Everything is always just MOU.

No firm orders whatsoever for CN-235 and N-219.

follow Alman Helvas tweet for more info.

We'll see

The Korean might be interested in paying for some of the BVR cost. If the BVR in question is not AMRAAM. They do not need anymore jet that can shoot amraam. But they might be interested in a jet that can shoot derby or meteor.

If The BVR in question is AMRAAM then no. We have to pays it ourselves and integration cost amount to around $15 mil a jet or around RM1 billions. The aesa radar itself only cost $0.5mil to $1mil. We could ask for royalty or whatever but we aren't getting much back of the money we invested for such integration that would make it worthwhile.

Australia sends 14 M113AS4 to Ukraine, followed later by M777 howitzer and Bushmaster

Bayraktar TB2 spotted in Pakistan



SOS

gg india

50 F-35 already delivered to RAAF...22 to go
https://news.defence.gov.au/capability/f-35...ed-new-arrivals

So even before 2025 RAAF will have a full fleet of

72 F-35A
24 F/A-18F
12 F/A-18G

Plus the loyal wingman UCAVs

PT PAL 143-meter frigate design unveiled in 7th PhilMarine 2022 event

from the drone video, the battlefield in ukraine really is flat land as far as eye can see.
no wonder ukraine army entrench inside town or city to fight russian army.

that is literally the definition of the European Plains. Wide open ground where mass armor and artillery are the main form of land warfare.

So finally we can see the PT PAL version of the ARROWHEAD 140 frigate design.

My initial opinion?

If Malaysia wants to get the ARROWHEAD 140, please get the original design.

I really don't know why and i really cannot wrap my head on the reasons that they modify the design to become the PT PAL 143m frigate.

1. why do you relocate all your vertical launchers to the bow area? that will have lots of stability calculations that need to be done.

2. why do you shorten your superstructure? the biggest advantage of the ARROWHEAD 140 design is the massive volume of space inside its superstructure. Big hangar space to fit helicopter + UAV. Big boat hangar to able to carry multiple RHIB + USVs. The PT PAL 143m design eleminates the biggest advantage of the ARROWHEAD 140. So why did they do that?

There's still Vertical launcher on the middle of the ship with additional VLS at the bow. The middle VLS is likely for tomahawk or/and SM2 as the Danes had recently paid for the system integration on tops of ballistics missiles detection. While the bow is for CaMM or/and ESSM or it equivalent

Seem they are building a FREMM out of the type 31 rather than a multirole combat ship type thing as the type 32 would. As unlike the type 31 they do not just do local defence AAW like type 31 but also carry over Asw & Asuw system from Iver Huitfeldt & absalon. Its likely going to be cheaper than the fremm too . If anything it just proof the versatility of the absalon design as it could be anything from a mini MRSS to a combat ship.

This post has been edited by darth5zaft: Jun 23 2022, 03:58 PM

You dont need to modify and shorten the superstructure to fire CAMM or ESSM. All the original iver huitfeldt and Type 31 can perfectly fire CAMM and ESSM from the central location. The original iver huitfeldt frigate is already as capable as the FREMM frigate.

I would understand if you modify it to do something the original design cannot do. But the problem is, even the original design is capable to do it.

Which is why i don't understand the reason for the Indonesians to mutilate the ARROWHEAD 140 design to do something that even the original design is able to do perfectly.

PT PAL submarine tender design

Royal Thai Army to buy additional 9 used UH-60A Blackhawk helicopters.

SOS





This is to add to the 3 already bought used UH-60A Blackhawks and 12 UH-60L/M Blackhawks already in Royal Thai Army Fleet.

Unlike the PT PAL 143m frigate design, this I believe is a superb idea and a good modification to the original LPD design.

TLDM could have a good use of a ship similar to this.

It allows the submarine fleet to be dispersed in wartime situation, allowing the submarine fleet to operate away from its main base, or even operate in case the main base (in our case just teluk sepanggar) is destroyed by the enemy.

But can the tender become target itself like aircraft carrier?

of course

but it is a better probability for the submarine fleet survival rathar than having none.

it also allows the submarines to regularly operate at locations far from base, like say from. kuala terengganu for example, or allowing our submarines to operate out of foreign naval base, like singapore or vietnam.

Curious if let's say Malaysia orders it, can it also function as MRSS which is needed under 15 to 5 plan or this is different class