Its Now KD Sri Sabah and KD Sri Sarawak

KD Sri Sabah and KD Sri Sarawak. RMN

SHAH ALAM: The Royal Malaysian Navy commissioned two patrol craft, KD Sri Sabah and KD Sri Sarawak, into service today. Both ships were originally decommissioned from the RMN and entered service with the MMEA in 2006.

Both ships were handed back to the RMN in 2020 and after undergoing a four-year makeover and chang-over at the MSET Corporation Sdn Bhd in Kuala Terengganu, both were recommissioned into service at a ceremony at the Kuantan naval base.

Malaysian Defence had written extensively on both ships so please check the archives for them. The two PC will join their sister ships, KD Sri Perlis, and KD Sri Johor, at the Sandakan naval base. The ships will be part of the 13th PC Squadron.

The release from RMN:

๐๐„๐๐€๐Œ๐€๐€๐ ๐ƒ๐€๐ ๐๐„๐๐“๐€๐”๐‹๐ˆ๐€๐‡๐€๐ ๐๐€๐“๐‘๐Ž๐‹ ๐‚๐‘๐€๐…๐“ (๐๐‚) ๐’๐‘๐ˆ ๐’๐€๐๐€๐‡ ๐ƒ๐€๐ ๐’๐‘๐ˆ ๐’๐€๐‘๐€๐–๐€๐Š
KUANTAN, 19 Jan – Upacara Penamaan dan Pentauliahan Patrol Craft (PC) Tentera Laut Diraja Malaysia (TLDM) iaitu Kapal Diraja (KD) SRI SABAH dan KD SRI SARAWAK telah disempurnakan di Jeti Pangkalan TLDM Tanjung Gelang, Kuantan pagi ini. Bagi penamaan kapal SRI SABAH, majlis telah disempurnakan oleh Puan Sri Dr. Norinah binti Mustapha, isteri kepada Panglima Tentera Laut iaitu sebagai Lady Sponsor. Manakala isteri kepada Timbalan Panglima Tentera Laut, Datin Zamzelina binti Ahmad pula terhadap kapal SRI SARAWAK.
Bagi upacara pentauliahan kedua-dua kapal, Panglima Tentera Laut Laksamana Tan Sri Abdul Rahman bin Ayob telah membaca Perintah Pentauliahan sebagai simbolik Pentauliahan Kapal. Upacara disusuli dengan pemakaian insignia Pegawai Memerintah kepada Leftenan Komander Mohd Fairuz bin Ahmad Fauzi TLDM, Pegawai Memerintah KD SRI SABAH dan Leftenan Komander Anwar Redhwan bin Lokman Hakim TLDM, Pegawai Memerintah KD SRI SARAWAK.
Hasil upacara Penamaan dan Pentauliahan, Panglima Tentera Laut menyatakan bahawa pengoperasian KD SRI SABAH dan KD SRI SARAWAK di armada TLDM merupakan langkah interim. Ini bagi memenuhi keperluan operasi di lapangan yang semakin mencabar dan bukan sebahagian pelan pembangunan aset jangka panjang yang memfokuskan kepada perolehan aset-aset baharu.
Inisiatif warga Navy People pada tahun 2019 seterusnya komitmen limbungan MSET Corporation Sdn Bhd di Kuala Terengganu melaksanakan refit secara extensive membolehkan KD SRI SABAH dan KD SRI SARAWAK berwajah baharu. Ini membuktikan bahawa industri pertahanan maritim tempatan mempunyai keupayaan dan berpotensi untuk berkembang maju.
Warga TLDM wajar berbangga dengan inisiatif โ€œhandoverโ€ iaitu pindah milik dari Agensi Penguatkuasaan Maritim Malaysia (APMM) kedua-dua PC, โ€œmakeoverโ€ (refit) dan โ€œchangeoverโ€ (penamaan dan pentauliahan), di mana mampu mendokong keperluan operasi yang semakin meningkat. Semoga ianya menjadi inspirasi kepada warga Navy People agar terus berusaha untuk memastikan TLDM terus maju jaya

In a press conference after the ceremony, RMN chief Admiral TS Rahman Ayob said RM18 million was the cost for the refit for each of the two ships.

— Malaysian Defence

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

About Marhalim Abas 2227 Articles
Shah Alam


  1. Updated histories of KD Sundang, KD Panah

    KD Sundang โ€“ P36
    launched 22/05/1966
    commissioned November 1966
    Passed to APMM 2006
    KM Segantang โ€“ 3133
    retired APMM 2018
    passed APMM back to TLDM 10/06/2020
    OP Progran Start โ€“ ??? (MSET Shipyard Terengganu)
    accepted back to TLDM after OP program โ€“ 23/10/2023
    Recommissioned and officially renamed KD Sri Sabah 46 – 19/01/2024

    KD Panah โ€“ P42
    launched 10/10/1966
    commissioned July 1967
    Passed to APMM 2006
    KM Kukup โ€“ 3135
    retired APMM 2018
    passed APMM back to TLDM 10/06/2020
    OP Progran Start โ€“ ??? (MSET Shipyard terengganu)
    accepted back to TLDM after OP program โ€“ 07/12/2023
    Recommissioned and officially renamed KD Sri Sarawak 48 – 19/01/2024

    Original KD Sri Sabah โ€“ P3144
    launched 30/12/1963
    commissioned September 1964
    Passed to APMM 2006
    KM Labas โ€“ 3137
    retired APMM 2018 โ€“ scrapped

    Original KD Sri Sarawak โ€“ P3145
    launched 20/01/1964
    commissioned September 1964
    Passed to APMM 2006
    KM Sipadan โ€“ 3131
    retired APMM 2018 โ€“ sunk artificial reef off Pulau Tioman

    KD Sri Perlis โ€“ P47
    launched 26/05/1967
    commissioned 28/01/1968
    OP program start 11/08/2020 (Preston shipyard)
    accepted back to TLDM after OP program โ€“ 24/09/2021

    KD Sri Johor โ€“ P49
    launched 21/08/1967
    commissioned 14/02/1968
    OP program start โ€“ 31/10/2022 (Preston shipyard)
    accepted back to TLDM after OP program โ€“ 23/07/2023

  2. 1)First LCS Maharajalela will be launch in the water this May.

    2)Procurement of four SAR helicopter approved for the Malaysia Coast Guard.

    Its a good start for this year perhaps.

  3. Basically 1/3rd the cost of a brand new ship like the NGPC.

    Those vospers, with new engines and electrics, would probably be serviceable for 20-30 more years with regular maintenance.

    Still, i would like to know what is the long term plans for all these OP ships? All the FACs with new ECU equipped diesel engines, electrical systems would be serviceable for 10-20 years. What is the long term plan for the Laksamanas? One is fully rehulled (KD Laksamana Mohd Amin) so that is effectively a brand new ship using the identity of the old one (as is the KD Perkasa). If KD Perkasa was operational for 40+ years, the reincarnated KD Perkasa with totally new hull (probably the only thing transferred from the old KD Perkasa was the 57mm and 40mm bofors) should be capable to operate for 40 more years into the future.

    If the 2 vospers OP at MSET cost RM18 million each, i assume the cost for KD sri perlis and KD sri johor is less as they are maintained as fully operational ships before their OP was undertaken (shorter time to complete their OP too). Would like to know the costs for KD Perkasa too if possible…

    @ anon

    Good news ๐Ÿ‘

  4. Intrim measures.

    If these vosper OP are intrim measures, what is the permanent plan for new vessels to undertake the 13 squadron mission in patrolling Sabah waters around the ESSCOM area?

    Bigger ships such as OPV and Corvettes are probably too large for this mission. Pass this mission to APMM in the future? Get something low cost of 50-55m in length like my proposed LMS-X instead of LMS Corvette?

  5. Things in the Pipeline to boost our Naval Presence in SCS:
    1) Additional 18 FA-50
    2) x2 ATR72
    3) x3 CN235 converted to MPA’s
    4) Two Long Range Radar in Borneo
    5) x3 ANKA MALE UAS
    6) x12 Boeing Scan Eagle UAV
    7) x5 LCS
    8) x3 LMS
    9) x2 PC’s re-commissioned above & x4 Laksamana Class refitting
    10) MMEA OPV1-comissioned x2 OPV to go
    11) x3 AW139 for RMN
    12) x4 helicopters for MMEA & x1 Mother Ships
    13) x18 SPH for the Army
    14) New Bintulu Naval Base

    Many more I know, but after listing above I think we started to see some improvements.

  6. Marhalim, if a ship has not completed the design works, which I am guessing means the physical works on the ship has not yet finished, can it actually be ready for sea trials as the Admiral has claimed?

  7. The design work which is not completed for the LCS is the production design work, which is the work to translate the design work into the production. This must be done as the ship is being build as it is the first one.

    So perhaps the admiral is right. As I had said before the industry people had already said the ship will float when it is put into water. Whether it will work as the design, is something they must confirmed.

  8. launched and in the water โ‰  sea trials

    ships are regularly launched even when they are not yet fully completed. after they are launched, they will be tied alongside with further fitting and finishing works done to them. After that is completed, then sea trials will begin. After all trials are completed then it is handed over to the customer, and officially commissioned.

    This is an example. Below are the pictures of UAE second Gowind corvette, Al-Emarat when it was officially launched and floated in the water. You can clearly see that is is far from completed at this stage.

    If LCS Maharaja Lela could be really launched by mid of this year (the original 24 august 2017 launch was a scam. Just to meet the deadline to get payments done - ), then it will have 2 years to go before planned commissioning date. Should be enough time to complete the ship.

  9. If not mistaken weapon integration is done when are launch launched. It also mean that BNS yard has free capacity to build LMS2.

    Sure we can import the LMS2, but then we would merry go round again with BNS in debt, skilled workers left, then we give them another contract down the lines and they couldn’t get it done. Then we import and around and around we go.

  10. @ darthzaft

    ” It also mean that BNS yard has free capacity to build LMS2 ”


    BNS still has 4 more Gowinds to be completed, and i am hoping the last (6th) gowind (Mat Kilau) will be completed too with additional budgets approved in RMK13 2026-2030.

    BNS with the Gowinds in hand will be fully occupied up to 2028-29 at least.

    Then it will come to the ideal timeframe (2031-2040) to build replacements for KD Kasturi, KD Lekir, KD Jebat and KD Lekiu.

    Decide it now or starting 2026, then we can give a stable long term build future for BNS (at least to 2040).

    Selecting Arrowhead 140 Frigate design for KD Kasturi, KD Lekir, KD Jebat and KD Lekiu will be the best compromise between size, low cost, performance and capability. In our region, Indonesia and Singapore has chosen the design for their Fregat merah Putih and MRCV projects. New Zealand is also a big possibility to go for the Arrowhead 140 design.

    A future surface force led by 6x Gowind and 4x Arrowhead 140 frigates will give TLDM a very capable force that will be capable of handling multiple mission scenarios.

  11. @Zaft
    Im hoping they will Uturn their decision to cancel 6th unit and reinsert it back after LCS1 has cleared the line. Then LMS2 can follow after LCS6.

  12. @ joe

    Most reporters have zero understanding about building ships.

    The ship will be launched into water. At that stage it will still be mostly unfinished so no trials can be logically done. Then it will be alongside for further fitting out for 22 months (as per article). Trials will only be conducted after that, just before handing over to TLDM.

    LMS2 if wanted needs to be decided and paid for before 2025. 6th Gowind will only realistically be considered after at least a few gowinds is in the water and people trust to BNS is restored.

    I am not for LMS2 (preferring my smaller LMS-X concept, it would be a much more multi role ship than a corvette, able to take on patrols in shallow and narrow ESSCOM waters like the vospers can while also capable working offshore in bad sea state conditions) but am fully for the 6th Gowind to be paid for even if it is over thr original allocated budget.

  13. “Selecting Arrowhead 140 Frigate design”
    The 15to5Plan does not have a requirement for larger frigates. Right now the next is either LMS2 or MRSS to proceed.

  14. 15 to 5 plan is dodo anyway.

    There is no LMS Corvette requirement in original 15 to 5 plan also.

    Original 15 to 5 plan

    For example currently there is no requirement to build 12 more NGPVs. OPVs if build should be for APMM anyway. LMS which is supposed to be small multi-role ships that can do tasks as diverse as minehunting and hydrographic survey now morphed into single role corvettes as big as KD Kasturi and KD Lekir.

    So what ships that will do minehunting and hydrographic survey if LMS is a full blown traditional corvette?

    Also there is no way a second batch of Gowinds would be bought with all the issues it has. Future needs, to operate unmanned systems means that available space on board the Gowinds are too small to sustain UAS/USV/UUV operations. A reason why RSN did not buy additional 3200 ton formidable-class frigates, but buying 6000+ ton MRCV that is based on Iver Huitfeldt / Arrowhead 140 frigate that can operate various unmanned systems.

    2031-35 is the time to replace KD Kasturi and KD Lekir, as they are approaching 50 years old then. 2036-40 would be time to replace KD Lekiu and KD Jebat, which at that time will be 35+ years old with no major SLEP or upgrades done to them.

  15. … – ”15 to 5 plan is dodo anyway.”

    Sounds familiar that. As I never tire of pointing out; it’s been dead for years now and when it was introduced nobody was under any illusions that it would actually be followed through [same with the CAP 55 and the army equivalent]. It’s politically expedient to officially stick to it though; approved by the politicians and there is no other plan which has been officially approved off or which can be implemented on account of erratic funding.

  16. … โ€œThere is no LMS Corvette requirement in original 15 to 5 plan alsoโ€

    Well I could be wrong but I was under the distinct impression that there was provision for a class of corvette sized vessels [mind you that a corvette in one navy could be a frigate in another – the Kasturis were โ€˜mini-frigatesโ€ before being classed โ€œcorvettesโ€ and some corvettes are more heavily armed than frigates] designated the LMS. Also note that in this case there was a political/bureaucratic angle in designating the Kedahs โ€˜NGOPVsโ€™.

    … – โ€œ OPVs if build should be for APMM anywayโ€

    The RMN has no requirement for OPVs; itโ€™s unlikely to have a requirement for OPVs anytime soon and the 15/5 did not include OPVs; anymore than it has plans for a 18,000 tonne cruiser. What it did include was a follow on Barch of Kedahs but they were intended to be fully armed and this despite their NGOPV designation were not intended to be operated as OPVs per see.

    All this has been discussed before and is really moot as the chances of follow on Kedahs being acquired in the future are as likely as the the Popular Front For The Liberation of Palestine – General Command parading in Haifa’s High street or pygmies being found in Lake Gardens.

    … – โ€œSo what ships that will do minehunting and hydrographic surveyโ€

    Survey work is something which will be privatised. Not out of choice but sheer necessity. MCM, sad state of affairs given at one point we had the most capable MCMV fleet in the region. I remover a ADJ 1987/1988 editorial which mentioned us having superior MCMVs compared to the USN. Not far fetched as during that period the USN relied on helos for MCM and had wooden hulled decades old minesweepers.

    … – โ€œthe Gowinds are too small to sustain UAS/USV/UUV operationsโ€

    They can accommodate a Scaneagle sized UAS and initially that was the plan; as has been discussed previously. For some apparent reason which has nothing to do with the LCS being – supposedly – too small for a UAS; the plan was ditched as was announced by the RMN head. Mind you the RSNโ€™s Victory class operates Scaneagles from their quarter deck.

    Also, even if the LCS was large enough would there be a requirement to equip it with USVs and UUVs? Now I see the value in having both and in the need for certain ships to be equipped with both but a LCS or a frontline combatant?

  17. Zaft – โ€œIf not mistaken weapon integration is done when are launch launchedโ€

    You are mistaken. If certification and then integration was performed โ€œwhen are launch launchedโ€ it would lead to a long delay as certification and integration can be a long process. Itโ€™s one of the first things to be performed or almost concurrently with the actual build.

    Zaft – โ€œbut then we would merry go round again with BNS in debt, skilled workers left, then we give them another contract down the lines and they couldnโ€™t get it doneโ€

    Isnโ€™t written in stone. If the yard was fully vetted under apolitical oversight; if it was given a realistic schedule and if nobody interferes; no reason why a locally build LMS Batch 2 will be a repeat of anything. Personally Iโ€™d rather have it constructed abroad but itโ€™s not because of the actual ability of a local yard.

    Zaft – โ€œโ€ It also mean that BNS yard has free capacity to build LMS2โ€œ

    If youโ€™ve been to BNS or viewed it from a ferry youโ€™d know that itโ€™s actual โ€œwork spaceโ€ is not that large. It also does not have a surplus of trained manpower.

    Chop – โ€œMany more I know, but after listing above I think we started to see some improvementsโ€

    Given the length of the coastline; the size of the EEZ and territorial waters; all weโ€™ve done to date is still a โ€œlittle but not enough of anythingโ€. The trick is consistency; to stay the course and not have any delays or major shifts in plans or policy. We also have to look beyond the hardware; all or almost all of the actual hardware has to be โ€œfusedโ€ together; i.e. a RMAF MPA able to share stuff with a RMN ship or a MMEA ship being able to receive time sensitive intel/data from a RMAF UAS.

    Anon – โ€œIts a good start for this year perhapsโ€

    Wish I was as sanguine.

    … – โ€œships are regularly launched even when they are not yet fully completedโ€

    I was under the impression that ships are almost always launched when not fully completed. The next step after launching would be actual completion; followed by yard/builderโ€™s trials before being physically handed over to the end user whom then assumes full responsibility and ownership for the ship even whilst itโ€™s still under a period of warranty.

  18. “15 to 5 plan is dodo anyway.”
    “There is no LMS Corvette requirement”
    The Plan laid out 18 LMS of which 4 is accounted, but it did not say whether it can or cannot be a corvette sized ship. The nomenclature itself is also debatable, what is a corvette to you may not be for another. It may appear to be a singular class of ships but to TLDM it could be ships of different sizes & makes outfitted to perform different roles as was envisioned, but still under the umbrella called ‘LMS’.

    Th Arrowhead140, if TLDM sees a need, would likely come under the ‘LCS’ category in the Plan but if its too large a size & tonnage compared to Maharajalelas it can be called to question how its justified to be called an LCS too, otherwise it has to be a level where the Govt are complicit with such deception too (like how the Japan Govt & JMSDF are stretching all nomenclature definition calling Izumo class a ‘destroyer’).

    The Plan has deviated quite a lot from its inception that one can say its a different direction, but for new builds its the only one approved for TLDM to move ahead, and so far they are sticking to the Plan, until such when to call a spade a spade TLDM proposes a new more viable & real plan to replace 15-to-5 (so why dont they?). I see the backroom job of relifing old ships more towards supporting the Plan rather than being part of it and their short extended service life seems to indicate this.

  19. They cannot completely change the RMN plan as it is part of the DWP 19, what they are doing is realignment of the plan. Which to me means that it is still 15 to 5 but with some realignment to the priorities.

    They can do a realignment as there is the half term review of the DWP being conducted now.

  20. @ azlan

    “I was under the impression that ships are almost always launched when not fully completed”

    Ships are usually launched when they are at a stage where the hull can be afloat on the water on its own. Clearly KD Maharaja Lela condition in 2017 was not, so that “launch” with just water sprayed on the hull is not a launch in normal shipbuilding sense.

    General shipbuilding steps
    – steel cutting
    – keel laying (start of ship building)
    – launch (floating on water)
    – fitting out
    – trials
    – handover to customer / commissioning (usually its done together, sometimes another official commissioning ceremony is held)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.