SHAH ALAM: TCG Kinaliada – the fourth ship of the Ada class – will be visiting Malaysia in mid-May as part of a five month deployment to Japan and neighbouring countries. The ship according to Defense News left Turkiye on April 8.
The publication stated:
The navy deployed its Ada-class corvette TCG Kinaliada to both celebrate the 100th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Turkey and Japan, as well as commemorate the 134th anniversary of the sinking of the Ottoman frigate Ertuğrul during a typhoon following its visit to Japan.
Some of the nations, Kinaliada is scheduled to visit are users of Turkish defense products. On its way to Japan, the ship and its crew have already stopped in Saudi Arabia and Djibouti, with plans to also visit Somalia, the Maldives, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, China and South Korea.
As it returns home, the vessel is to stop in the Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, India, Oman, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, Djibouti and Jordan.
The visit of the Kinaliada will come a week after the likely public signing ceremony for the Ada class corvettes for the RMN LMS Batch 2 project, during DSA 2024 exhibition scheduled from May 6 to 9. A graphic published by the Turkish government (below) revealed that Kinaliada is expected to be in Malaysia from May 13 to May 15.
As reported previously, the government had signed an LOI with the Turkish firm, STM.
Following this the Defence Ministry had issued a letter of intent to the company – STM – on February 5 and the company replied on February 8 for further negotiations.
The ministry via the Royal Malaysian Navy is currently undertaking the detail negotiations to determine the specifications and subsequently the cost before the procurement is concluded.”Of course, he did not say outright that the Ada class corvettes has been selected as the LMS Batch 2 but since STM has offered the ship to meet the requirement, it is foolish to think otherwise.
Hopefully, at DSA 2024 we will know which version of the Ada class, RMN will be getting. Apart from the Turkish navy one, there are also the Pakistani and Ukrainian variants. A fourth variant is of course the Hisar OPV. It must be noted that former Defence Minister DS Mohamed Hasan had told Parliament the ministry had offered to various countries (likely the three countries above) to buy their newly completed ships to expedite the delivery to the RMN but it was not accepted.
— Malaysian Defence
View Comments (25)
Marhalim, what do you think the RMN will do? Will they buy another MOH to replace the one that crashed? Or will they just soldier on with just 2 airframes?
The original plan was to get six airframes, if the plan is followed through, three more airframes will be procured in the next RMK. Whether or not they will also fund a replacement for the loss airframe, is beyond me.
A lot of details are still unknown. Hopefully there will be some clarity after DSA. The fact that it will have some Turkish components with zero compatibility is a bummer but it is what it is.
Asked around, many say that the LMS contract is basically done, just to announce during DSA.
Personally I am against the idea of getting a halfway Corvette with USD175 million per ship budget when the original design itself cost USD250 million. Buying them does not add much to the overall capability of the TLDM warship fleet.
Yes, as I mentioned in the story, the public signing of the contract. That has always been the case.
... - ''Personally I am against the idea of getting a halfway Corvette with USD175 million per ship budget''
You'll be saying the same thing by the time the class enters their 1st refit and for all we know even after they retire.
... - ''Buying them does not add much to the overall capability of the TLDM warship fleet.''
By that logic we should not be getting LCAs. BTW the RMN has openly stated why it needs LMSs and it would be apparent to you if you actually look at things from a less dogmatic lenses. The LMSs in certain circumstances would be more ideal given that they are smaller and have a shallower draught than the LCSs. They will also be cheaper to deploy at times; similar to the case with the LCAs compared to the LMSs and the fact that they will be modestly armed is a penalty worth incurring as they aren't supposed to punch above their weight category. If placed in the wrong environment even a ship with a 96 VLS cell might not survive and here you are perpetually making flawed and highly subjective claims about the LMS. There is fac and there is opinion both are dissimilar.
Congratulations to the RMN after having had to wait so long and after having had no choice when presented with a class of 4 LMSs constructed in China which were politically expedient but not what was needed. With the Batch 2s various roles can be undertaken freeing up the LCSs and the resulting wear and tear. The weapons aside; for me Link 16 is the crucial element.
>Buying them does not add much to the overall capability of the TLDM warship fleet
We have 3 ASM capable ship, with 1 still in the drydock *any* ASM capable ship will be a massive boost to overall capability of TLDM warship fleet
My only hope is that there's no f-up from the government or contractors this time like almost all big ticket navy items
dundun - ''with 1 still in the drydock *any* ASM capable ship''
Any ship which meets the RMN's requirements; a class which is intended for certain roles and one fully part and needed in the RMN's force structure.
dundun - ''My only hope is that there’s no f-up from the government''
And that a follow on batch is ordered on schedule rather than being postponed indefinitely. Last but not least having the ability to operate our assets on a systems not platform centric basis.
To recap in the 1990's the plan was a force structure comprising 6 Lekius and 'X' number of NGOPVs which would have gradually replaced the FACs [plans were put in place for an upgrade in the 1990's but went nowhere] and Vosper PCs. That plan went ratshit.
Fast forward today the eventual aim is a combat force structure comprising the LCSs and LMSs. Not only do we not and will not have the resources to have an all LCS fleet but in certain environments a ship with a smaller draught comes in useful. The LMS will also be less resource intensive; an important consideration for a small resource strapped navy like the RMN.
Personally I see the the need for a mainline combatant to be more heavily armed than just a 16 VLS cell and 8 ASMs but that's a policy decision based on how we view the threat environment and off course financial realities. I also see the need for a larger hull; not for the range and endurance offered which is superfluous to our needs [a RMN ship is never more than 2 days sailing time to the nearest base/port and always carries emergency fuel - it's like we sail as far as the Marianas and launch Ops Fajar type ops with regularity]] but for the extra deck and below deck space.
>system not platform centric
When all the equimpent came from different places it would be a wee bit problematic is it not? We have 2 different ASM fulfilling similar roles, we have 3 different 30mm secondary gun (one of them fire different kind of 30mm ammo, 3 different CMS, just to name things that can remember
Of course one way to reduce these mess is to design and build these ship domestically and allow end user to pick the equipment based on their requirement and experience
As long the ships are linked together, and the stuff works it will be ok even if they have different equipment.
Marhalim, what is the status with LCS 6? Have they made a decision yet?
Now, there are no funds for the sixth LCS. Perhaps they will reconsider it in the next RMK.