Ships Updates, LMS and LCS

Egyptian Gowind 2500 undergoing sea trials.

LANGKAWI: Ships Update, LMS and LCS Work on the first LMS is expected to start in May. The work is to be undertaken by Boustead partner, China Shipbuilding and Offshore International Ltd, in one of it shipyards in China.

Under the RM1.17 billion contract, two of the LMS will be built in China while the other two in Malaysia, most likely in Lumut. The first two are expected to be ready by 2020 followed by the other locally built ones in 2021.

A model of the LMS view

And yes while the LMS model looked very empty for a four-ship RM.1.17 billion contract, the navy has an explaination for it.

The LMS is the fourth class of the RMN #15to5 Fleet Transformation Programme which will also provide opportunities for local defence industries as the project progresses. Adopting the ‘Fit for Purpose’ and ‘Mission Module Capable’, LMS capabilities are elevated to the next level and will be able to fulfill RMN benign missions

LMS capabilities. RMN.

Meanwhile, work on the first LCS is progressing well and both RMN and Boustead officials said that they were hopeful that it could be launched in August. Production difficulties which was encountered are being overcome and the shipyard was making progress.

Egyptian Gowind 2500 undergoing sea trials.

The progress comes as DCNS is reporting that the first Gowind 2500 corvette build for Egypt has successfully undergone its maiden sea trials. With the completion of the sea trials, the ship is well on its way to be delivered to the Egyptian Navy.

— Malaysian Defence

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

Share
About Marhalim Abas 1161 Articles
Shah Alam

19 Comments

  1. Just my two cents, in my opinion….the shape of the Chinese made LMS doesn’t really break any new grounds.It sucks!

  2. *Looking at 2nd picture*

    …Where will they put those missiles on the LMS? O.o

    Reply
    Enough space for two or fout SSM launchers just before the RHIB stern well

  3. From the photo, “LMS capabilities” RMN, the 1.17 fulus paid for the 4 ships will exclude the Mission modules which is under Future Acquisitions and SSM which is under Future Enhancement.

    That a Whooper $ per ship!

  4. LMS sounds like a ripoff. You could buy a similar sized patrol vessel from a reputable Western shipyard for 1/3rd the price (i.e. under US$20 million each).

    Given Boustead’s relationships in France, I wonder why they didn’t partner with any of the 3 big French players who are competitive on the export market for small patrol vessels:
    – Ocea (OPV 190, also OSV190 used by Indonesia)
    – DCNS/Piriou (OPV 50, l’Adroit)
    – Socarenam (OPVs for the French and Belgian navies, La Confiance and Castor classes)

    Reply
    The decision to get the boats from China came first before Boustead got into the picture. My guess if it was Boustead proposal in the first place, it would have been a down size version of the Kedah class. This was supposed to be their proposal for the MMEA OPV if it was not through the direct tender route. However it is unlikely they can get it to be as cheap as the Damen design unless they opted to low spec it to commercial standards

  5. The LMS… Benign mission it is! Might as well use the Samudera class. Don’t have to spend billions on benign mission. If this ship breaks down on its maiden voyage with the cooling water pumps going kaput, we can just get the parts from Serdang. What a letdown. Better the Laksmanas, even though they are old, they have the fear factor. Benign mission..what a term

  6. i see theres nothing new with this lms from china, its design looks ordinary..and it is overly hyped..

  7. Yup everyone could see that boustead with the cheap off the shelf chinese design is more expensive than the bigger better performance MMEA damen OPV 1800 design, and 4x more expensive than the NGPC with shamefully lower performance than the smaller ship.

    It is not worthy of the Littoral Mission Ship name as it could not even perform on par with the old laksamana corvettes and missile FACs.

  8. I don’t mind getting ships from china. What i am angry is at that price other countries such as Nigeria is getting advanced type 056 corvette based 1800tonnes opv (the p18n) instead of the sparsely equipped 680tonnes slow boat.

    That ship should be no more than usd10-12 million tops, not the criminally expensive usd60million per ship.

  9. Benign missions what the heck? Might as well expand the MMEA and buy them 15 more better performing NGPC (faster 24knots, same range 2000nm with additional UAV included in the price, with all western equipments) for the same LMS budget!!

  10. zaidi – ”Better the Laksmanas, even though they are old, they have the fear factor. ”

    ”Fear factor” with guns that can’t be fired due to directors that are unoperable [crews jokingly called their ships ”FAC GPMG”]; missiles that have reach their shelf life and can’t be fired due to directors that are unoperable, a CMS, sonar and other stuff that are barely functioning? I don’t think so.

    We all hope that the LMS will at a later date be fitted out to enable the RMN to gain the capabilities it needs and to replace the capabilities lost with the FACs and Laksamanas BUT priority [often overlooked] is to get new hulls in the water ASAP. This is because the FACs and Laksamanas are not only becoming increasingly expensive to maintain but also very troublesome. The RMN either gets new hulls with some but not all the capabilities needed and hope that it can add on stuff later or it can continue with the FACs and Laksamanas. It’s obvious which’s the ideal choice.

  11. The Egytian Gowind LCS look so cool… Can’t wait for the Malaysian version.
    The French are expert in beautiful design even for military purposes

  12. Seems to be a heck of a lot of money to get hulls in the water asap. Very expensive hulls with machine guns.

  13. Lee,

    Very true. In most cases [not only here but everywhere]; ”fitted for” doesn’t materialise into ”fitted with”. Another issue is having a platform ”fitted with” on time.

  14. It said that the real final configuration of weapons is still not finalized. They also mentioned that the first 2 ships most probably will be fitted with all chinese stuffs but the the ones built by boustead might instead use equipments sourced from other countries. The lms model shown is a proposal from the chinese company, its specs might be changed. (Hopefully i read it right)

    On the other hand, we dont know what kind of real capabilities differences between mmea opv, ngpc and lms. For instance, their sea state capability, the endurance at sea and their armor.

    Not sure about the ngpc and opv, but the lms will or might have a cms, esm/elint, a surveillance radar complementing the lpi and navigation radar, bow sonar and fire control radar.

    What i want to say is that the navy is doing their best. They have to compensate with political decisions, reduced budget, older ships, large operational demands and lack of equipments. Anyway thanks for all the post on lima admin ^^.

  15. It’s like we want to do what Denmark did with their Flyvefisken-class patrol vessels, but without all that proven technology of Stanflex and the associated cost savings.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


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