First Ada-class Ship in Town

TCG Kinaliada crest.

SHAH ALAM: TCG Kinaliada – the fourth ship of the Ada class – has berthed at the Port Klang Cruise Terminal in Pulau Indah, Port Klang today – for its three-day visit to Malaysia. She is the first Ada-class ship to be in Malaysia with the RMN version expected returned home in 2027 at the earliest. As reported previously.

Kinaliada is here as part of a five month deployment to Japan and neighbouring countries. Like all Ada class ship, Kinaliada is named after a Turkish island, so in English the ship’s name is Kinali Island or Pulau Kinali in Malay.

TCG Kinaliada arriving at PKTC today.

Walking halfway to the ship to get to the main wardroom for the press briefing from the helicopter hangar – a Sikorsky Seahawk was parked inside there, I had a distinct feeling that I had seen a ship of similar layout. I thought the ship layout is similar to the Kedah class as one could walk straight to the front from the helicopter hangar.
TCG Kinaliada crest.

That said I must point out, the Kinaliada is a much bigger ship than the Kedah. She is about 100 meters long (about 326 feet) with a beam of 14.4 meters and a displacement of 2,400 tonnes. The Kedah class is only 91 meters long, a beam of 12.4 meters and a displacement of around 1800 tonnes.
The wing bridge of TCG Kinaliada.

The Ada class is just slighter shorter than the Lekiu class (106 meters); but bigger as the latter has a beam of 12.75 meters and displacement of 2,300 meters. The new corvette will only be slightly shorter than the LCS but with similar beams and tonnage.
Note the RWS which is located just next to the funnel. On the Malaysian Ada class variant this will be the area where an extension is added for a VLS launcher. This is replicated on the other side.

Anyhow, there was a strict policy of no picture inside the ship, I have outside pictures and video of Kinaliada only on this post. From the pictures and videos, one could make out the ships main armaments ie the A-position 76mm main gun, the twin octuple surface-to-surface missile launchers, a single RAM missile launcher and twin 12.7mm remote weapon stations.
One of the four MG3 and its mounting.

Four GPMG mounts are also mounted, two just behind the 76mm gun and another two on the helicopter deck, for close in protection.
Underneath the helicopter deck, there is an opening for the RHIB launcher and retriever.

Two twin torpedo launchers are also installed on both sides inside the helicopter hangar. A RHIB launcher is also placed under the helicopter deck with an opening to the rear.

— Malaysian Defence

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

Share
About Marhalim Abas 2191 Articles
Shah Alam

26 Comments

  1. Can’t wait for this ship to enter into service in RMN and please update for any information about next generation of mrss for RMN

  2. The ship that is offered to TLDM is closer in design to the Hisar-class OPV rather than the Ada-class (both comes from the same MILGEM Project)

    The Hisar-class OPV uses 4x Diesel engines, unlike combined Diesel and Gas turbines for Ada-class. The Hisar-class has a top speed of only 24 knots, similar to the Kedah-class.

    So in an essence, the “corvettes” we buy from turkey is closer in design and concept to a fully armed Kedah-class, rather than a lighter-armed Gowind-class (3,100 tons displacement) frigates.

    A side profile of the Hisar-class OPV
    https://i.hizliresim.com/khz7a6w.jpeg

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GNMJ7YubUAAEGoG.jpg

  3. hopefully we can change the bridge window design. sweptback window sucks

  4. any update on when RMN will reveal the new realignment plan for 15 to 5? On X various photos have been shared of what the current plan looks like and it doesn’t seem pretty, from 55 ships to just 28. Granted, this is the ship amount they anticipate to have by 2040, which still leaves us with 2 more Malaysian plans(2041-2045/2046-2050) so I suppose there’s still plenty of time for additional ships if budget is available, but I am still confused by it since various sources have conflicting reports as to the actual amount of ships. Guess we’ll have to wait and see for the official RMN release and get some insight into what their plans are moving forward.

  5. The line between Corvette and frigate is blur now, heavily arm Corvette is more potent than lightly arm frigate, just like Chinese PLAN type 55 they called it destroyers but USNavy classify it as cruiser,as for LCS just scrapped it hull barely useable now with all the rust..

  6. Rushi – ”The line between Corvette and frigate is blur now”

    Thank you as I never tire of pointing out. What’s a ”frigate” in one navy could be a ”corvette” in another and we can have instances where a ”corvette” is more heavily armed than a ”frigate”. At time the decision to classify something as a ”corvette” or a ”frigate” is determined by poltical considerations.

    dundun – ”sweptback window sucks”

    How so?

  7. … – ”concept to a fully armed Kedah-class”

    The ”concept” of the Kedah included peacetime roles of fisheries enforcement and EEZ patrols [at a time when the MMEA didn’t exist] and wartime roles of supporting the Lekis and Kasturis; as well performing roles such as convoy escort; safeguarding the coast and limited forms of naval action which might not require a Lekiu or Kasturi and which would have been performed by the FACs. Although the planned RAM and 4 MM-40s were intended mainly for self-protection the class was also expected to have a combat role; hence the 3D radar, obstacle avoidance sonar and other things which one doesn’t normally find on a hull intended purely or mainly for constabulary type work.

    … – ”rather than a lighter-armed Gowind-class (3,100 tons displacement) frigates.”

    Ok but the question I have is was it from the onset intended to be a ”a lighter-armed Gowind-class”? The answer’s actually; not quite. There’s been quite a bit of confusion on the part of some; a common misassumption is that the LMS requirement only gained a sense of urgency when it was clear that there were major issues with the LCSs and that the Batch 2s were intended as an interim solution; like how the Laksamanas were ostensibly acquired to compensate for late deliveris of the Lekius. The actual fact is that even if the LCSs had all been delivered on time the RMN still had a requirement for LMSs.

    Rushdi – ”as for LCS just scrapped it hull barely useable now with all the rust..”

    The first part of your paragraph made sense; unlike this part.

  8. Its quite spacious. Especially when rmn choose to remove the RAM & opted for vls at the side. That would free the space above the hangar. Can it fit a gokdeniz ciws up there?

  9. Scrap the lcs huh? Easy for you to say..not after billions already paid..Like im always said,LCS maharajalela is potential and enough to rejuvenate RMN fleet but let down by reckless decision by decision makers plus covid..We cannot let this saga continue or repeating in the future

  10. Gov n rmn should consider to rearmed the kedah classes with SSM n SAM too..

  11. Maybe what differ a corvette and a frigates nowadays is just their size maybe? or maybe just their naming/nomenclature? ever heard of 40m, 600 tonnes frigates?

  12. @ azlan

    ” The ”concept” of the Kedah included peacetime roles of fisheries enforcement and EEZ patrols [at a time when the MMEA didn’t exist] and wartime roles of supporting the Lekis and Kasturis; as well performing roles such as convoy escort; safeguarding the coast and limited forms of naval action which might not require a Lekiu or Kasturi and which would have been performed by the FACs ”

    Yes i know, and i fully understand the original concept of the NGPV.

    But that concept is designed in the mid 90s, when there is no APMM, there is no chinese coast guard, the PLAN is still a brown water navy mainly armed with corvettes and never ventured into malaysian EEZ.

    We should not get ships that is designed to fulfill expected threats of 30 years ago.

    Even PLAN is discarding its very new 056 Corvettes end masse, painting them white and passing it on to the Chinese Coast Guard. In their place, PLAN is building more Frigates and Destroyers, that have 60-100+ VLS systems on board.

    What does our corvettes be capable of when facing such an adversary?

  13. … – ”But that concept is designed in the mid 90s”

    And still holds valid till today …

    So you say but the Chinese Coast Guard has far more resources than the MMEA. You’ve made this comparison before; based on that shall the army have Corps level arty groupings because the North Korean army does? The Chinese Coast Guard can absorb OPVs it has more resources and different mission sets.

    … – ”PLAN is still a brown water navy mainly armed with corvettes and never ventured into malaysian EEZ.”

    – It did enter the EEZ only not as frequently and didn’t make headlines.
    – This has been touched on. Don’ make it sound like the PLAN only became a threat recently. In the 1990’s it already had dozens of submarines; Sovremmenys with Sunburn and other things.
    – Even if we had a force structure comprising 3 dozen frigates and 22 dozen subs we’d still be unable to deal with th PLAN. That’s reality as opposed to fantasy. Also, you find it hard to grasp that our force structure’s not intended to deal with the PLA and that despite your obsession with China [which is a major source of concern] we also have other things to focus on and yes I’m keenly aware the main challenge we face is in our maritime domain.

    … – ”What does our corvettes be capable of when facing such an adversary?”

    What kind of question is that? For the 100th time; it’s really not hard but no doubt you’ll still be making the same spurious claims after the corvettes complete their 1st refit. There is a place foe everything. A ”corvette” is intended for certain roles under specific conditions. Under the wrong conditions even a ”destroyer” or one of your much vaunted subs might not be survivable.

    Again: our force structure is not driven by China and we can raise the budget by a tenfold but we still can deal with China. It has a much larger population; the largest industrial capacity in the world; a high tech engineering base and spends much more on defence than we do. It worries the likes of the U.S, Australia an Japan yet here you are again suggesting we can actually do something to make China think twice.

  14. If our force structure is not to deal with PLAN, then concentrate mostly to fully fund our APMM instead to deal with the Chinese Coast Guard, not waste money with TLDM.

    So if we cannot face PLAN, what do we need the the Turkiye Corvette for? To do war with Indonesia, Philippines and Thailand??

    5 Gowinds that is paid for should be enough as it is.

    Non state actors can be dealt with TLDM Brand-new FICs.

    Our current urgency is to deal with Chinese Coast Guard. We need to buy more APMM OPVs not Corvettes for that. Wy are we wasting billions of RM on Corvettes due to urgent need to deal with the Chinese Coast Guard?

  15. … – ” our force structure is not to deal with PLAN”

    It is not as been explained many times and apart from the Spratlys we also have other issues which concern us. It’s not just the Spratlys. Yes China is a concern but a lot of what we do is capability not threat driven and the idea that a country of 34 million with a small economy can square of with a country has a much larger population; the largest industrial capacity in the world; a high tech engineering base; spends much more on defence than we do and worries the likes of the U.S, Australia dan Japan is cloud cuckoo land thinking; far detached from actual reality.

    … – ”To do war with Indonesia, Philippines and Thailand??”

    Some threats we can face; some we can’t. Perhaps in your obsession with many things and on paper notions you overlook that the whole idea of the MAF is to have a means of self defence and a level of deterrence [in line with the resources as a country with a small population and small economy] we have in order to deal with threats we can manage.

    … – ”to fully fund our APMM instead to deal with the Chinese Coast Guard, not waste money with TLDM.”

    Two separate issues which you persist in simplistically conflating. If we go according to your logic what happens if we’re faced with situation in which the MMEA can’t handle? Then will you gripe about ”wasting money on the RMN”? On one had you actually come up with some sound ideas/concepts; on the other hand you come up with stuff like this. Akin to the ”subs should surface in the vicinity of intruding ships toshow them we’re there”; no need extra crews on a LMS because it might as well be abandoned if hit by a ASM and a list of other things.

    … -”So if we cannot face PLAN, what do we need the the Turkiye Corvette for?”

    You seriously think we can? Must as well believe in the tooth fairy or Pippy Longstocking. For the 100th time [you are the same ‘…’I’ve been discussing things with and not an imposter I presume] the LMS are part of the low/high end mix; to perform roles which don’t require a LCS and at fraction of the cost. Same with your vaunted subs; against an opponent which has its subs in the area; as well as strong surface and air ASW units backed by underwater sensors, mines and other things; there will be instances where subs can’t effectively operate. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have them; anymore than the pedantic and ludicrous notion that we should not get LMSs merely because they have no utility against the PLAN.

    … – ”Our current urgency is to deal with Chinese Coast Guard. ”

    No offence but this is a downright silly statement. So you say; so you’re convinced and so you’d like everyone to believe but the Spratlys is a main area of concern but not the only one.

    … – ”5 Gowinds that is paid for should be enough as it is.”

    Not it’s not and the RMN incidentally doesn’t think so. Now you can raise this issue until the Batch 2s undergo their 1st refit but there is a reason for it and the RMN would have a better idea as to what it needs or doesn’t. BTW your continued claim that the LMS is not ”survivable” is spurious as against China [which you need reminding has a qualitative and numerical advantage] even a LCS with it’s modest 16 cell VLS or even an Arleigh Burke might be vulnerable

  16. … – ”We need to buy more APMM OPVs not Corvettes for that.”

    Since you need to be reminded; one of the peacetime roles of the LMS is EEZ patrols but it’s not the primary reason it’s being acquired as it has a host of other peace and wartime roles. Just like how despite being marketed as ”CSAR” configured RMAF helis will essentially be jack of all trades [like the Nuri] and will not be performing only or solely CSAR.

    Back to the RMN. As has been pointed out [countless times – by others too] even if the MMEA had 100 OPVs the RMN [like almost all navies] would still have various peacetime roles. The RMN pointing out that the Batch 2s can and will do EEZ patrols is a way to justify funding; just like how years ago the RMAF made the case that a AEW platform also has peacetime utility. A major peacetime role of the Batch 2s will be EEZ patrol but this is not it’s only role; it also has war time roles and until the MMEA can fully assume all its responsibilities the RMN is the only entity able to carry the burden [unless you know of another entity].

    I can try to lay this out in simpler terms if needed

  17. “a Sikorsky Seahawk was parked inside there”
    Is it parked with the tail rotor folded or the full length chopper can fit into the hangar? What about the ceiling height? Kinda curious to know if say we go for H225 ASW will these fit into the bay or not.

    The stern RHIB bay looks odd and kinda looks like it was rather made for a towed sonar array, or minelaying duty. What do you think?

    @Hulu
    “Our current urgency is to deal with Chinese Coast Guard.”
    If that is our current urgency then why do we need 6 Scorpene subs?

  18. Of course it was folded. No lah it was made for a RHIB, a towed sonar array just need a round hole same with a mine laying module.

  19. @ joe

    ” If that is our current urgency then why do we need 6 Scorpene subs? ”

    Unlike most here, I want TLDM to be able to fight PLAN, remember? that is why.

    If fighting PLAN is not the plan as most of you infer, then just concentrate on equipping APMM as best as we could. I did a plan for both APMM and TLDM, not just for TLDM.

  20. As mentioned to you, we arent BFF with our immediate neighbours so for that we dont need a superpower beating navy. But we still need a navy just something that will keep on par with them. Neither can we have a MMEA focused fleet as we be in trouble when they start to roll our their navies. We need to have appropriate force to respond in an appropriate manner when things start to escalate. China has never been in our equation, simple as that.

  21. “China has never been in our equation”

    What is our main defence threat right now? Clearly it is the illegal 10-dash line of china.

    If it is still not in our equation, despite them clearly declaring our EEZ off sabah and sarawak as their inalienable sovereign territories, then better just declare those areas as theirs then.

    Then, like you say, we can get back on thinking of a fight with our own neighbours.

  22. ”Unlike most here, I want TLDM to be able to fight PLAN”

    Well can’t speak about you but ”others” deal in the realms of reality. The notion that the RMN can ”fight PLAN” is ludicrous; might as well talk about Buck Rogers or Roger Rabbit. Next time you get a chance to speak to a RMN gut; tell him that you’re convinced the RMN’s force structure is driven with the need to ”fight” China and that if only it adopted all your proposals the RMN would have a chance. See how loud he laughs …

    Are you still convinced our subs should surface in the vicinity of intruding Chinese ships to show they’re there? Need another reminder why North Vietnam an Finland were able to achieve what they did; that the enemy too has a say/vote and that others too can practice asymmetric warfare? What happens if an enemy is not ”deterred” but our ”deterrence”? We sit back and sing patriotic songs and hope?

    The PLAN causes major worries for the likes of the USN, RAN, JMSDF and others; all belonging to countries which spend much more and are in a higher state of development in terms of experience and tertiary capabilities; compared to the RMN. Yet the RMN can ”fight” China?

    … -”If fighting PLAN is not the plan as most of you infer”

    In simple English the RMN is there for the threats we are likely to face and those we can realistically handle. Can explain it in simpler terms.

    … – ” then just concentrate on equipping APMM as best as we could.

    Simplistic conflation is really your thing isn’t it? What happens if there’s a situation which the MMEA can’t handle? I know you can’t grasp this simple fact but the RMN and MMEA are meant for different things and in certain situations both are intended to complement each other.

    … – ”I did a plan for both APMM and TLDM, not just for TLDM.”

    Of course you did; as you’ve reminded other on numerous times.

    … – ”we can get back on thinking of a fight with our own neighbours.”

    Silly. We have unresolved overlapping issues with our neighbours but nobody said we want ”fight with our own neighbours”. Also; since you need a reminder it’s not Chinese ships which have rammed, pointed guns and came close to opening fire [by their admission] on our ships. We didn’t comeclose to goingon full alert and dispersing planes because of the PLA.

  23. … – ”If it is still not in our equation, despite them clearly declaring our EEZ off sabah and sarawak as their inalienable sovereign territories, then better just declare those areas as theirs then.”

    It’s still a peacetime situation and we’re dealing with it the best we can. If you noticed; we’re not a t war. Also comments like ”then better just declare those areas as theirs then” is downright daft given the level of resources and importance we place and the efforts made by the RMN and MMEA. If you’re going to again make silly comparisons to Vietnam; we aren’t Vietnam and they feel more threatened. They are closer; have fought a land war and sea skirmishes with China and were occupied by China in ancient times.

    This is simply the best Malaysian defence site around – there is no other worth visiting. At one point when you claimed you were being censored and declared you wanted to leave; you asked for opinions on alternative sites. There are none. The rest are mostly cut and paste jobs and comments like why Malaysian can’t get aircraft carriers or get F-22s. Some level of realism, sobriety and clear headedness is required.

  24. @hulubalang. For real bro you want our armed forces to be on par with China who spent hundreds of billions per year? And the manpower they have? Come on you should know better. Even the mighty uncle sam would think twice and only strike when they have allies backing them up. The resources you need for war will kick us back to the 16 century. And there’s no guarantee you gonna survive it. For real. We develop our armed forces for DEFENSE not OFFENCE. We dont have the capacity to go on the offence & neither are all the Asean nations.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*