SHAH ALAM: Ammo for Keris class, Part 2. Last July, I wrote about a MTO tender for shipping the ammo for the Keris class ships from Europe. I am happy to report that the tender was won by MultiModal Freight Sdn Bhd with a contract price of some RM496,000.
After fiddling around with the Eperolehan website I can write that the amount 30mm x 165mm High Explosive Incendiary (HEI) Link Belt being shipped back is 4,400 rounds.
The tender for the rounds itself was issued in August, last year and the company that won was World Integrated Technologies Sdn Bhd, the same company which was awarded the 40mm grenade cartridges contract. The contract price is RM5.2 million.
Apart from the 30mm HEI rounds, two other separate tenders for the Keris class ships were issued early this year – High Explosive Target Practice (HE-TP) and Armour Piercing Tracer (AP-T) rounds. As it is for the 30 mm Single Barrel CS/AN3 naval guns on the Keris class, the rounds are the 30mm X 165mm cartridges. Both tenders were for 4,400 rounds.
Both tenders were awarded to Nestari Resources Sdn Bhd for the same price of RM4.17 million. As the MTO tender has not been issued so far I have no idea where they are being sourced.
What about the price then? Well, from the figures stated above, cost for the 30mm guns on the Keris class is around RM1k per round. Further fiddling around in the Eperolehan, revealed that the cost of the standard Nato 30mm round – the 30 X 173mm – used on the Gempita and other RMN vessels like the Lekiu and Gagah Samudera classes is also around RM1K per round.
— Malaysian Defence
The RMN clearly wanted ammo and gun/turret compatibility among it’s assets unfortunately politicians (the previous ones in charge at least) just don’t care much about that. Just imagine if we bought another system that is incompatible with the current ones already had.
Thats about 1,100 rounds per ship. Thats very little with no spares. In times of need these can be expended within the hour
Lee – ”Thats about 1,100 rounds per ship.”
It is a self defence weapon and it’s not like we’re going to find ourselves in a Jutland or Leyte Gulf scenario where we have to fire with guns for hours. Times have change; it’s 2021 now.
That’s the irony isn’t it? Buying weapons and plenty of ammo, and one measure of their success is actually not having to use them at all and chucking them out after the use by date!
@Luqman
The good thing is, these RWS are usually modular by design and could, in theory, replace the gun with a Nato standard 30mm Bushmaster if TLDM sees fit. Much like how they are ongoing replacing the radiosets.
@joe
“in theory, replace the gun with a Nato standard 30mm Bushmaster”
I am not sure what you meant by whether replacing only the gun itself or replace the RWS mount entirely. As far as I know, no open source said replacing only the gun is feasible. My guess is RMN cannot convinced the been counters to replace these Chinese guns until the next 15 years or until the Keris are about to go for SLEP/refit. What RMN should do next is buy those planned ISO containers to get the full use of these LMS and the upcoming ones.
There is no plan to buy the so called ISO containers…
Luqman,
Modular mission payloads are predominatly Western. Integrating to the ship is problematic. The RMN is focused on fully fitted out LMS Batch 2s from a non Chinese source and is contend using the present LMSs as a patrol asset to meet its peacetime commitments.
Replacing the 30mm mount with a non deck penetrating Western system [to enable ammo compatibility] is not the issue, which is integrating it to the Chinese director.
@Luqman
Modular as in the gun could be replace with another, an RWS could do that:
https://www.aselsan.com.tr/en/capabilities/land-and-weapon-systems/remote-controlled-weapon-system-naval/stamp2-remote-controlled-weapon-system
Replacing the entire RWS system itself might not be feasible but at least it replacing the gun, we could standardise to using Nato calibre again.
As for mission payloads, it would be a good concept if we could get them as the usability is vast. Unfortunately it would have to come from China and since the Chinese military doesn’t implement it, unlikely it would materialise. In the first place, we have no idea what type of modular mission system compatibility was built into the LMS class.
One doesn’t just replace a gun on a OWS/RWS and they tend to be intended for a particular gun and has to be certfied by the OEM. Less hassle to just replace the entire mount.
Modular payloads tend to come primarily from Western OEMs and the modular payload concept hasn’t gained much traction in the PLAN or Russia. Some navies adopt the concept because they see the utility but others due to circumstances. In our case it was added to the 5/15 because of circunstances. Whether we truly adopt it for the LMS Batch 2s remains to be seen. The whole concept offer advantages but also penalties which have been discussed here previously and is a rabbit hole.
“…a remotely operated stabilized weapon station for small caliber guns.. can be fitted with either a 12.7 mm Machine Gun or a 7.62 mm Machine Gun or a 40 mm Grenade Launcher.”
Well it depend on the RWS itself, things like the Kongsberg Protector or CROWS in US service, were designed from the start to be easily configured for various type of weapons. But that is not like the China made one, or even the MSI or Aselsan ones (the 30mm cannon versions).