PETALING JAYA: Its nice to hear after the SGPV confirmation (which is probably a boo-boo) that the second of the Malaysian Armed Forces “must buy” RMK10 list is on the way.
Yes, I am talking about the Eurocopter Cougar. After almost five years in gestation, the programme has finally taken off.
However due to the flip-flop decisions by the Abdullah Administration, the first Cougar is not expected to arrive here at least until 2013. The latest development probably means that the Nuri upgrade programme is also expected to be sign within the next 24 months. At this year’s Lima perhaps?
So what about the third “must buy” programme, the Army’s 8X8? It is in the works, I am told but it may not turned out to be the AV8.
The tally for the RMK10 budget so far is RM8.6 billion; RM6 billion for SGPV; RM1.6 billion for the Cougar and RM1 billion for the A400M ( provisional).
–Malaysian DefenceIf you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment
alhamdulillah, well at least something to augment the Nuri fleet. the nuri then could be used mainly for general transport and resupply mission rather than CSAR
The Nuri’s are old and tired.If the RMAF plans to make further use of the Nuri then they should do a complete remanufacturing using the technology developed by Sikorsky for the seakings used for Afghan and Iraq purpose-upgrade the whole instrument panels, replace the ror blades with non-metallic ones, replace the engines and the transmission and check the structure.Equip with better radars too.
If this costs too much in terms of the lifespan which can be expected to be squeezed out of the Nuris then better to get CH 47’s as they are really workhorses
to me Mi-17 family are truly workhorse
Hmm it was reported in Combat Aircraft monthly that some Eastern European air forces have not been able to use their MI -17’s due to very costly maintenance required and also being unreliable.Now they are looking for new helis.
It has been published in combat aircraft-feb edition that the RMAF will be signing a contract to purchase 12 new P 6 trainers and the old P6 may be sold to the Philippines
Or buy additional EC-725 tranport/utility variant
First of all, the Cougar is a Nuri replacement or a dedicated CSAR helos? If they’re meant to replace the Nuri, why don’t we look at a bigger helos such as Chinook for example? Anyone knows the difference between NH-90 and the EC-725? Both of them are new helicopters with lack of proven combat records while I favor the NH-90 which can be used both by RMN as AsW helos or as TTH for the army and the airfoce
Its to replace the Nuri. Since one of the Nuri roles is CSAR, the Cougars will also be used for CSAR. The NH90 is considered a light twin, only slightly bigger than the Blackhawk. Eurocopter bid the Cougar based on our tender. The NH90 has proven to be problematic not only in production but also in limited service.
Personally, I guess that the 3rd must buy programme for the armed forces might be an attack helicopter squadron for the army.
Reply: There is no need to guess Syameer as I mentioned in the post the 3rd Must Buy Programme for RMK10 is the Army’s 8X8.
Ym Lee, you mean PC-7 trainers. The PC-6 is operated by the PDRM and is not a basic trainer.
Let’s not get carried away and start having grandiose ideas about CSAR. CASR indeed sounds sexy, much more than SAR. But just because a helicopter is fitted with a FLIR, night vision compatable cockpit and a winch doesn’t mean it’s operator has a true CSAR capability. To achieve a true CSAR capability, other force multiplers and support assets are needed. We should start with ensuring the RMAF has an adequate number of operational helicopters to perform the very vital but non-sexy roles of troop lift, logistics support and disaster relief, etc.
My opinion is RMAF helicopters should concentrate to CSAR/SAR role and leave transport/utility job to PUTD.
If the A109s are anything to go by, they will be used to ferry around the brass and politicos. Just ask about the mission tasking of the the PUTD birds and you’ll have an idea of how little actual scout/recce work they do. Yet they are almost all over time on their frames.
The CSAR moniker is so that the RMAF no longer has to do the ‘pemandu bas’ mission.
As for attack birds, we need them like we need new MRCAs. Or AWACs.
Troop lift? workhorse?.I would say the Chinook and the Wwestland 101 would be a better choice especially in the high and hot environment of Malaysia and the many hills and the jungle. They must be real tough nuts. The EH 101 are well proven. But of course pricy-using 3 engines instead of 2.
Well, with regards to the need for MRCA’s, it’s a differencce of opinion. Granted, the MAF is not about to wage a multi-dimensional 2 front war against China and North Korea, but we still need to mantain an adequate number of fighters both to ensure our peacetime comittments and for other eventualities. Given the operational comittments of the RMAF in relation to it’s size, fighter numbers are dangerously low.
For the PUTD to fully takeover the ‘pemandu bus’ role [as MR.T put it] a huge investment will be needed for the PUTD to have its own ground support infrastructure. The RMAF of course would like to hold on to the very sexy/glamorous roles of ‘CSAR’ and ‘special forces insertion’…..
Even for the Pemandu bas ops, it will take at least five years operational experience before one can claim to be combat ready.
You know it really doesn’t matter what we buy cause its always outdated. This is due to the long process it takes prior to order (propose – evaluation/testing – wait for budget-no budget another year-worse still RMK11 maybe-then tender or direct nego-then production-then FAT/testing) If you are lucky for big items eg. heli, jet, APC and so on will probably take 5 years. By then new technology already developed. What more can I say…