DSA 2022 Gading Marine Sigma 92 meter LMS

Gading Marine Sigma 92 meter LMS Batch 2.

SHAH ALAM: IT appears that Gading Marine – a subsidiary of the Gading Group – is offering the Damen Sigma 92m design for the RMN LMS Batch 2 project. The Sigma 9113 combatant design is among the items showcased at the Gading Marine booth at DSA 2022.

According to the specifications, the ship is 91 meter long with a 3.7 m draught and a displacement of 1900 tons. The Indonesian Navy already operates four of the same Sigma design which is designated the Diponegoro-class. The four ship class were built between 2005 and 2008 with the last ship commissioned into service in 2009.

The Sigma 92 meter model at Gading Marine booth at DSA 2022.

Based on the model on display at the Gading Marine booth, the proposed ship will be armed with a BAE Systems 57mm Bofors gun, a VLS system for 12 missiles, twin launchers for SSSM and a single 30mm aft. It will be powered by twin diesel engines, proppeling the ship up to 28 knots.
Specifications of the Gading Marine Sigma 92 meter LMS Batch 2.

As you are aware the RMN wants eight ships for the LMS Batch 2 project though the Defence Ministry has yet to confirmed its funding.

— Malaysian Defence

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

Share
About Marhalim Abas 1629 Articles
Shah Alam

57 Comments

  1. Ah its indeed the same design as tni al’s diponegoro class corvette..my bad..but quite a huge gap/difference between batch 1’s 60+m and this batch 2 90+m ( if selected )..or maybe RMN will ditch or transfer batch 1 altogether in future..

  2. Is Destini still going to offer the Damen OPV for LMS bid, or the company is now not in a good shape anymore to execute any new projects?

    Anyway does the previous Rfp indicate anything about the cost range of the LMS batch 2?
    https://www.malaysiandefence.com/moving-on-rmn/

    Also, is the RMN going to use the LMS batch 2 tender to cover the capability badly needed to offset the LCS Gowind unavailability? The LCS Gowind project grew from just a fully armed Kedah OPV Batch 2 into a proper ASW capable Frigate program.

    Back to the SIGMA corvette. The SIGMA 9113 that is offered by Gading Marine is exactly the same design that Indonesian Navy is currently using as the Diponegoro Class corvettes (4 units). The first 2 was bought with most equipments FFBNW. But the final 2 units are bought complete with weapons. The contract for the final 2 units costs around 339 million dollars, or about 170 million dollars each.

    As the DAMEN SIGMA 9113 is offered for the LMS batch 2, we can assume that the cost range of each LMS Batch 2 is about 170 million dollars.

    Then we can search around for the highest possible corvette or frigate specification that we could get for 170 million dollars.

    The Turkish Ada (MILGEM) class corvettes sold to Pakistan for 250 million each, so that is out of the price range.

    Gowind Corvettes for UAE costs 425 million dollars each, no difference to our LCS Gowind frigates. Pared down Gowind corvettes for Greece is said to cost around 350 million euros, still not much difference to our LCS Gowind.

    The brand new European Patrol Corvette (EPC) Program is interesting to follow. But the EPC projected cost is about 250-300 million euros per ship. Still out of the price range.

    The Spanish Avante 2200 corvette sold to Saudi Arabia for 360 million euros each.

    The highest specification ship we can get for around 170 million dollars after searching around is the Jose Rizal class frigate built by South Korea. Each ship costs 168.5 million dollars, installed with weapons but without the munitions (shells, torpedoes and missiles). Compared to the DAMEN SIGMA 9113, it has a length of 107m and has a displacement of 2,600 tonnes. DAMEN SIGMA 9113 has a length of 92m and has a displacement of 1,900 tonnes. The Jose Rizal is also equipped with a full helicopter hangar, something that the DAMEN SIGMA 9113 lacks.

  3. The Jose Rizal is too big for the LMS Batch 2 requirements. Destini is only working with Damen for the MMEA OPV project now. Nothing else. They were supposed to work together for the LMS Batch 2 but I guessed Destini’s financial difficulties made it difficult for Damen to work with them.

  4. Marhalim,

    If the LMS Batch 2 is to take up some of the tasks of the still unavailable LCS Gowind, a bigger ship for the same amount of money would always be better.

    Firdaus,

    The LMS batch 1 is better operated by MMEA, as they are the agency for our peacetime maritime security.

  5. Firdaus – d )..or maybe RMN will ditch or transfer batch 1 altogether in future”

    Higher chance of Cinderrella appearing in the streets of K.L. The RMN is so short of hulls it would never under the present circumstances hand over anything.

  6. In the bigger scheme of things, it should not be about RMN. It should always be about Malaysia.

    It does not matter the specific patrol boat hull is under RMN or MMEA. It would still be patrolling to protect malaysian waters and exclusive economic zones.

    But the more patrol hulls, the more old patrol craft still being operated under the RMN budget, the less money RMN will have for proper fighting vessels that RMN could use to fight other naval forces. Current spend to relife evey single laksamana, FACs and even a few Vospers will be good for the short term, but will be devastating for RMN long term fleet build up.

  7. The LMS is originally envision as per DWF to only operate within the territorial waters,in their own words “MAF will deploy Littoral Mission Ships (LMS) that could conduct a wide variety of missions including SAR and HADR, counter-terrorism and anti-piracy, intelligence gathering and reconnaissance, hydrography and mine countermeasures. The LMS is modular by design and can be fitted with additional weapons and systems to meet future operational requirements”

    Guess they go for a bigger ship to add on the capabilities of the LMS to achieve their goal in the EEZ As well? per DWP (and i paraphrase), “the MAF intensions is to achieve Sea Control on the air, surface and sub-surface through Sea Denial and Sea Assertion in the EEZ

  8. gonggok – but will be devastating for RMN long term fleet build up”

    “Devastating” is an exaggeration. I’d prefer ;detrimental” in that the ships should have been replaced years ago and the RMN had no choice but to spend the minimum needed to keep them in service to undertake certain roles. If the 8 Batch 2s come on time, together with the 4 Batch 1s, they will enable the FACs and Laksamanas to be retired but whether they are fitted out as planned is the key question. Them not being fitted out as planned would have a severe impact on the RMN’s ability to meet possible wartime requirements.

    Another question is if only 2 of the multi role LCSs enter service or if the whole programme is scrapped; how long will it take to get replacements?

  9. ” RMN had no choice but to spend the minimum needed to keep them in service to undertake certain roles ”

    The main issue is, we are not spending the minimum to keep these ships to function purely as patrol boats. We are spending as much as we can (which in the long run will save us money), with new internal everything (engine, gearbox, AC, wiring, galley, interiors) with some even getting new hulls. All of these ships are planned to be operational for at least 15 more years, much more longer than a basic refit interval.

  10. 5zaft – ”The LMS is originally envision as per DWF to only operate within the territorial waters”

    In our territorial waters and the periphery to perform a variety of roles that don’t require a larger heavily armed surface asset. In catch is that the LMSs have to operate in conjunction with other assets and should not be placed in an operational scenario where it has to punch above its weight.

    Note that the whole idea behind the modular payload concept was not out of choice but sheer necessity – pros and cons in adopting such an approach. Some navies swear by it; others are hesitant. Proponents often cite the Danish experience but the Danes adopted it out of choice and from the onset the local industry had a major involvement’ on top of that it suited their operational requirements. How successful the modular payload concept will prove with the RMN remains to be seen. I know for a fact that within the RMN opinions are highly mixed.

  11. ” Another question is if only 2 of the multi role LCSs enter service or if the whole programme is scrapped; how long will it take to get replacements? ”

    The quickest way to get a replacement for the LMS Gowind capability now is to use the LMS Batch 2 requirements to sneakily get a Frigate. If that is the case, RMN needs to find the best possible frigate for the budget of a LMS corvette.

    There is a precedence that the LCS original requirement was for a fully armed corvette (was supposed to be just a fully armed Kedah Batch 2, which is why there is no open tender) was increased to become a frigate replace the cancelled F2000 Frigate batch 2 project.

  12. The more suitable design for lms batch 2 as for me is damen’s own sigma 7311/7911..1000 tonnes with heli pad almost like that rsn lmv

  13. I am doubtful TLDM wants Sigma92 as LMS2 since its about the same size & displacement as Kedahs, might as well restart Kedah production if that is what they wanted. No need to pay additional RM for rights to the new ship and maybe suffer delays with another unfamiliar ship class!

    There must be a reason why of all the ship sizes in China, TLDM went with a 70mtr hull for Keris class. A LMS2 with Keris-sized hull but fully fitted as per TLDM requirements, I guess, is what they intend.

  14. gonggok – “The main issue is, we are not spending the minimum to keep these ships to function purely as patrol boats;
    .
    Whatever is being done [whether new hulls, gearboxes, electrics, etc] is the bare minimum needed to keep.them operational for the foreseeable future until they can be replaced.Take the Lakssmanas; issues with the hull [steel weakening and bending] were faced as far back about a decade ago and keeping them in service entails a new hull. On the FACs; to avoid power issues and even breakdowns the generators and engines have to be replaced.

    What is being done is certainly not ;spending as much as we can” but what is needed.

  15. gonggok – If that is the case, RMN needs to find the best possible frigate for the budget of a LMS corvette”

    The problem is that the “the best possible frigate” may serve as an interim measure as multi role combatants to compensate for the LCS. It still however doesn’t do away with the fact that LMSs are intended to replace the FACs and Laksamanas, as well as the Mahamirus; as such configuring the Batch 2s as multi role combatants solves one issue but still leaves another unresolved. I have no idea as to how things will pan out but I’ll stick to what I said many moons ago that delays with the LCSs will have a detrimental effect on other areas for the RMN.

  16. @gonggok
    “We are spending as much as we can”
    Irregardless really. The budget for rehulling & relifeing the FACs are coming from OE budget, money which otherwise would be spent for the usual basic refits which would not keep them alive for much longer. Now they can be used 10-15 more years and the magic to all that… TLDM’s DE budget still remain untouched for them to spend on actual new acquisitions or to restart LCS.

    So I disagree such actions are “devastating” or “detrimental” to TLDM, all indications they will still keep their plan to acquire new ships (LCS, LMS2, Kedah Batch2?) but augment them with relifed boats, thereby boosting fleet size.

  17. These ships have capabilities the RMN need. The displacment falls within one of the 5 classes of ships the RMN needs. Any new ship is better than a ship perpetually under construction. Whether its LMS sized, LCS sized, DDG51 sized is no longer relevant at this stage. The LCS delay has derailed all current and future shipbuilding plans. By right LMS batch 2 should be the focus as the LCS are being commissioned. Instead LMS batch 2 has to compete with LCS funding because none of the LCS has been completed. It the Sigma 92 can be built close to LMS Batch 2 budget, it doesn’t matter if its LMS or LCS or Destroyer.

  18. Gonggok – The quickest way to get a replacement for the LMS Gowind capability now is to use the LMS Batch 2 requirements to sneakily get a Frigate.

    It’s probably cheaper and faster to complete the gowind first. Since all the hulls, equipment & Even NSM had been acquired.

    The LMS batch 2 is still in the RFI stage, then they’re would be a tender, then closing the tender, then few more years to announce the winner of the tender, then more years for the detail design stage to meet RMN requirements then another few more years of construction & some years of sea trials.

  19. 5zaft,

    “It’s probably cheaper and faster to complete the gowind first”

    There is no extra budget available to complete all 6 Gowinds.

    On the other hand, there would be budget in the future for 8 LMS batch 2.

    You can be frugal with your money and get the most bang for your budget. For example, originally MMEA OPV budget approval was for just 2 ships. MMEA managed to find a bidder that can supply 3 OPVs for the same cost of the original 2 OPV approval.

    You can get a proven design that does not need much design changes, and a proven shipyard that can build and commission the ship in a short timeline. Those can cut a lot of time from award to commissioning.

  20. 5zaft – “The LMS batch 2 is still in the RFI stage, then they’re would be a tender, then closing the tender, then few more”

    Precisely. There’s also the pertinent fact that the LMSs are a separate requirement for separate roles. Configuring them as multi role combatants instead of LMSs with modular payloads creates a new set of problems because it still leaves a longstanding unfulfilled requirement.

  21. If anyone would propose for a Kedah batch 2, it rather not be built by BNS cuz you know why. If the Damen Sigma corvette really is a choice to be considered, I think we should rather consider the Jose Rizal or any Korean made ship for the matter due to cost to size ratio. An option for the Jose Rizal is ability to further add Korean or Western made towed sonar array in the future, making them affordable ASW corvette. Oh wait, Danish Absalon frigate would cost around this price also (but hey someone will point out that it’s to big -_-)

    LMS should be a cheaper alternative to LCS and Kedah and I don’t think that usd170 million is cheap, but it is still very cheap for a properly equipped corvette.

    I would still think that LMS should be built on cheaper hull like Damen OPV or Korean designed hull and then add long range radar, 4 anti ship missile and Mistral in SADRAL system (2 quad TETRAL version of the Mistral is fitted on Diponegoro class). In short, LMS should be small, relatively cheap but still pack quite a punch like the Russian Steregushchiy for example.

  22. “Configuring them as multi role combatants instead of LMSs with modular payloads creates a new set of problems because it still leaves a longstanding unfulfilled requirement”

    pick one problem @ thing to be unfulfilled

    – unfulfilled LMS batch 2 requirement due to it becoming a conventional corvette/frigate.

    – unfulfilled LCS frigate requirement due to LMS batch 2 sticks to being a LMS, plus the Gowinds not completed as planned.

  23. Azlan – LMSs are a separate requirement for separate roles. Configuring them as multi role combatants instead of LMSs with modular payloads creates a new set of problems because it still leaves a longstanding unfulfilled requirement.”

    Hence the rehulling of FAC & laksamana? It basically a brand new boats by then. able to keep on floating for 20-30 more years?

    Having LMS batch 2 configured as a multirole combatants likely mean it a replacement for Mahamiru, lekiu & kasturi (which would be obsolete by 2030) rather than laksamana & fac i supposed.

  24. kel – “These ships have capabilities the RMN need”

    The designed proposed for the LMS Batch 2s is configured the conventional/standard way. Little or no space to accommodate modular payloads on which the LMS is intended to be centered on. Also, it’s not actual ship capabilities per see but the level of networking; their ability to work in conjunction with other assets, not only RMN ones, that is the deciding factor in this day and age.

    kel – Whether its LMS sized, LCS sized, DDG51 sized is no longer relevant at this stage”

    To that contrary it’s very “relevant”..
    Too large means it”s superfluous to requirements and too small means inadequate deck space for what’s needed; can’t dock at certain RMN bases and range and endurance limitations. It also has to have a certain draught to operate in some parts of our littorals.

  25. Honestly is the Navy’s priority focusing on semantics, nomenclature between LCS vs LMS vs FAC vs Frigate, or is the Navy’s priority about getting new ships? The Navy needs new LMS and LCS sized ships but have 0 LCS and only 4 LMS. Even if the government continues to fund the LCS, it seems very likely it will stop at 2 ships. So if this is indeed the force structure (only 2 LCS to anchor the fleet), then what is the problem with a bigger LMS batch 2? It really doesn’t matter if it is a LMS, LCS, LMS+, Frigate ship. All types are needed. I believe, even if the Navy doesn’t want a 2nd batch LMS Batch 1, they will take the 2nd batch if it gets funded and delivered on time, simply because it needs new ships and 8 new LMS Batch 1 is going to be superior than zero LCS and 4 LMS Batch 1.

  26. gonggok – “pick one problem @ thing to be unfulfilled”

    I don’t have have to “pick” because it’s plainly obvious.

    5zaft – basically a brand new boats by then. able to keep on floating for 20-30 more years”

    The new gear they are getting greatly improved things but they are still not brand new boats. The upgrades do away with the main issuers faced but others will be evident due to.age issues.

    5zaft – Having LMS batch 2 configured as a multirole combatants likely mean it a replacement”

    Replacements for the FACs, Laksamanas and Mahamirus.

  27. kel – Honestly is the Navy’s priority focusing on semantics, nomenclature between LCS vs LMS”

    It’s not “semantics”.. The LCS and LMS are different classes intended for different roles.

    kel – ” then what is the problem with a bigger LMS batch”

    Who has said it”s a problem? The RMN has long identified a class of a certain tonnage and to be fitted out in a certain way. As long as that’s met there is no problem. What the RMN doesn’t want is to be straddled with something ill suited for its requirements.

    kel – “8 new LMS Batch 1 is going to be superior than zero LCS and 4 LMS Batch 1”

    No doubt and they will enable the retirement of certain ships but they will not – obviously – be a replacement for the LCS.

    As,it stands the RMN is hopping the LCS issue is resolved but at the same time is actively lobbying for the LMS Batch 2s.

  28. my observation of the current situation

    – There is a stalemate to the current LCS Gowind mess. Lots of money has been spent not to actually build the ships, but to pay Boustead to do nothing while the leaders are procrastinating on the decision of how to continue with this project. There is virtually no chance that all 6 ships can be completed with no injection of additional funds, and the government has clearly stated that it is not going to put any additional money into the project. Should the RMN still put all hope that they will in the end really get the 6 Gowinds? Or must they start deciding on plan B right now to get their frigate capability?

    – According to the plan that is agreed to by the government, the next project that the government will fund for RMN will be for 8 new LMS batch 2.

    – Also concurrently, RMN has embarked on a major refit program, some almost to a stage where virtually a new ship is built with just the guns and a few small items are left from the original ships. Almost all the ships that are planned to be retired 2018-2022 are now being refitted. All the ships that are supposed to be replaced by LMS; the laksamana corvette, 8 FAC(M) and Lericis are to be thoroughly refitted that they are good to go for at least up to 2035.

    – Now all of the ships that are supposed to be replaced by the LMS are still going to be around for quite a considerable future. Up till 2035, RMN will still have
    4x Keris LMS batch 1
    4x Laksamana
    4x Lerici
    4x Perdana
    4x Handalan
    6x Jerong
    2/4x vosper PC
    When there is so much of these corvette or smaller ships still operational, arguably there are less reason for RMN to add more of the same with the LMS batch 2 when at the same time the RMN are without the frigates that it needed.

    – RMN does not have much of other options to get a substitute frigate in place of the gowinds. The best option that they have right now is to tweak the requirement of LMS Batch 2 so that they can get their gowind substitute, even if the small 170 million dollars per ship budget will dictate that a less capable frigate is all that they could have. If they don’t grab the chance that they have right now, RMN will stand to become a fleet consisting of mainly gunboats with just 2 or 4 frigates for the next 15-20 years.

  29. Azlan – The new gear they are getting greatly improved things but they are still not brand new boats. The upgrades do away with the main issuers faced but others will be evident due to.age issues.”

    Still it bought them time, time to add on others capabilities rather than a replacement for existing capabilities. As it is There’s no need for them to build FAC nor laksamana size ship for the next 2 decades at least.

    As for the modularity particularly on MCM. i guess it’s ok to give up on it since most navy had all given up on it & goes for a conventional fit. As for ‘modular’ weaponry, Well USMC put a Himars truck on their flat deck. if they continue on developing it, it would be a good alternative to the danish system.

    The problem with acquiring new smallish gunboat is that it put the navy in direct competition with CG. Which they would lose since CG brilliantly push for the usage of consumer grade equipment & thus would be more cost effective solution to the gov then the navy could ever be (case in point the cost of tun Fatimah vs keris LMS). Coastal protection is also a market that the army is entering as the army brilliantly monuver into being given the additional responsibility as the border force & marines.

    While the navy operating under the umbrella of AF protection & potentially in the future army long range ASW missile (which a market they would totally enter since they know coastal protection is where the money is,Land base missile on truck is afterall whole lot cheaper than a missile boat to acquire and maintain) is nobles. It would just give excuse to the gov to underfunded the navy. Since investing in the AF & army would be the more cost effective solution

    What the navy as an organization need to do to survive is to go beyond what the AF,army,CG can do rather than replicate them. To carve a unique proposition that they and only they can only do to secure future funding from the gov.

    Interagency rivalry isn’t necessary a bad thing, as we had seen it incentivise different agency to proposed different solution & agency with the best proposal get the funding. I don’t see a future where the navy can survive if they remain a brown water navy.

    The LMS batch 1 are almost universally hated. Basically after the maharajalela being sold as Malaysian answer to RSN formidable, Scorpene as the answer to archer, they expected the LMS to be an answer to LMV. One they realized they got a small gunboat instead of a LMV equivalent they got very angry instead. What’s more when they realize it cost as much as tun Fatimah.

    While a rakyat like me has not much knowledge of the nuance of military operation. But in a democracy,public support does matter. Thus why I think RMN marketed the LMS batch 2 as LMV equivalent is the right move. Once the public see it they would want it and would create excuses why we should have it & would put the politicians under pressure to acquire it.

  30. Seems that RMN want a more advanced LMS than the batch 1. Is a usd170+ million Sigma really worth it? Should we get the larger Jose Rizal for about the same price? Or get Damen 1800/2500 OPV and up armed it? that usd170 million price will not include the 12 missiles for the VLS as Indonesians only have 2×4 Mistral shorad on their ships nor any long range radar.

    I wish we could get a ship with cheaper OPV/corvette size that have multi role combat ability as well as still having ability to carry mission modules like LMS batch 1 ISO containers. Getting that size of ship also meant being able to put a towed sonar array up to CAPTAS-2 and SQS-250K size.

    If we end up only completing 2 LCS, might as well just use whatever sub system we had bought for them at put on LMS batch 2 like the 57mm guns, 30mm guns, NSM, Smart-2 mk2 radar and CAPTAS-2 rowed sonar array on the LMS, could save some cost there enabling our LMS to be really multi role and packs a punch.

    Giving the LMS a long range radar or long range anti ship missile like Teseo MK2 (350+km) could turn the LMS to a radar picket ship or a missile truck that stand by further behind the lines. Well I’m just dreaming here

  31. Seems like my observations are correct.

    RMN did put out in the open their dream LMS Batch 2 specifications out at DSA 2022.

    RMN LMS Batch 2 wishlist specification

    General specifications
    Length overall 80-100m
    Beam 10-14m
    Speed(max) 28knots
    Speed(cruise) 14knots
    Propulsion System CODAD (combined diesel and diesel)
    Main engine 4
    Shaft line 2x CPP (constant pitch propeller)
    Endurance 4000NM/21days
    Weapons
    – A gun 57mm
    – Y gun 30mm CIWS
    – 2x NSM Launcher
    – surface to air missile or point defence missile system

    So officially we have a proof that they are now going to use the LMS batch 2 program as a replacement for the seemingly hopeless LCS Gowind project. They know that the 15to5 program as it is right now is untenable anyway.

    Lets see the specs of Jose Rizal Frigate
    Length overall 107.5m
    Beam 13.8m
    Speed(max) 25knots
    Speed(cruise) 15knots
    Propulsion System CODAD (combined diesel and diesel)
    Main engine 4
    Shaft line 2x CPP (constant pitch propeller)
    Endurance 4500NM/30days
    Weapons
    – A gun 76mm
    – Y gun 30mm RCWS
    – 2x twin SeaStar SSM Launcher
    – 2x mistral simbad point defence missile system (VLS FFBNW)
    – 2x SEA triple tube torpedo (same as we bought for gowind)

    If we see the RMN wishlist specifications, we can see that RMN is planning to just install all the weapons already bought for LCS Gowind into the LMS Batch 2. I have heard that all of the 57mm bofors, 30mm MSI and NSM missiles are already complete and ready to be sent to malaysia. So that is a lot of things not to be paid for and can save money for the LMS Batch 2. As we still have not signed for any surface to air missiles for the Gowinds, these are still open for the LMS batch 2, and RMN is willing to settle for a lesser point defence missile to save on cost.

    If we really want to save more money on the LMS Batch 2 project, if we really go for the Jose Rizal frigate design, we can also cannibalise radars, FCR, EO systems from Kedah class and install them on the LMS Batch 2. Jose Rizal class uses the same radar as our Kedah class, the EADS (hensoldt) TRL-3D. As the kedah is used as an OPV all its life, it does not really need a radar as advanced as the TRL-3D, and it can be donated to a fully armed ship like the LMS Batch 2.

    To make sure that RMN finally get the ships that it needed, the first 3 ships should be made by Hyundai in South Korea. The Philippines got their first ship just about 2 years after contract signing.

    The Jose Rizal class is also designed to be fitted with CAPTAS-2 towed sonar, although the Philippines navy does not buy the sonar (just FFBNW). But we already bought 6 CAPTAS-2 sonars, and it can be installed on LMS Batch 2 without any design issues.

    So whats next for the Gowinds? If the frigate LMS Batch 2 is a go, then even if only 2 ships finished it does not really matter much. Yes it is sad that the advanced Gowinds are a missed chance for malaysia, but it is what it is and we need to move on. The PRISM integrated mast with SMART-S radars probably we could save for a future large frigate project.

    So if Jose Rizal class Frigate is the best for RMN, how should we get it?

    If we choose FA-50 for RMAF, and Jose Rizal class for RMN, we should do a government to government defence package with South Korea. Add in large OPVs for MMEA, raybolt ATGMs and chiron MANPADs for the army. And try to get some free transfers of korean weapons to us, such as metis-m reloads, retired blackhawks for PUTD, and used corvettes for MMEA.

  32. No lah, the amended RFI have been out there since six months ago. It was the second RFI after the first one which came out last year calling out the ships up to 75 metres

  33. Marhalim,

    If that is the ammended RFI, it shows that the RMN 6 months ago already think that there is no hope for the LCS Gowinds, and now using the LMS Batch 2 program as a Plan B to replace the Gowinds.

    You wouldn’t plan to install Gowind weapons onto the LMS Batch 2, and change the specs of the LMS Batch 2 into a corvette/light frigate if you still believe that you will eventually get your Gowinds.

    BTW this is what that is put up by RMN at DSA 2022
    http://pictr.com/images/2022/03/31/BThWXZ.md.jpg

    This is some specs of the Jose Rizal
    http://pictr.com/images/2022/03/31/BThQhn.md.jpg

  34. Whatever the design/spec etc, the most important thing is the capability/credibility of the chosen shipyard to deliver the hull within the allocated budget and schedule. We had enough of disaster for how many times?the hundredth time? i’ve lost counts.

  35. “calling out the ships up to 75 metres”
    Exactly what I said, of all the ship types you can find in China, why did TLDM went for 70mtr class boat for Keris? Surely they must have identified this type of ship is what they intended for LMS, both Batch 1 & 2.

  36. Joe,

    Right now it probably does not matter much if you are right about something that is now in the past anyway.

    What really matters now is that RMN have clearly changed the specifications to have a Gowind substitute under the LMS Batch 2 project.

  37. Beli Sigma 9113 nanti sama macam Indonesia

    Beli Jose Rizal nanti sama macam Filipina

    Gading marine pernah ada rekod bina kapal besar?

  38. “There’s no need for them to build FAC nor laksamana size ship for the next 2 decades at”

    So you say but the RMN has specified the need for a,ship of a certain tonnage.

    “The problem with acquiring new smallish gunboat is that it put the navy in direct competition with CG”

    Understand that the RMN would love to wash its hands of the peacetime consatbulary re but it can’t until the MMEA is adequately funded, the LMS Batch 1s were badly needed to take the strain of existing aged and overworked assets and the Batch 2s are intended to be fully fitted out.

    ” USMC put a Himars truck on their flat deck. if they continue on developing it, it would be a good alternative to the danish system”

    Apple’s to oranges comparison. HIMARS on ships is to provide a,capability. The RDN’s approach to a modular payload concept is to provide a range of capabilities.

    “Interagency rivalry isn’t necessary a bad thing”

    In the case where it prevents prevents jointness and when overall efficacy is effected it is bad and counter productive.

    “if they remain a brown water navy”

    What’s your definition of a “brown water navy”? Mine is one whose capabilities are driven by its lack of a fleet train or the ability to sustain itself at sea for extended periods and to project power. Even if the RMN got 10,000 tonne combatants it doesn’t necessarily transform it into a “blue water navy”.

    “Scorpene as the answer to archer, they expected the LMS to be an answer to LMV”.

    No they are not.A lot of whAt we do is capability not threat driven.

    gonggok – “What really matters now is that RMN have clearly changed the specifications to have a Gowind ”

    Has it really changed the specs? Until we know more I’ll reserve judgement. I’ve heard otherwise; which is,why I peer the fact that the LCS and LMS should not be conflated as both are different requirements.

  39. 5Zaft – ”As for the modularity particularly on MCM. i guess it’s ok to give up on it since most navy had all given up on it & goes for a conventional fit.”

    Some navies are willing to go for a modular approach; others aren’t. If presented with a choice the RMN would want a purpose built MCMV but funding isn’t there; thus as a compromise it has decided to meet its future MCM requirements via a modular approach.
    This is not a assumption or a personal opinion on my part but something I know for a fact.

    5Zaft – ”The LMS batch 1 are almost universally hated.”

    Understand that the RMN was desperate for new hulls ASAP for reasons known. It was politically expedient to buy from China during that period and the Batch 1s serve a purpose. As such they are not ‘hated’ within the RMN.

    5Zaft – ”potentially in the future army long range ASW missile (which a market they would totally enter since they know coastal protection is where the money is”

    For a number of reasons [which we can go into] a land based ASM should be operated by the RMN. The challenge in getting a land based ASM is to acquire the needed enablers in the form of a strike/recce complex [OTHT, integration with ISR assets of other services, etc].

    5Zaft – ”Still it bought them time, time to add on others capabilities rather than a replacement for existing capabilities.”

    It’s a reactive rather than a proactive move. Had to be done to keep them operational.
    As originally planned the FACs should have been upgraded in the late 1990’s and retired by the mid 2000’s.

    5Zaft – ”Coastal protection is also a market that the army is entering as the army brilliantly monuver into being given the additional responsibility as the border force & marines.”

    This is the first I’ve heard of it. As for ”marines” turf guarding and inter service rivalry will ensure that if we do get a ‘marne’ unit; the army will fight tooth and nail for the capability’ as a way to justify and maintain funding.

  40. Luqman – Seems that RMN want a more advanced LMS than the batch 1″

    “More advanced”? It wants something which is fully fitted out in order to perform certain roles unlike the Batch 1s.

    What is displayed at DSA could be profoundly different from what the RMN really wants in terms of layout and displacement. Many things are offered, doesn’t mean there is actual intent. For RMN the Batch 2s are needed and badly so but not to replace the LCSs per see.

  41. Azlan,

    “Has it really changed the specs?”

    As Marhalim said it has been in the RFI since 6 months ago, and also from the picture I posted from the RMN booth at DSA 2022.

    http://pictr.com/images/2022/03/31/BThWXZ.md.jpg

    If you compare the specs of Gading Marine offer, it follows the specification posted at the RMN booth down to a tee. https://www.malaysiandefence.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/gad.jpg

    That makes me believe that the specification shown at DSA 2022 is the same one as the latest LMS Batch 2 RFI, and clearly it is really no longer the LMS of the original requirement, but now a substitute ship for the LCS Gowind.

  42. Thank you Marhalim, that’s what I’ve been trying to.point out. I’ve also asked around and nobody has told me its a substitute.

  43. Thank you Marhalim, that’s what I’ve been trying to.point out. I’ve also asked around and nobody has told me its a substitute.

  44. Officially telling it with a straight face to MoF of course it is a follow on to the LMS batch 1, thats is why it is called LMS batch 2.

    But just look at the latest modified specs, it is not the multi mission ship that the LMS originally meant to be. With no gowinds in sight, this will probably become the RMN major combattant (overtaking the lekius) in years to come.

    The high possibility of the gowind project being terminated or substantially cut, the LMS batch 2 is virtually the substitute for the gowinds.

    It would not be the first time a military program morphed into something different from its original intent. Even the LCS project was supposed to be a straightforward follow on of the Kedah class OPV project, and it morphed into the cancelled F2000 (lekiu) batch 2 frigate substitute.
    https://www.malaysiandefence.com/sgpvlcs-part-ii/
    https://www.malaysiandefence.com/poll-results-jebat-batch-2-and-rm6-billion/

  45. What you are saying is speculative. No doubt you believe it but it’s still speculative and you are seeing the facts you want to see and drawing the needed conclusions.

    I will say this again : the LCS and LMS Batch 2s are separate requirements. The RMN believes that the worst case scenario will see a pair of LCS commissioned but not the whole programme shelved and has contingency plans,in place. LMS Batch 2s can make up for the LCS shortfall but not be a substitute per see. Also, just because a particular model with a certain fit out was displayed doesn’t necessarily mean it was requested by the RNN or specified. I can categorically tell you that the RMN still desires a LMS Batch 2 with a modular payload.

  46. I really doubt LMS batch 2 going to be a ‘replacement’ for the LCS. As mentioned before,the equipment, hulls, weapon for all 6 ships are already there. And all we need to do is finished glueing it together (hopefully in a way that the navy want it). Personal speculation wise i say the mica is not to the navy liking.

    From the picture gonggok provided,the LMS batch 2 seems to be a multi mission multirole ship pretty similar in concepts as to UAE’s Al baynunah & LMV.

    Speaking of MCM,The LMV as well as the Belgian MCMM is the only example of a modern MCM ship that i know off. And both of it are pretty big since The ship need to act as a ‘mothership’ to Carry a slew of UAV,UUV & USV which would do the sweeping & hunting instead of having the vessel itself doing the sweeping & hunting.

    But most importantly the navy are only committed to a total purchase of 3. Once the navy chief & menhan change, the navy priority would change again. So don’t really count for the further 5 orders.

  47. RMN is committed to buying eight but the government only allowed three for this RMK. So as long as they get the ships that they wanted, they to have to go along it

  48. 5Zaft – “I really doubt LMS batch 2 going to be a ‘replacement’ for the LCS”

    Yes, it’s not a replacement or a substitute. It’s a complete different requirement for a different class of ships to perform slightly different roles compared to the LCS.

    5Zaft – “LMV as well as the Belgian MCMM is the only example of a modern MCM ship that i know off”

    There are actually quite a few “modern” MCMVs around.

    5Zaft – instead of having the vessel itself doing the sweeping & hunting”

    Yes, unlike in the past when ships with wire seeps and ROVs had to actually get close to mines.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*