SHAH ALAM: Names for MMEA OPVs. The MMEA, it appears has decided that the three OPVs being built by THHE-Destini JV will be named after state royal towns. The first of class MMEA 1800 OPV will be named KM Kota Bharu, the second KM Kuala Kangsar and the third KM Seri Menanti.
KM Kota Bharu is of course named after the royal town of Kelantan while Kuala Kangsar is Perak and Seri Menanti, Negri Sembilan, respectively. There are nine state royal towns in Malaysian with two ships already in seservice with MMEA,namely, KM Pekan and KM Arau. Both, as you are aware, were ex Japanese Coast Guard ships which were gifted to Malaysia some two years back.
A CGI of the first of class MMEA OPV to be named KM Kota Bharu.
As there are four more state royal towns in Malaysia (Anak Bukit, Kedah; Klang, Selangor; Kuala Terengganu, Terengganu and Maharani, Johor) does that mean MMEA has plans for four more OPVs? It is likely but for the moment the government has yet to announce the funds for them.
Forward and aft CGI of the MMEA OPV
Anyway, the MMEA could also reuse the Pekan and Arau names for two more OPVs, when it decides to replace the two ex-Japanese Coast Guard patrol ships as both are already long in the tooth. Despite being old ships, I was told that the MMEA are quite happy with both ships.
KM Arau
Despite this more work are needed on them compared to new ships, of course.The two former RMN OPVs, KM Langkawi and KM Banggi it must be said need to be retired as soon as possible.
KM Pekan
As previously reported, the first of class MMEA OPV is expected to be launch late this year with the rest coming on line within the next year.
— Malaysian Defence
If you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment
hope govt continue to give more of this OPV to MMEA…
So what is the plan?
To retire KM langkawi and KM banggi as the 3 new Damen OPV 1800 is commissioned? When is the launch dates for the 3 new OPVs?
Hopefully there will be a batch 2 of the DAMEN OPV 1800s
If MMEA are still happy with both ships, why is there need to mention replacing them?
Japan has a very good culture of maintenance so old equipment are still usable if well maintained. MMEA should just stick to what has been done prior to their donation and it will last them many more years to come.
@ joe
We need to plan to replace all things we have in service, irrespective if it is to be replaced next year or 10 years in the future. As a used ship, probably it would be economical if it is used for 10 more years, so not too early to plan ahead for its replacement.
Anyway as they are happy with the ship, could this mean that MMEA would be open to receive more used OPVs?
@…
I rather they concentrate on building their fleets and maintaining their current ships instead of looking to replace them so soon.
I don’t mind if they look to Japan for more donated ships. Japanese stuff are really made to last.
@ joe
In real life how do you manage your truck fleet without concurrently planning your maintenance, buying new trucks and planning for current truck retirement plus future fleet expansion?
@…
Conti haulage trucks have avg 10 year lifecycle. So planning for replacement only comes it at 5th year where budgeting happens (budgeting always happens first but priority is fleet expansion), towards 7th-9th year, maintenance records & costs are scrutinised and driver feedback taken to decide if said trucks are to be replace on schedule or continue service.
Which is why is back to my point, if the ownership time frame was just 2 years, and MMEA is still happy with the upkeep and uptime of these ships, why consider replacing them so quickly? Perhaps its best for us to find out how long does MMEA intended to use these veteran ships.
@ joe
Do note that I actually was talking about retirement plans of the KM Langkawi and KM Banggi, which is not the japanese donated ship but ex TLDM OPVs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musytari-class_offshore_patrol_vessel
New zealand had just retired two of their inshore patrol vessels (IPV) after just 10 years of service. These ships are bit bigger than the APMM NGPC but smaller than the TLDM LMS68. It was retired due to the perceived need of a bigger OPV for long range pacific island missions.
Would be a great addition to the APMM fleet.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/HMNZS_Rotoiti_and_HMNZS_Pukaki_in_2010.jpg
Indonesian coast guard had just added 3 more 80m OPVs to its fleet
The locally designed and built OPV measures 80 meter in length, 7.90 meter width. It has a speed of 22 knot powered by two MAN/2862LE433 engines.
Now to the price. The total of 3 ships cost only USD42 million!
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-VVrTlj078Vg/XamuvHvQHEI/AAAAAAABILA/SGMZ5BV3LRoXzEOaewruWUvoK5jTOV1rQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/Bakamla%2BKN321-3.jpg
@…
I see. I was asking Marhalim in reference to “MMEA could also reuse the Pekan and Arau names for two more OPVs, when it decides to replace the two ex-Japanese Coast Guard patrol ships as both are already long in the tooth.”
@…
>”The total of 3 ships cost only USD42 million!”
As I understand it comes partly down to a trade-off between automation and crew.
…
“Now to the price. The total of 3 ships cost only USD42 million!”
I challenge to BNS or Destiny to beat that!!
Reply
How could they, labour is cheaper and the shipyard has built 10 of these and possibly another 10. And possibly the design was adapted from a ferry of which more than 50 has been built.