubt BNS would get the contract for the LMS or even anymore ship after this for a long period of time. The whole paying for BNS debt due to Kedah by acquiring the worthless gowind IP in itself a divorce settlement. It free the gov from having a commitment to order all navy ship from BNS. The politikus who go give BNS anymore contacts would not only need to be brave but stupid as well. Not like other shipyards doesn't know how to pay duit kopi. So why would they stick their neck out for BNS when they have nothing to gain but everything to lose?

As for why? Already said. Don't know. Probably it's would do whatever the heck LMV are doing. With a budget of rm500 mil it's not enough to buy a ' full spectrum' Corvette. It's not enough money to buy all 3 type of missiles.

As for how the 2LMS can be use to bailout the LCS?
Probably both LMS & LCS would share the same ESSM leveraging the discount on mass order. or they just take the mica launchers & it's associate equipment from the LCS and stuff it into the LMS or keep the mica on the LCS and equip the LMS with ESSM to supliment the LCS disadvantage in area defense.

Already give you the wiki link there.
And 1.795 million is for block 2 if not mistaken.
Only available for purchase by US BFF ATM if not mistaken.
Block 1 is a million a piece.

But then again,US sells same stuff at different price to different people is an already know phenomenon. They do give us priorities on Pfizer even as Japan & Australia struggle to get their hand on it. While In 2015 they offered 36 super hornet while France only offered 18 rafales. Which kinda indicate we could get US stuff at US selling prices.


Probably because military hardware aren't build with USB-C and allowed for plug & play? 😆. Some forumers here put the price of Amraam capable FA50 to be almost double the price of current FA50. Normally the 1st guy who ordered such customization would pay for the R&D & intergration cost. The next guy who ordered it get a substantial discount since they don't have to pay for the R&D but get all the benefit of the upgrade at original cost.

So you could say prior to the UAE ordering ESSM capable gowind, the cost of intergrating would be through the roof. And now it's mostly within reach.

.

Already told you long winding explaination how only a moron of a politicians going to give BNS anymore project nor going to build anymore LCS. It's not a politically popular things to do and thus they won't. Not to mention with 6 ASW frigates around,do you really need more?

Off course I can't give you an example. except for Sinki, have anyone else ordering a AAW only Corvette? The only example is dipornogoro class and Jose Rizal at around that price point but both don't really have much AAW capabilities.

My opinion that 2LMS is only AAW Capable is there if they wanted to use the budget from the 2LMS to bailout the LCS. It could as well be that the 2LMS maybe just a normal Corvette like the 2 example above.

Already told you 3 possible option to use LMS budget to safe the LCS
1) both LMS & LCS use ESSM
2) mica launchers & equipment transfer to LMS, LCS get ESSM
3) LCS still use MICa, LMS use ESSM

We do know that sigma and it's associated equipment & CMS can shoot both mica & essm. the Mexican sigma carry 8 ESSM. The cost of demen kapal kosong is 250 mil, 8 ESSM cost 36 mil. That's mean equipment needed to fire ESSM has a budget of around RM200 mil. Whether it's enough or not I don't know. If it's not enough that do option 2.

For options 2, all they do is move the mica equipment (that's already bought & paid for) to the 6 of the LMS. By Doing so they have RM2.2 billion extra (RM 2 billion from LMS equipment budget + cost of LCS mica missiles purchase of RM1.2 billion - 0.5 bil cost of 8 cell mica on 2LMS - 0.4 billion for 16cell ESSM for LCS) + 3 billions original LCS budget = 5.2) billion to finish a ESSM capable LCS.

Not really

The Cost of intergrating sensors &torpedoes may be more cost prohibitive then just buying an off the shelf solution. Invention & innovation are never cheap.

Not to mention all 36 ATR 72- 600 MAS ordered before for MASwings & firefly are all in storages. No news on what happened to those aircraft afterwards whether it got resold or what. But if they still got it and since the gov already paid for it. then just give them to the army.I assume the ATR 72 MPA is a very competent plane because despite already operating CN 295 MPA, the Turkish ordered ATR72.

As for the CN 235, the original plan was to give the CN235 (MSA & normal one) to MMEA after TUDM get their new submarines detecting capable MPA.

^^
With so much innovation, so much gold plating custom made limited user solutions. So much risk of cost overun, lack of people available to help with troubleshooting, too high a risk of things not working as intended. Doubt you'll going to safe money with it just like i doubt TuDM are actually saving any money buying the custom indian derived Sukhoi with french avionics compare to just buying more hornet.

Mahathir had do all the things above for a very very long time. I'm not sure why we wanted to continue doing it anymore.


Trying to add stuff into something is in itself an innovation. If it cheap & easy, ID would had offer a submarine detection capable MPA for TUDM MPA contract or Germany would not buy the Poseidon & just give money to Airbus to do their A320 MPA project.

Prototyping thing are the easy part, actually coming up with a workable product is not. No need to look further than Gen2 or Scomi sutra monorail (which keep going up in flames), German & Brittain meanwhile are having problem with their puma & ajax.

CN 235 is a very competent MSA, and it's more than enough for coast guard duty. And our CG do need plane & AF already plan for the CN235 retirement. so Let just take the easy way out, use it for what it's intended usage. It's still available to move troops/supplies and drop paratroopers if such a need arise.

Not to mention we do have plentiful of unused ATR72 in storage.so why pay to the roof and take huge risk to innovate an old CN235 when we can get brand new atr72 mpa instead?

This post has been edited by darth5zaft: Sep 22 2021, 04:02 PM

Rm600 mil sounds a lot, but in reality a bit low thought, a budget of only $67 mil per MPA.

ID Don't offer us submarine detecting capable CN235. Obviously the price & quantities we offered aren't enough for them to invest in making such variety possible. if they could, they would.

The ATR 72 MPA cost around $80 mil a pop, CN 295MPA cost more then the Leonardo while civilians ATR72 is around $50 mil a pop. With that budget, only a bring you own airplane to be converted to a MPA is what we can afford. If Leonardo win, the actual cost of MPA is more $30 mil a pop or RM810 mil for the whole 6 MPA.

The other CN 235 too would likely get the upgrade to MSA. 3 is not enough for our CG need. But the upgrade would have to come out of the CG pocket or maybe uncle Sam would be nice enough to pay for another 3 conversion despite hisaputing going to go to china to seek their opinion about AUKUS,🥺.

As for the AWACS, the AF said they only going to get those only by 2045 if not mistaken. What good AWAC when we don't have sufficient jet in the 1st place😂😆.

Like i said, prototyping is the easy part, creating a finish product is the difficult & expensive part. If they can do it and sell it cheaper than Leonardo then by all means, buy it.

Yes, I'm aware of what AWAC does. By 2030 we do have enough jet but just a wee bit afterwards those jet need replacing. From 2030 to 2045, all money are pretty much utilize to buy new jet.

So 2045 is the earliest time frame to purchase one. If you want one quick, saab are known for throwing AWAC FOC for buying jet from them. So maybe let buy jet from them? If only there's a jet that Saab are selling that fits our requirements, particularly for a tender that close today 😉

Got money ke?
AWAC aren't exactly cheap

Wedgetail for example can cost $30-$80 mil if we bring our own plane if they don't charge for R&D immortalization cost. If they did wedgetail cost $400 mil. Saab global eyes cost $500 mil.

https://www.airplaneupdate.com/2019/02/boei...7-aewc.html?m=1
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2...2-billion-deal/
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2...-arab-emirates/

Also wonder if Boeing would accept around $30 mil discount and only charge $67 mil for p8 Poseidon if we brought our own plane.

https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/ger.../142882.article

Wonder what we can do to make Boeing be generous to us 🤔


But then again those stealthy MRCA can also function as a mini AWACS. So maybe 2045 for a standalone AWACS is not a bad time frame afterall.

I think you really often underestimate the complexity and cost of engineering and how much works, time & money needed to turn a product from an idea to prototype to a complete products.

You do not just add the bills of material and ta dah. The price. For example smart phone are often sold 300% more than the cost of material and even at such healthy markup, most smartphone manufacturer are in the red.

Just because you glue together some stuff together like a Lego block doesn't mean it would work outright and can start selling it tomorrow. It's not a cakoi. Just because something only weight 2kg doesn't mean you can't get away with bolting it under the fuselage without any modifications or strengthening of a fuselage and it would stay bolt on as you fly at 500kmh. Have you ever put your head out when car are traveling at 160kmh and felt the throwback due to wind resistance?
What you have now is just a prototype.

A prototype that you glue together is not a final product. Scomi makes that mistake of gluing components together for the monorail and it worked well in their limited trials. But once it's in customer hands it's burst into flames. Same as galaxy note 7.

The T7 redhawk first flew 5 years ago, and until today it's still in the testing, certifying, fixing stage and it would still be for the next 4-5 years. Afterwards another 10 years needed for it to have full capabilities.

And you want what, a MPA & AWAC yesterday? And you really think you can glue something today and have it available tomorrow and it would work perfectly forever? If glueing stuff together are cheaper & better than buying stuff off the shelf, don't you think you're aren't the first in to figure those out and everyone else would have done it already? Do you see people doing it? Why do you think people aren't doing it?

The only way to get stuff for cheap is to ask said companies not to charge a profit nor the R&D amortization cost and thus then only you could buy something equivalent as it's bills of material. But it just mean someone else are paying for your discount. Often said manufacturer country taxes payers. There's no such thing as free lunch after all.

Technically a Corvette with ESSM with the price tag of +-RM 500 mil do exist. It's called the Baynunah-class, a 915 tons ship with 8 ESSM,RAM & Exocet with space for future installations of minesweeper equipment.

Also, Putting a essm on a sigma or a gowind has been done before. The R&D has been done, the solution is there, the software had been written. At this point it's is a plug & play game. That's hardly a 'difficult' engineering projects. The 'difficult', expensive, pecah kepala kind of engineering is when you bought a Russian plane and jammed a french avionics in it. Just because both the Sukhoi & the avionics are available off the shelf doesn't mean marrying it together are easy nor cheap or if it's actually works as imagine.

Deleting equipment from an already finished product is a whole lot easier. But I really doubt Deleting the MPA equipment automatically make it reduce half price. MPA equipment doesn't seem to be that's expensive since ATR 72 MPA are only $30 mil more then a normal ATR72. Heck even the AWAC equipment on the wedgetail aren't that expensive, it's likely cost in-between $30 -70 mil.

The reason why both these jet are sold at twice the cost of material to outsiders is likely due to their profit margin + R&D amortization cost is half the selling price of the plane.Also the most likely reason why US jet are half the price of everyone else. It's most likely because the cost of R&D are absorbed by the US taxes payers

That's also the reason why many here opinionated that BVr capable FA50 is at least $50 mil, or why the Arab are paying half the price for a gempita then we are. it's just the rules of the thumb that if you're want to invent thing and intergrate thing that has never been intergrated before, just do cost of the equipment x 2

And thus the easy way to safe money is not to invent something yourself. But to convince the manufacturer Host countries to absorb the cost of R&D for you, allowing you to get an equipment at half the price. Why do you think the Korean are investigating potential usage of FA50 for F5 replacement? Yes. They doing it to see whether or not they can afford to subsidized the R&D of the FA50 to filled our requirements.

Military industrial complex is never about profitability, most of the time what they are doing is subsidizing the defense of other countries. That's the price those country pay to own a military industrial complex, as having self sufficiency in defense allowed them an independent foreign policy and thus super power or middle power status.

Well the UAE aren't operating alone isn't it? They are part of the combined maritime force. And their acquisition are there not to do self defense of themselves by themselves. But to balance the acquisition between their needs and the capabilities needed to support her allies. All nation works together towards a common goal because they have similar self interest.

Same thing could be said about us. No matter how our gov try to play ambiguity with no official clear statement of what their defense priorities is. We can makes an educated guess based on the plans military acquisition. But doing so mean we are in the realms of speculating. And you guess are as good as mine.

In my personal view, base on the plan they laid out, i can safely conclude that our adversery are CCP, Why CCP? CCP is playing the gate keeper for hundred of millions of middle class inviduals. They use it to strong arm everyone, challenge the international rules of law. What they scared off is losing power, the Chinese are now a higher middle income society, you know the kind of society that get rid of their dictators Just like in MY,SK & TW B4. What they wanted is to be like PAP. To keep the mandate of heaven they need to ensure wealth flowing to the citizens pocket as nationalism can only go so far as BN found out and thus the Strong arming & challenging international law. They are using maritime dispute as an excuse of rapid military buildup. Their ultimate aim is to control the choke point of Straits of Malacca,sunda, Makassar & senkuku to keep the wealth flowing and allowed them to be in power. Their whole bet relied on the assumption that others can't make up a united front challenging them. And thus why they are really pissed off at the US. The US are helping people to stand up by backing them up.


And thus, our defense policy is not we are defending ourselves by ourselves for ourselves, we are helping the western powers achieve their objective since we also shared the same interest & The western powers are helping us gurenteeing our security.

What ATM main priorities now is to acquire a robust, competent A2/AD capabilities. The 1st stage Is ASW capabilities. That's where gowind,MALE,MPA comes in. To achieve this, the priorities is quality over quantity. There's no point in having a swarm of MALE,MPA, sonar boat if they can't detect almost all subs. Not to mention playing quantities over quality is the Chinese speciality, since they have a clear advantage in those area. Playing the same game mean we are playing to lose.

The distance, lack of a base nearby & the meh ness of their 'stealth' jet mean submarine are their main weapon of choice for deep strike missions. So no compromise on the quality allowed there. Nothing short of the best of the best equipment that we can afford to pay. Even if we can afford just a few then be it.


Secondly, All security agency would operate a single type of helo for economic of scale purposes like the korean are doing. All heli be equip for but not with Airbus defense solutions so every helo can be turn into a quasi attack helo. This would be our primary ASuW platforms not just against maritime swarmed attack as helo base ASuW missiles are almost a thing with sea venoms.

It's hard for maritime Militia or less equip ship to counter help also helo are a good thing in counter incurgencies, surveillance & so on and it's useful for the utilities they provide. Sea venoms too would most likely be cheaper then a NSM, suitable for the low in the high low mix.

Afterwards is AAW capabilities. This is where GBAD, BVR capable LCA, hibah hornets, ESSM ship comes in. Having all 3 allowed us to extend an umbrella of protection not just for ourselves, for the merchant ship but also to our allies who would use our EEZ as the staging stage. It's has to be sufficient enough to severely restrict, slow down, or endanger the opponent. And as such we solved the Arial intrusion problem. They can fly or sail around according to the international law that we recognize and with A2/AD abilities to impose.

The quantities & variety parts can always be remedies by not playing sombong and accept a helping hands nor asking for help in the first place. We do have friends afterall, we do get Intel on whatever the Poseidon found, someone do kepochi and send AWACs that can send Intel to us when someone fly by B4, another are dismantling their jet to send us sparepart. But those helping hand can only come if we provide the security for them to operate here. Objective here is not the be another Taiwan or Philippines.


The next stage is forward deployable capabilities. We can scream how much a waste of money forward deployment is. But The fact to the matter is, if the Chinese occupied an island near Palawan, or mainland ASEAN or anyway near us. It's in our interest to have capabilities to deal with it. Inability to do so would allowed the Chinese to use to place as her own A2/AD and point a land attack missiles to us like they did to the Pinoy. The western army would retreats and we lost our EEZ as the Chinese can do whatever they wanted since they own the biggest gun around. Afterwards from 2030s onward the acquisition of deep strike capabilities with a destroyer, submarines, stealthy MRCA, AWACs , Adnan & pendekar replacement.


What i think would happen is the 3sq of LCA & 2 sq of MRCA under OG CAP55, would be replaced by 2 sq of LCA & 3 sq of MRCA, similar to RAAF numbers during their hornet + hawk yyears if they could get the used hornet.

OG 1525 plans of 18 FAC, 18 Corvette, 3LPD, 6 LCS & 2 subs at one time with vessel replace every 20 years Would change to 4 FAC, 8 Corvette, 6 frigates, 6 destroyers, 4 or 6 subs & 3 LPD replace every 30 years. Basically RMN will have similar vessel numbers as RSN. The 2LMS is likely a AAW & ASW Corvette, to operate in less contested waters compared to the gowind like SOM or Sulu sea. They the low in the high low, if we do get a type 31, it's the low and someone else need to provide the high in that mix.

Again don't be to worries about the numbers, them Sinki & indo are more than Glad to send ship into our water since it mean the fighting is away from their waters . Just as much as we would be more than happy to send out ship to Vietnam or Ph.

TD meanwhile need to assume 2 more roles, 1 as Marine Corp like JDF & Aussie are doing, 2nd as border enforcement agency, Thailand's pretty much are back playing the same game they did 70 years ago. TD also need to resume their konfrontasi era jobs of not allowing anyone to land on our shores. This would be useful for them to familiarize themselves to the area, allowed for increase in personel & equipment for a just in case scenario. TD are our last lines of defense afterall. So i don't agree on calls for them to be sacrifice and put last in the pecking order of defense acquisition.



As for MMEA they likely going to play deputy to navy in warfare However in area of peacetime patrol, CG is the lead agencies and the navy are there to help them. Just like how TD help the police & the police help the army during the emergency.The paskal are what the navy seal is while CG equivalent is a SWAT. One train to kill, the other train to safe hostage.

It would be useful if both use the same kind of ship but CG operate the gunboat version of the same vessel type thus allowing not just an economic of scale but also interoperability. For example

Last MP CG get tun Fatimah. this MP navy get sigma
This MP CG get Absalon in it support ship version. next MP type 31
This MP navy finish Gowind, next MP CG get Gowind OPV.

CG is the low in the high low mix. To play deputies, they need to be train as a brown water navy, their ship need to be equip with gun capable of AAW & ASW. They need to be train to performs sea denial, base and facilities protection against aireal bombardment, the use their mothership to install sea mines since navy ship aren't supposed to have through decks, even perform minesweepers in shallow waters.

Their MSA is also the low in the high low mix,mostly operate on Sulu & SOM where submarine is less of a problem and enforcement & traffic management is the priorities. AF would operate the MPA at SCS mostly to detect sub but also a secondary roles of enforcement & traffic management helping the CG perform their duty. Their pilot also need to train in case they need to send supplies or paratroopers using the CN235. Again playing the low in the tactical transport segment.

This helping each other out by allowing CG roles that's blur along the grey line between internal security & defense allowed us to minimize the overall amount of ship & personel, the amount of high end equipment we need to acquired, also allowed higher level of efficiency as they specialized to perform more specific jobs. Thus why most country keep the CG a paramilitary organization compared to a clear cut approach of CG as a purely civilian police at sea.


So personally, if my assumption are right. Contrary to your opinion i think Their planning are top notch.

[quote=alexz23,Sep 24 2021, 03:05 PM]
What your assumption and current TLDM, TUDM plans problem, is the lack of $$$$$$$$, and continuing wasteful buys.

Let me talk about TLDM and TUDM plans first.

This is the actual current TLDM 15 to 5 plan



By 2040 if according to plan (remember those Gowinds need addittional $$$$$ not in the plan, and that means something needs to be deleted from the original plan to complete the Gowinds)

- 6 Gowinds by 2025
- 4 Chinese LMS
- 14 LMS batch 2 target price same as chinese LMS of RM250 million
- 4 submarines, with the 2 original scorpenes now 30 years old
- 6 Kedah class OPV
- 12 new PV of target price RM500 million
- 4 new LCS in 2036-2040

The whole cost of new LMS + PV is estimated to be at RM9.5 billion

This is the current TUDM CAP55 phase 1 2021-2030 plan
- 36 LCA/FLIT
- 1 sqn of used Hornets
- 6 new MPA
- 3 MALE UAV (this is too small a number)
- Medium range SAM

TUDM CAP55 phase 2 2031-2045
- Hornet replacement MRCA
- MRTT tanker

- CN-235 replacement for transport duties (this contradicts with CAP55 plan of just 2 types of transporter, A400M and C-130)
- More MALE UAV
- more MPA
- more Medium range SAM [/quote]

This is correct, but with a MENHAN that wants to quickly seek an audience with CCP to reassure malaysian stand on AUKUS issue, this will be difficult. We must not vote for people who are willing to collude with CCP.


planned ASW capability with just 6 Gowinds, 6 MPA, 3 MALE UAV, ?? ASW helicopters? We need more. Which is why I prefer for smaller ships that are actually cheaper than LMS batch 2 and OPV batch 2 that could run with the same speed and endurance with the Gowinds to give a bigger ASW detection area.
Helicopters can be easily shot down by 57mm, 76mm naval gunfire, missiles etc.

How many helicopters need to be bought to equip the multitude of LMS batch 2 and OPV batch 2?

Yes the Sea venom is cheaper than NSM, it can sink FACs at 20km, but shooting 110kg missiles at maritime swarms of fast boats? Can a helicopter carrying Sea venom even get near a corvette or frigate?



That orange thing is the sea venom. It is larger than the Sea Skua.
ESSM corvette is survivable? Against Ballistic anti-ship missiles, Hypersonic anti-ship missiles or even latest Chinese Destroyers? We extend air defence umbrella to our allies? Probably should be the other way round with proper Air Defence Destroyers. ESSM on a corvette or frigate at best a self protection against conventional anti-ship missiles. No enemy figher jets is going to stray anywhere less than 100km from our corvettes or frigates, all anti-ship missile attacks would be made at ranges more than 100km. Can ESSM intercept Ballistic anti-ship missiles or Hypersonic anti-ship missiles? Can you even do A2/AD with corvettes/frigates/destroyers against superior threat like China?











How did Vietcong, Taliban subdue their bigger more powerful adversary? By going asymmetric. When the real shooting starts, it is the submarines, UUVs, and small ships like alexLMS dispersed among fishing villages and small islands planting mines, clandestinely shooting missiles will be our response to them.
Yes we can get intel from Poseidons, which is why we should have more ASW capable ships instead.

AWACs are not used just to send intel. The "C" in AWACs is there for a reason. The AWACs will be used to "Control" the fighters. That is a sovereign capability we need to have, to be able to control interceptions through our own secure Network Centric capability.

Helping hand can be with different ways. We can build Replenishment Tankers to support friendly ships operating in SCS. A different ASW capability such as my proposed alexLMS that has the speed and range to sail together with allied frigates is another thing we can contribute. MALE UAV intel from our own bases means we have more time on station, unlike operations from bases further away.
So you want to plan for us to forward deploy and attack chinese army occupying Palawan??????? Do you even realise how impossible that is? Please tell me how can we do that?
So your ideal plan is for 4 FAC, 8 Corvette, 6 frigates, 6 destroyers, 4 or 6 subs & 3 LPD ?

FAC doctrine call for having big numbers. What is the mission for a fleet of just 4 FACs? Do we have the money for "destroyers"?? A destroyer will cost at least 1 billion dollars each. Even Australia will have just 3 Destroyers, how can we afford to have 6??

There are 2 ships in TLDM plan, LMS batch 2, and OPV batch 2.
LMS batch 2 of 70+m, less than 1000 tonnes, RM250 million. OPV batch 2, 90m+, 2000+ tonnes, RM500 million. So your plan for 2LMS is to be a corvette with AAW and ASW capability? Will there be plenty submarine operations in shallow SOM or Sulu Sea? Why you need dedicated AAW ESSM capability in a corvette operating in SOM when it could be protected by TUDM air cover?

Why do you need 3 LPD? To attack chinese army occupying Palawan?
My modest TLDM plan is just this
- 8x Gowind ASW frigate
- 4x Type 31 GP frigate to replace lekiu and kasturi, that should cost no more than 450 million dollars each fully armed.
- 24x alexLMS that can do FAC, ASW wingman to the Gowind, MCM wingman to OSV, minelaying and other multi purpose tasks. 25 million dollars each only.
- 2x Replenishment Tankers
- 2x MRSS, that is not a LPD. MRSS main task is to be able to rapidly deploy 1 whole mechanised battalion from west to east malaysia by just 1 ship. able to carry 100+ Gempita at once. Amphibious attack not main function.
- 3x OSV, large, cheap, used, less than 10 million dollars each. To be MCM mothership, Paskal mothership, emergency repair and rescue of TLDM ships hit by missiles in war, etc.
- 6x scorpenes
- 6x large UUVs
TD does not need to be a Marine Corps. We just need to defend our shores and prevent others landing on it. Not actually the one who will do beach landings. At most we need to have forces like Sweden or Finland has, a specialized anti amphibious landing force.

Spending huge amounts of money just for the sake of "commonality" is false economics. Damen Sigma has nothing in common with Damen OPV design. Totally different hull form. Why MMEA need to have ABSALONs for 250 million dollars when you can buy 6 Korean 4000 tonnes OPV for the same price? How cheap can a Gowind based OPV be anyway?

Also how does a huge 100m mothership as proposed by MMEA (I disagree on this need to be expensive custom ship when a used OSV can do the same task) can discreetly install mines? Both MMEA and TLDM have a need for off the shelf OSVs, around 70-80m in length, no need for a custom ship for these roles.


We shouldn't waste money buying things that is adequate for day to day needs but are priced as much as fully armed ships. But having all MMEA ship capable of war capability (even TLDM chinese LMS 68 does not) will increase costs, acquisition and operational. We need very capable ships at reasonable costs that can do our day to day operational needs.

Our "what if" plan should be reasonable, we cannot plan on the impossible, like going head to head with china with Destroyers. Asymmetric response is the only logical response that we are capable to any attack by China.

[/quote]


I think most of above statements can be all sums up as you prefer quantity over quality. And you need that because you want to perform asymmetrical warfare against a foe. Nothing wrong with that. And as you mention this kind of strategy are very effective with the Taliban & Vietcong.

It is also the exact strategies the Chinese are doing. Their maritime dispute are their version of asymmetric warfare since they know they can't match the might, experience & technology advantage of western powers. So they set a stage of new kind of warfare, relying on numbers and operate in ambiguity, it's not a full war but not peace time either.

The problem with their strategy is that it can easily evolve into another cold war which they hope to counter by divide & conquer by playing gates keeper to the hundred of millions of middle income population.


Those plans are a perfect match for them. Kudos to them. I say their planning is top notch. They are hitori bochi not because they wanted too but circumstances Makes them unable to makes allies, no allies mean no high technology, which mean money goes to quantities since they can't hope to achieve quality all by themself.


.
But employing the same strategies to us just means
*You have access to allies, but you rejected working with them to do asymmetrical warfare.

*Doing the above mean you lose the easy way of copying other people homework (which mind some are combat proven) you decide not to, and go on having to write all the doctrines, strategies all by yourself. How many people do you think die as Ginnie pig before the Taliban perfected their very impressive improvise explosive strategy?

"Despite having opportunity to develop relationship in which you get access to others personel & equipment. Rather then nurturing it, you just go for a minimal support roles since you don't have the equipment required because everyone else is doing standardization, you are doing custom solution. This leads to your almost non commitment to back them up, mean they also would lack in any commitments to backed you up.

"Despite knowing with you just having 2% of your Nemesis population, you already know their overwhelming ability in numbers & resources but you still trying to outcompeted them in resources & numbers.

*Despite knowing your Nemesis lack of access to high technology, while you yourself has access to high technology. you still choose to do low technology because your strategy required numberical in quantities. With only so much money around you can only choose either qualities or quantities.


Australia defense spending is around 10x of us, they live far from everyone in their own corner of the world. Even with that kind of resources available to them they can't relied on themselves alone to defend themselves against all spectrum of threats out there and thus why from before till now they always had a DaGe to help them defense themselves.

Their last Da Ge dragged them to Malaya to fight other people war then run away back to west of suez and they go around finding a new Da Ge, who dragged them to Iraq , Afghanistan & ironically back to Malaysia. But that's is the price they pay and unfortunately it's also the strategies that fit us best. That's why I say their planning are top notch.








Ps. Just because it look wee bit different doesn't mean they build everything from scratch. Let just use a car analogy.

a VW golf & Audi Q2 & Audi A3 are 90% the same car. The sigma hull are more square off to deflect the radar better at the cost of efficiency due to drag while the rounded hull of a OPV is there to help with efficiency at the cost bigger radar signature. A mechanic that can repair a VW, can also repair the Audi, since despite huge differences in it exterior design & interior fit & finishes. Behind the scene, it's the same car. Using the same bolt, pipe & part, running the same software.

Things like the type 26 is the Buggati, still parts of VW, but it is design to reach the absolute maximum abilities that current technology can offer. It is expansive because most of it software, parts & components need to be invented and be a custom made because no manufacturing facility are there yet to make it. Starting a new production assembly are expensive. And the less parts you make the more each single parts cost. Add all up you end up with an expensive thing which make it more expensive because only a limited number of people can afford it. The custom made parts mostly being new hasn't been tested fully in term of reliability and thus why operating it is expensive because it keep breaking down.

But as long as they keep the manufacturing going, the less expensive the per parts is, the more it break the more they can find fixes. Things like the sigma & type 31 are the Lamborghini. It's made from mostly previous Buggati platforms which had reduce in price and increase in reliability, it's just a wee bit less fast then a Buggati but it's a whole lots cheaper & more reliable. As it's goes cheaper & cheaper the platform become the Porsche.

This post has been edited by darth5zaft: Sep 25 2021, 06:47 AM

Building a new assembly line is always expensive.
What's more when the order are limited since the setup cost can only be redistributed to limited number of unit.

TD only order a few unit but the Thai are buying lots more (Not really sure how much the Thai are buying though). But for the Aussie they need to order 1000 unit of hawkei to get the manufacturing price in AUS to be $500,000 a unit.

But of course the JLTV is the king of the hills, it's huge ordered mean you pay the same price per unit as first win & hawkei. But it's so so so much more value for Money.

That's the problem with lack of economic of scale but still want to konon konon create a local industrial military complex If buy directly from turkey, the 8x8 would likely cost half because their assembly line is mostly had been paid for by the large order of the Turkish military.

If it's was me, it would probably more cost effective to just ask for an offset like our deals with Airbus or indo with KAI.

But then again, it's not just us. Sinki, Aussie & Indo are also playing these really weird game of let's paid a whole lot more just for the sake of it to be CKD locally. So let's bersangka baik & assume probably there's something they trying to achieve kot. 😂