APMM Plans

MMEA 415MP M71-02 at LIMA 17.

SHAH ALAM: APMM Plans, a guest post by… While RMN has its widely publicized 15 to 5 plan, Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency (APMM, Agensi Penguatkuasaan Maritim Malaysia) also came out with its own plan, the Pelan Perancangan Strategik Maritim Malaysia 2040 (PPSMM 2040). It was launched by Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin during LIMA 2011.

Although the exact plan is not made public the plan has 5 Strategic goals (matlamat strategik) and 10 strategic objectives (objektif strategik). Some of the known targets to be had by 2040:
– 9,414 personnel
– C4ISR and surveillance of the whole of malaysian waters and EEZ
– 20 large patrol ships
– 96 medium patrol ships
– 228 boats less than 20m in length (95 interceptors, 133 RHIB)
– 15 Helicopters
– 12 Fixed wing aircraft

KM Pekan

This is some of the assets that APMM has from open sources:
This is the current Large Sized Patrol Boats (>60m) in APMM service:
7501 KM Langkawi (Musytari)
7502 KM Banggi (Marikh)
9203 KM Pekan (PL-02 Erimo)
8704 KM Arau (PL-01 oki)
This is the current Medium Sized Patrol Boats (>20m) in APMM service:
6x NGPC class (45m)
15x Gagah Class 39m (ex PZ)
2x Satria Class 38m (ex Bay)
9x Ramunia Class 32m (ex Bahtera)
9x Gemia Class 29m (ex PX)
2x Rhu Class 26m (ex Siri 200)
4x Malawali Class 25m (ex bintang)
15x Tugau Class 22m (ex PA)
This is the current Small Sized Patrol Boats/Interceptors (>10m<20m) in APMM service:
5X SAR Penyelamat 20m
2x Penggalang 18m DMS
10x Penggalang 20m BYO
8x Penggalang 17m DMS Icarus Marine
20?x Penggalang 16m (ex kastam perantas)
10?x Penggalang (ex polis penyengat)
30?x Petir 12m
10?x Halilintar 13m
20?x Pengawal 13m/15m
Kelas Kilat 7.62m
25x semi cabin
13x open
Helicopters
3x AS365 N3 Dauphin2
3x AW139
Fixed Wing
2x CL415

Cl415 M71-01 landing at Subang in early November.

In my opinion, a constant budget of USD500 million per 5 year Rancangan Malaysia is adequate to fulfil most of the PPSMM 2040 targets. This will also be used to continuously buy small crafts like RHIBs that would need replacements. There are some radical ideas that I will elaborate further. My plan is as per below:

APMM 2040

RMK11 2016-2020
3 83m OPV Damen 1800 $200
6 44m NGPC $100 replacement of ex vosper
2 Ex JCG $10
3 Ex Pohang $20

RMK12 2021-2025 USD500 mil
3 83m OPV Damen 1800 $200
2 35m Sail training ship $10
12 22m Sail PC $10
6 44m NGPC $100 replacement of ex vosper
15 25m PC $50
10 20m SAR $20
30 13m PC/RHIB $10
10 Penggalang FIC $20
3 Beech B200 MPA $50 (plus 3 transferred from TUDM)
3 Eurocopter AS365N3 used $10
3 Agusta AW139 used $20

RMK13 2026-2030 USD500 mil
3 83m OPV Damen 1800 $200 replacement of ex musytari
3 80m OSV rescue/tow $100
6 44m NGPC $100 replacement of ex PZ
15 25m PC $50
10 20m SAR $20
30 13m PC/RHIB $10
10 Penggalang FIC $20

RMK13 2031-2035 USD500 mil
3 58m MPV $100 replacement of ex bahtera
6 44m NGPC $100 replacement of ex PZ
15 25m PC $50
30 13m PC/RHIB $10
20 Penggalang FIC $40
6 NGPV Kedah transfer $100 refit. replacement for ex JCG, ex Pohang patrol ships
6 Beech B250 MPA $100

RMK14 2036-2040 USD500 mil
6 58m MPV $200
15 25m PC $50
30 13m PC/RHIB $10
20 Penggalang FIC $40
10 New rescue helicopter $200

APMM fleet 2040
9 83m OPV Damen 1800
3 80m OSV Rescue/tow
6 NGPV Kedah
9 58m MPV
24 44m NGPC
60 25m PC
12 22m Sail PC
20 20m SAR Penyelamat
80 Penggalang FIC
120 13m PC/RHIB (Petir/Halilintar/Pengawal)
2 CL415
6 B200 MPA
6 B250 MPA
6 AW139
10 New Rescue Helicopter

Now some explanations of the points above.

– OPV and NGPVs
The plan is for all OPV operations to be done only by APMM. Rather than buying more expensive SGPV Meko 100 OPVs, the APMM would be tasked to procure more DAMEN 1800 OPVs. The remaining Kedah Class OPVs will be transferred to APMM once TLDM has sufficient Gowind Frigates in its inventory. The NGPV Kedah Refit for APMM would see its 76mm Oto Melara replaced by 57mm Bofors from FACs, with the 76mm Oto Melara to be reused on new TLDM Frigates.

A CGI of the MMEA OPV

– South Korea Pohang Class
This is a quick way to acquire an OPV. Other Coast Guards such as Peru, and navies such as Egypt and Vietnam have bought this ship. It is actually worth to get this even only to get our hands on the 2x 76mm Oto Melara and 2x DARDO. These could later be reused in future TLDM Frigates. This is to be used for around 10-15 years and phased out after 2031.

– OSV Rescue/tow
This would be a largely off the shelf oil and gas Offshore Support Vessel (OSV) to be used for patrol and as a rescue and salvage tug. This is a needed capability especially in Malacca Straits for any incidents such as ship fire, ship grounding, oil spill, capsizing etc. Similar ships are also used by China Coast Guard to encroach our EEZ in Sarawak.

– Sail
This is a radical idea to save operational costs by using sailing vessels. There are no serious plans from other Coast Guards to use sailing ships for patrol. There are suggestions by Mauritius Coast Guard to use sailing ships but there is no concrete plan on how to do this from them. To do this from 2021 there would be a need to train personnel to be skilled in harnessing the wind. Sailing ships would not be fast, but it is ideal for tasks such as presence, deterrence and regular patrols. Sailing ships usually use just 10% of the fuel needed by similar sized ships. the 1st stage is to get training ships and small 22m sailing patrol ships. This is to familiarize APMM personnel in operating sailing ships. These 22m sailing patrol ships would be used for patrols in islandic areas such as Langkawi, Penang, Perhentian, Tioman, Sabah. The 2nd stage would be the building of offshore capable 58m MPV (medium patrol vessels).

– 58m MPV (Medium Patrol Vessel)
The 58m MPV, although seems small, is to be an offshore capable sail patrol vessel. This ship is to be based on the Greenpeace ship the Rainbow Warrior III. The sail masts is more than 50m tall, a deterring presence that could be seen from far. The tall mast could also be used as a convenient place for EO turrets, enabling a horizon range of more than 20km compared to from the sea level. The ship also has helicopter landing pads, and hangar for a small helicopter. The hangar can instead be used to house UAVs. The ship also has the capability of carrying 4 large RHIBs. This ship could be tasked as a mothership for patrols in littoral areas such as ESSCOM. This ship can also be used for presence in disputed areas such as the Lucania Shoals, staying put for months at a time. This is the specification for the ship:
Length : 57.92 m (190 ft 0 in) OA
Beam : 11.30 m (37 ft 1 in)
Height : 54.25 m (178 ft 0 in) (air draft)
Draught : 5.15 m (16 ft 11 in)
Tonnage : Approximately 855 GT

Conclusion
Empowering the APMM to protect and secure Malaysian waters and EEZ in peacetime would be the most effective way to enhance the Malaysian maritime security. This does not require large amounts of budget as I have laid out in this article. Giving more responsibility to APMM would also free TLDM to concentrate on its warfighting capability, especially in Anti-submarine warfare, Amphibious Warfare, Anti-air and Anti-surface warfare. Even with all the large OPVs to be under APMM, the total Malaysian large hulls in 2040 (APMM+TLDM) would be more than 30 Ships, significantly more than around 14 Frigate/OPV that we have now (6 NGPV, 2 Lekiu, 2 Lekir, 2 Langkawi, 2 ex JCG).

* The post above is completely the opinion of the writer and does not reflect the opinion of Malaysian Defence.

–Malaysian Defence

If you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment

Share
About Marhalim Abas 1154 Articles
Shah Alam

48 Comments

  1. On foreign navy or coast guard ships in malaysian EEZ.

    We should respect other nations right to freedom of navigation, which is passing through our EEZ.

    But we should be very strict and firm on foreign navy or coast guard that lays anchor and stays for extended periods in our EEZ to harass our fishermen and our oil exproration activities. These ships has no right to be in our EEZ and we must remove them by force if necessary.

  2. Kedah Class OPV will be transfer to the Navy once it has sufficient Gowind Class? But y tho? How much is sufficient for the navy just give up the Kedah Class to the coast guard?

  3. @ meh

    Why?
    OPVs under coast guard will be operationally better. Actions will look more as a policing duties rather than military.

    How much?
    By 2031-2035 i am looking at around 9 Gowinds available before those NGPV Kedahs are transferred to APMM. Will elaborate further with another article on TLDM

  4. @…

    From what you wrote there’ll be 30 relatively large vessels available between MMEA and RMN by 2040. But I can only see 9 Damen 1800 + 6 Kedahs of the MMEA, plus at most 12 Gowind (big dream) from RMN. That makes up 27, still short of 3. Btw, these are ships larger than 1500 tonnes.

  5. @…
    If follows the TLDM 15 to 5 plan, 9 Gowinds isn’t enough. This plan would require 12 Gowinds PLUS 18 Kedahs & 18 LMS. They Navy would never transfer the current Kedahs unless all 8 can be exchanged for more Gowinds. Fat chance that would happen.

  6. @Nimitz
    Kirov airship lipoting! (Lolz!)

    I believe Mahalim was just suggesting tongue-in-cheek about it. Otherwise, keris & tombak will most definitely suffice for our TDM.

    Reply
    Its Marhalim..

  7. @…

    “The three 80++m OSVs is also a large patrol vessel.”

    Ah, didn’t count in the OSVs… But some of those look quite ugly to be honest.

    On another note. According to your plan, there’ll be a total of 12 Gowinds. With the price we acquire the first 6, just how realistic it is for the next 6 to be acquired? If we can get something like the Iver Huitfeldt or Type 31 maybe, but that will be another ‘class’ of ship. Iver Huitfeldt has a cost of US$325M/ship, and that makes it on par with the Kedah! We Malaysia boleh a bit lah…

    Or, the 15-5 is to turn the Gowind into a lesser role, free up one ‘type’ and allow RMN to acquire Type-31? Hahaha… all these are dreams.

  8. @ joe

    This article is written by me, and I am not joking when I suggested sailing patrol ships. Wind is a free energy, and it can at least reduce some of the operating expenditures. When the budget is tight, those sailing ships will be sent out patrolling when others are tied to the dock. BTW the design of the Rainbow warrior III is one of the most sophisticated sailing ship to ever sail the seas.

    The problem of both 15 to 5 plan and PPSMM 2040 is that they are written independent of each other. We dont need 50 large frigates/OPVs like what both plan wants (12 gowinds, 18 kedah, 20 OPV). That would cost USD10 billion to buy all those ships. My calculation is we just need around 30 frigates/OPVs to enable 10 to be always out on patrol (5 sabah/sarawak, 2 east coast peninsular, 3 selat melaka) in addition to the various small ships that we are planning for.

    I have written a sequel to this article, on tweaking the 15 to 5 plan and how it can be tied to the PPSMM 2040 plan.

  9. @ hornet lover

    Ah… its like you can read my mind 🙂

    Wait for the sequel to this article.

    Some snippets

    – to continue building gowinds after no6, unlike the original plan. And all gowinds are to be fully armed.

    – yes there is the arrowhead 140 in there 🙂

    – more scorpenes

    – money for ASW helicopters

    All for less or similar budget of the original 15 to 5 plan. Impossible? No it can be done.

  10. Sorry for getting the your name wrong Marhalim. Autocorrect malfunction.

    Also I spotted another my error: “…The Navy would never transfer the current Kedahs unless all 18 can be exchanged…”.
    If we have the rights to the Gowind hull design and can build a basic version cheaper than Kedah Mekos, we should consider utilising this platform instead of 90s era Meko design.

  11. @…
    With all due respect, I do agree with you point that harnessing wind is a plus on OPEX. But wind power is very fickle thing and our maritime patrols can’t be just during fair weather conditions. And good luck with our sailing ships trying to catch Sulu bot pancungs when they travel upwind.

    Instead, might I suggest diesel-electric battery powered boats charged by either solar/wind or ala plug-in hybrid? Banks of batteries can replace ballast on the ship.

  12. An aside. There is a Sarawak govt controlled shipbuilding yard that can be utilized to build naval class ships. Brooke Dockyard. It’s one of Msia’s oldest and the 60s saw it at its peak servicing the navy and police vessels. It nearly went bankrupt in the 80s/90s until it became a Petronas contractor building oil rigs and support ships. Shin Yang is a private concern. Brooke is not with a hundred years of shipbuilding expertise. TLDM is perhaps simply ignorant, at not farming out its requirements to many able local builders. I’ll probably be shot for saying that! 😉

    Reply
    No TLDM cannot say which company it wants to build or service its ships. It can list the requirements but it’s up to the tender committee, if there was a call for tender or more likely its the Finance Ministry which will decide who gets the job even after recommendations from the Defence Ministry. It is likely that Shin Yang sister company, Paliau Slipways was given the Kedah class refit job as it likely meet the Finance Ministry requirements for such job apart from having the right facility for such a ship. Previously the Kedah class refit was done at BNS but as four of the ships are now based in KK it makes economic sense to have it done in shipyards in East Malaysia. The first one was done at the Labuan shipyard a few years back but it took them too long to complete the job the navy started to look elsewhere. The FACs based at KK and the two PCs based at Sandakan were refited at local shipyards, again it make no sense to send them to Semenanjung for this kind of work.

  13. @ joe

    Since when does a sailing ship cannot sail in heavy weathers? Of course the 58m MPV cannot intercept bot pancungs, that can be done by the 4 RHIBs on board. And intercepting small fast boats will be mainly the domain of the 80 strong 55+ knots Penggalang fast interceptor crafts (FIC)

    http://www.malaysiandefence.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/BYO.jpg

    https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8742/16752485998_19d9748152_b.jpg

    https://c1.staticflickr.com/8/7632/16939205341_4b258fd19a_b.jpg

    Plug-in hybrids? Can that be at sea for 30 days? Sailing ship is only limited by its stores for the crew.

    Btw the drawing for rainbow warrior III. There is a hint somewhere in that drawing…
    https://www.popsci.com/sites/popsci.com/files/styles/1000_1x_/public/import/2013/images/2012/02/rwschematic.jpg

  14. @…
    Throughout history, sail ships were vulnerable to storms at seas, and one such effect is the breakage of main sail, which can happen even in modern sail ships (see the voyage of Dato Azhar Mansor). In the past, sail ships must make port during inclement weather or risk serious damage to the main sail. That’s why there’s so many stopover ports back in the days of sail (Singapore was one such stopover originally).

    Which goes back to my point. If our sail vessels are only good for fair weather (unless TLDM are risktakers), an adversary that can infiltrate thru storms will have the added advantage and first strike opportunity onto our country. Therefore my humble opinion is to let the Age-of-Sails be in the past.

    I was thinking along the lines of SSK sub propulsion. The engine runs primarily via electric and only use the diesel motor &/or solar panels to recharge at sea or otherwise, it can be plugged in when at port (purely my idea). 30 days continuous patrols can be easily met this way. Can you say the same for sail ships during monsoon season? What about upwind or no wind conditions?

  15. @ joe

    There is no TLDM in this picture, we are taling about APMM here. Do you even check the tech details I posted? It does have engines for gods sake and it can use engines when there is no wind.
    http://www.greenpeace.org/sweden/Global/sweden/fundraising/foto/2011/RW_deck_view_2.jpg

    This is to SUPPLEMENT normal OPVs and patrol ships. Nowhere did i plan for an all sailing ship fleet.

    Btw how many miles can a sub travel on a full charge of battery? And how fast? How many kilowatts of solar panels do you need to recharge something that can push 15 knots?

    This ship is 58 meters long and 50 meters tall. It weighs 838 tonnes. Look for youtube videos of rainbow warrior III at sea. You are not talking about tiny 10m length sailboats here. It can sail in heavy weather and has sailed in heavy weather before.

    Btw earlier this month the Rainbow warrior III did have a port visit in Malaysia.
    https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2018/06/03/rainbow-warrior-visits-msia/

  16. @…
    I do apologise for mixing TLDM and APMM.

    But to your question, lets take the Scorpene for example. An endurance range of 50 days, a submerged speed of 20 knots (which might put a surface ship at 30 knots perhaps). Surface ships have long used diesel-electric propulsion, you can read it from here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel%E2%80%93electric_transmission). Granted the Rainbow Warrior 3 has an engine but wouldn’t that defeats its purpose of saving cost?

    Solar tech has not reached the level of efficiency to support running operations, that’s why I proposed lining the bottom with banks of batteries in place of ballast. Its diesel motor is the primary charger while solar will contribute 10~20%. As long there’s sufficient power, it can run full speed in any conditions.

    Rainbow Warriors, like its owners activities, are statement makers. Its to show its presence, and what better way than a tall mast. APMM should function more like a police of the seas, ever constant presence and conventional ships will serve this purpose better than unorthodox sail boats, unless they can dress it up and make it look like Black Pearl or Flying Dutchman.

  17. @…

    Not in favour of this sail ship. Even though their don’t rely entirely of wind. The mast could hinder the ship performance. And i hope you don’t support in GreenPeace fight against climate change amd stuff like that. Their are just a bunch of scammer who use the donation money for self gain.

  18. With the recent PM statement not to have foreign “warships” in South China Sea, it is more important than ever to have a stronger better equipped APMM to maintain the security of our territorial waters and EEZ.

  19. Everything aside, I wonder if APMM can operate the anti-piracy counterpart of a Q Ship. It could charter trawlers and coastal tankers for a short period so the ships are not recognised, put a security detachment aboard and make like a sitting duck.

    What could be more fun than to sail around, bait pirates and shoot them up.

    Nimitz “The power of Sail?interesting. Then for air unit I suggest dirigible/aerostat….”

    Might have a hard time keeping it out of bad weather. Might not be cheaper than a light aircraft. Must never come down low or it’d be quite vulnerable to rifle fire.

    Reply
    I think they did this in an operation last month. I don’t think they will make much about it though due to OPSeC

  20. @ AM

    modern day pirates are much2 smarter than that. They have insiders at ports that know what kind of cargo shipping to where and on what ship. When they hijack a ship, usually a tanker, they already have a buyer for the oil and has ships on standby to transfer the oil.

    Unless you are baiting those kidnap for ransom pirates. Then a nice beautiful sailing yacht would be ideal, with 1-2 mat salleh looking person on the deck.

  21. @AM
    There are 2 consequence to that bait action, either they get scared of being killed and never go pirating again or they doubled up with even more heavier weapons (LMGs, RPGs, grenades) and even more ruthless towards those aboard their target vessel.

    The former consequence is just wishful thinking. They became pirates because of money & survival and are well aware of the risks. Others are forced to follow leaders who would harm them if not comply.

    Which leads to the more likely latter consequence where they will try even harder to hijack their target despite the odds of getting that Q ship. The biggest risks are those civilian ships that aren’t heavily protected. They will then have to face with these more ruthless, more heavily armed pirates whom might choose to kill all the crew members to safeguard their bounty.

    When will this escalation ends? I believe the solution might be reverting back to convoy system with multi-nation Navy escorts that was successful in the past.

  22. … “They have insiders at ports that know what kind of cargo shipping to where and on what ship.”

    Then you’d have to tweak the scheme. You can’t charter the vessels but you’d have to put the security team on regular cargo carrying voyages. For secrecy you’d have to arrange with the owners for permission and possibly let the team meet the ship after it has left port.

    “Then a nice beautiful sailing yacht would be ideal, with 1-2 mat salleh looking person on the deck.”

    Yachts are easy to take because they have low speeds and low freeboard. They’re attractive because the owners can afford to pay large ransoms- which was the same reason cargo ships were targeted off Africa. It’s different here, I guess.

    Reply
    Most of the vessels hijacked in the region in recent times are mostly the small medium sized carrying fuel oil, the ones working on regular route around Malaysia Thailand Indonesia and Singapore. Most of took shelter around various small islands around Indonesia mostly those around Johor Singapore and Batam. They cut their teeth attacking fishing boats

  23. Something that most did not have a look at. Ships designed and built in India.

    This is Indian Coast Guard’s latest OPV, the Vikram class.

    http://diplomacybeyond.com/articles/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/ICGS-Vikram.jpg

    The vessels are approximately 97 meters long, displace 2,140 tons and have a range of 5,000 nautical miles. They can attain a sustained speed of up to 26 knots. It is equipped with a helicopter hangar and sailed with a crew of 102 persons.

    Built by Larsen & Toubro, they only cost about USD32 million each! And that is complete with radars and guns. This ship actually only costs half of the LMS68 we are getting!

  24. The plan can be modified to replace the 3x DAMEN OPV 1800 in RMK13 2026-2030 with 6x L&T OPV. So APMM would have a large ship fleet of

    6x DAMEN OPV 1800
    6x L&T OPV (vikram class)
    6x NGPV Kedah class
    3x OSV rescue/tow

  25. @ Zu

    That riverhawk is expensive for what it is, a simple 43.5m long boat.

    Compare that boat to the APMM NGPC, 44m boat with advanced radars and EO systems, plus embedded UAV system for just RM381.3 million for 6 ships, which comes out as USD16 million each.

    I applaud the APMM team on getting a good deal for the ships. It shows that we can get a lot for our budget when you put your minds to it.

    https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-xjICSd928Kw/WYZs8gqScwI/AAAAAAAA0jw/OURdBGjEIo8A0gfPsltPJ0mvyf2gcQOJQCLcBGAs/s1600/20479718_10155114881898541_6709465933066142563_n.jpg

    https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-N06PBFXBoiA/WMk-hT9fqWI/AAAAAAAAA90/8XM18M-1jD0_pA-CkxJnCMN2HX1Utd0yQCLcB/s1600/Bagan%2BDatuk%2BMalaysia%2BCoast%2BGuard%2B01.jpg

  26. What is this? Mothership for RM300,000 only??

    http://m.thesundaily.my/node/562260

    The want:
    – bigger ship than OPVs (more than 1800 tonnes I assume)
    – 21 days endurance
    – can carry 6 boats. I assume this would be RHIBs
    – cost only RM300,000? You cannot even buy a decent bus for that price or does the reporter have problems with comprehension?

    Could this task be done by the 58m sail patrol vessel i suggest above? It could only carry 4 RHIBs though

    Reply
    I think he is thinking about using barges as the mothership

  27. The NGPVs would be too expensive for the APMM to maintain. Even now, I was told that the cost for refits is astronomical with shipyard bills running between RM 60 to RM 90 million per refit. And this excludes the cost of RMN supplied spare parts! This is way above the APMM budget. The functionalities on the NGPVs are also not needed by the APMM, e.g. air surveillance capability, full fledged CMS, extremely high degree of automation, etc. This is a no-go from the start.

    The mothership is something that is being strongly pushed by the KP APMM. Believe the expectation is RM 300 mil per ship, not RM 300K! I hear that the APMM has already received proposals from interested parties and are reviewing them.

    More OPV1800’s and NGPCs (not necessarily the Fassmer design, which I hear the APMM is not very happy with) would be needed, along with additional FICs. Also, setting up a body within the APMM to operate a UAV fleet (and maybe USVs?) might be a good move. Right now, I do not see any coherent CONOP planning in relation to drone operations in the APMM. But I am sure they are looking into this seriously…

  28. @ Api69

    Was thinking of stripping the NGPV to just a basic ship, with the otomelara 76mm and other stuff transferred to new build TLDM ships in the future.

    Any examples of the mothership design? Roughly like any current available designs?

  29. Mothership design? What I know is that the ship will be able to accommodate around 4 to 6 FICs and be able to act as a replenishment vessel. Nothing more than that at this stage.

    As to stripping out the NGPVs, this is easier said than done. The main issue is not the weapons or weapons system but the L3 SCAMS platform automation system, which with nearly 5000 signals, is way too complex for the APMM personnel. As a comparison, the DAMEN 1800 only has around 1500 signals. Even the RMN has trouble with the SCAMS as it requires a different mindset to operate and maintain than what our present crop of seamen have.

    Barring the automation issue above, stripping out the A and Y gun and replacing with 30mm and 12.7mm RWS is possible. The CIC can be converted to some other use. The FFBNW Towed Array compartment can be converted into a prisoner holding area. Oil pollution equipment can be stored on the top deck where the FFBNW SSMs location and the Decoy Launchers are. Heck, there is even a space for the COMINT container on that deck!

  30. @ Api69

    Seems that you have an in depth knowledge of the NGPVs.

    Btw on the NGPCs what kind of unhapiness is there with the ship? Stability?

    Other suitable designs for NGPC would be:
    – Damen stan patrol 4207
    – Japan Bizan Class patrol vessel
    – China poly technologies 48.6m patrol vessel (said to be the original NGPC winner?)
    – any Luerssen designs?
    – larsen & toubro 46m patrol vessel

  31. Yeah. I know quite a bit about the NGPVs. hehehe…..

    As to the NGPCs, I have been hearing complaints as to the behavior at sea. Possibly due to the additional deck increasing the CG and impacting the dynamic stability of the ship. Maybe….

    As to alternative designs, many in the market. The Stan Patrol is quite unique with its Ax Bow. But that is a story for another day…

  32. Was talking about the conventional Stan Patrol 4207 that has been bought by many countries including the US Coast Guard.

    https://products.damen.com/-/media/Products/Images/Clusters-groups/High-Speed-Crafts/Stan-Patrol-Vessel/Stan-Patrol-4207/Gallery/Damen_Stan_Patrol_4207.jpg

    Anyway on the Axe Bow. I know there is a few FCS3307 in malaysia operating in oil and gas sector. I hear that it has good seakeeping properties in rough seas, but with the disadvantage of a very wet deck due to the bow design. What is your opinion on the design? Can you live with the wet front deck?

    2nd question, do you think a 2nd batch of NGPVs for TLDM a value for money buy? I think it is better if that capability is replaced by same number of cheaper DAMEN OPVs (or the even cheaper Larsen & Toubro OPVs) in APMM service.

  33. More details on the Multi Purpose Mission Ship (MPMS) has been shared by Admiral Dato’ Sri Zukifili Bin Abu Bakar at the 15th Maritime Security and Coastal Surveillance conference in singapore.

    Anybody can get hold of the transcript or the presentation of the MPMS?

    Would something like the sail equipped MPV in my writing, or an enlarged version of this be an ideal “mothership” for the MPMS requirement?

    Reply
    I have contacted MMEA about it, hopefully I will get it soon

  34. I understand that APMM @ MMEA is not under the defence ministry, but as this concerns the security of our EEZ, the Minister of Home Affairs and the Minister of Defence must be on the same page regarding the presence of chinese coast guard ships.

    Statements like China’s coast guard ship is bigger than Malaysia’s war ship, we cannot chase nor fight them should not be said by the Minister of Defence at an international dialogue. However poorly we are equipped now, we need to do all we can to defend what is rightly ours, and those in power need to do all they can to improve the situation. Blaming other parties or the past is not going to change the future.

    As i have written here, investments to get the MMEA the equipment to be a credible security entity is well within the reasonable means of our budget. It is just a matter of putting the foot down and get on with it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.