Jebat Batch 2 Mock-Up

KUALA LUMPUR: This is the mock-up for the Jebat batch 2 Frigate. Although the final details have not been signed off yet, the real ship would probably end up like this mock-up. Basically the hul and superstructure remained the same as the previous ships. Only a few modifications were made, of course, those that cannot be seen will remained hidden, like the interior of the cabins and arrangement of the machineries.

On the outside, the Seawolf will be completed by Raytheon Evolved Sea-Sparrow Missile (ESSM) of which the Mk48 vertical launcher will be sandwiched between the British made system. Tne new ships will also get a new radar, the Thales SMART 3D. Unlike the old Jebat and Lekiu, the new ships will be fitted with a towed array or variable depth sonar to enhance its ASW capabilities.

The ships are expected to be built in Labuan, much to the fear of BAE Systems, which is the main reason, they have not finished their negotiations yet. The builder wants the risk factor contingency written to the contract, increasing its price which the Government is baulking.

— Malaysian Defence

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

About Marhalim Abas 1631 Articles
Shah Alam


  1. Just curios and what will the lenght and tonnage of the Lekiu Batch 2 will be.
    From the mock up it looks like 12 ESSM. Will the MM40 be the Block 3 version. Don’t know why they are still sticking to the 30mm guns and instead should replace that with CIWS or even a RAM added to the ship.

  2. It will be slightly longer than both the Jebat and Lekiu (from memory they are about 107metres) to accommodate the towed sonar and the displacement should not be more than 2500 tonnes. You are right about the ESSM but the new ships are also to be fitted with around six or 12 VL Seawolf missiles. On the why they are not changing to CIWS and RAM, its more of a tradition and for brown water usage. RMN cannot be using those things on illegal trawlers or things like that. From what I heard the 30mm gun are probably the most used weapon on RMN ships bar none.

    Of course they could always used 50 caliber machine guns or sniper rifles for the same purpose but the RMN seemed to like 7.62mm machine guns more, so there.

    Take note apart from the MSI guns, RMN also used Emerlec 30 mm guns. Ooops before I forget, they also have the 30mm Oto Melara on the Kedah class PVS. All of these guns are fired from the CIC, most of the time although during enforcement missions it is fired locally from the deck.

  3. Having the 30mm is kind of over size for a illegal trawler and that function should be retain for the patrol boats. The frigate should be more for escorting large asset like the future LPD. Having CIWS will be the last point of defence against incoming missiles but nevertheless good to know they are retaining the seawolf.

    By the way will the ESSM be group together with the Seawolf or on a different section of the boat. Looking at the mock-up… not too sure if all can be place just behind the 57mm.

  4. 90 per cent of RMN duties are against illegal trawlers and such so the guns remain an essential part of the SOP. Patrol boats dont intimidate illegal trawlers anymore so a frigate or a corvette with big guns and bigger bullets are the sea equivalent of “Speak Softly but Carry A Big Stick!” As for the LPD it will be of the case for future.

    The missile launchers will be grouped together behind the 57mm gun. I believe the arrangement would be a six pack ESSM launcher on left and right and a six or eight silos for the Seawolf in the middle.

  5. The Batch 2s are to be equipped with a Rayheon MK56 VLS which is unable to accommodate a Seawolf missile. Besides, it wouldn’t make any sense to equip the Batch 2s with both the ESSM and Seawolf. With the MK41 VLS it would be possible to fit bot ESSM and Standards but I’m not sure about the MK56 VLS. If the Seawolf VLS was modular it would be possible to install ESSM on the Lekiu and Jebat and fit the Seawolf VLS on the NGOPVs but unfortunatly its not possible due to it being non-modular. I’m hoping the hangar will have a bit more space making it easier to perform maintanance on the Super Lynxs. In a perfect world, the Batch 2s would also be equipped with a RAM or Phalanx, but apart from the extra cost and redesigning of the ship, our threat enviroment doesn’t make it an urgency. [I could be wrong, perhaps the RMN specified a CIWS but were told the money wasn’t available] Only the Jap Kongos, Joreans KD 3s and German Sachsens have a RAM not even the Type 45s and the Dutch 7 Provinciens. Interesting enough, despite having a much bigger budget and more allowance to choose what the want, the RSN hasn’t equipped their Deltas with a CIWs, prefering to rely solely on the Aster and a soft kill option. But I suppose having a Phalanx or RAM becomes irrelevant due to the fact that both can tackle a high speed target like the Klub, Moskit or Brahmos.

  6. On the ESSM and Seawolf combo, It does not make sense to me also but when somebody with gold braids told me it is so, I keep my mouth shut long enough to ask another question! I believe as the saying goes the customer is always right. To me it would be better if only one missile system was selected — to me its obviously the Aster 30 but the MBDA rep told me they need a ship with at least 5000 tonnage to fit the Sylver launcher.

    Whether or not it will work (the ESSM and Seawolf combo ) of course is yet to be proven. I am not concerned about the modularity but a sense of dejavu. Back when they were commissioning the Jebat and Lekiu, they had so much trouble integrating the Seawolf with the NAutics CIC system that it took almost eight years to deliver the ships. That is one reason, I have stated publicly that I will wager RM50 that the first ship will only be commissioned in 2015 instead of the announced 2012 deadline announced by MINDEF.

    Anyway it is still a mock-up so they could always change the design before the contract is signed.

  7. On the RAM, it is supposed to be fitted but not equipped on the PVs, but since I have not seen any notice on the sale of such a system to Malaysia either via FMS or commercial sales, I doubt it is had been even tested on the two delivered PVs.

  8. As far as integration delays go, lets hope history doesn’t repeat itself as the RMN will be the launch custome for the CMS-1 combat management system on the Batch 2s. Malaysia already has a history of paying an arm and leg for integration. Thales was paid about $US60 million to be systems integrator for the MKMs. It would have smarter to go for the Super Hornet as all integration work has already been done and paid for by Uncle Sam, plus we would have got a platform and a range of air and ground ordnance that has actually been combat tested numerous times. If GAPU does end up with the Chinese KSH-1 or Buk-1M, costly integration to our present air network will also have to be done. Does anyone know if a successful Sea Skua launch has been carried out?

  9. I am veering off tangent, but since “F” mentioned about KS-1 and Buk M1, I am inclined to ask about GOM’s interest in the missile system.

    That I know, Buk M1-2 has not had much success in terms of sales, internationally. I understand that the GOM wants to begin to have a medium range SAM complex, but out of curiosity what is stopping GOM to purchase long range SAM complex like S-300 or the S-400 and bypass the need to have medium range SAMs ? Even Vietnam bought 2 battieries of S-300.

    There is a long list of customers having S-300 in their arsenal. Apart from Russia, I dont know any country deploying Buk M1.

    The other thing I am curious about is why does GOM source surface warships from UK alone ? We bought fighters from Russia, why is it that the Navy never even consider Russia as a source for our surface or sub surface fleet ?

  10. The Jan Tempur mentions Aster 15 as the missile system but everywhere else says ESSM. Which is it? I thought Aster was too expensive. And why do we need to be the guinea pig for the Type 45 CMS? Can’w we just stick with the NAUTIS?

  11. Lets pray the RMN never buys ‘Russian’. Its bad enough having to support 5 different combat systems, about a dozen different engines types, plus the many different sensors and electronics in service. As for gun calibres, the RMN has 100mm, 20mm, 30mm, 57mm, 40mm and 76mm. More than enough to keep the logistics and supply people busy.

    The Vietnamese probably decided to buy the S-300 because of the large PLAN presence near them. [about 40 PLAAF Flankers on Hainan alone]. Plus, the Vietnam already operates dozens of alerting radars and medium SAM batteries. GAPU on the other hand, has 2 Giraffes and will getting their EADS TRS-3Ds in 2008. For Malaysia, it would meke no sense at all to get a ‘triple digit’ SAM, the cash would be better spent on a medium range system. For starters, a passive alerting device, like ADADs, would be nice and very useful for Starburst and Igla units.

  12. The decision to have two different type of missiles (Aster 15/ESSM and Seawolf) may be due to a number of reasons.

    First is cost. Aster 15 is more expensive than Seawolf. According to Tempur, the configuration in Jebat 2 is 12 Aster and 12 Seawolf. The configuration is 3 Aster/ESSM + 6 Seawolf + 3 Aster/ESSM + 3 Aster/ESSM + 6 Seawolf + 3 Aster/ESSM. Supposed that we get all Aster then the missile number may be down to only 16 instead of 24!! So a basic rule of tumb says, more is better.

    Second is flexibility and cost effectiveness. Suppose the target is only UAV flying just beyond the range of gun but within the range of Seawolf and Aster/ESSM. If you only got Aster/ESSM you may have to think twice to shoot it down. It will be an overkill. You may want to save Aster/ESSM for something bigger like saturation attack of sea skimming supersonic missiles coming from different height and from different point of compass. But if you got Seawolf then it’s a different matter.

    Third is operationability. RMN has been familiar with Seawolf for many years now. Know its ability, strength, weaknesses and furthermore it is a combat proven system (remember Falkland?). As with Aster/ESSM it is a venture into uncharted waters. New training modules need to be written, new techniques need to be understood and applied, new standard operating procedures need to be written, tested and certified. It may take a few years before the system if fully understood and RMN really comfortable with it. Well, of course you make ask the french, the saudis, the dutch, the US and other aster/essm operators, but it will never be the same from having really using the system. It is just like driving a car. You may get all the training from a school driving instructor but when you are on your own it’s a different matter altogether.

    However what I don’t like about the Jebat 2 is that why put systems into a ship that by the time the ship is delivered (2012) the systems are already nearly compromised by the existing threat at the time. The costs is alos obscene to say the least!!. For example the radar. Why don’t we put phased array radar into the ship like what Singapore has done to their Formidable class (Herakles radar)?. Why Aster 15 not Aster 30?? If you want to have only 2 ships, it is money well spent to have 5000 tonne ones then only two 2500 tonnes. Let the OPV project being the “mini frigates”. They thrives in numbers (6+6). We want to buy 2 MPSS so lets built the surface projection forces around those MPSS. Having two 5000 tones ships equipped with Aster 30 may well pointed into that direction. Supported by the two Scorpenes, we may have a fully blue water navy.

  13. On the missile selection for the Batch 2, both of us (Tempur and MalaysianDefence) could be wrong or right! Since MINDEF have not signed off the design yet , all three missile systems or in combo is still in the running. I got my information on the ESSM/Seawolf combo direct, from a trusted source, so I reported it as that.

  14. Its good news to hear the government step to boost our navy. However my question is why such an acquisition is made not on open tender basis? I think the government should consider other options. since the navy is planning to acquire new logistic/landing platform in near future which DOKDO is being considered, it is wiser to choose a platform that will be more capable to escort this ship and to provide sufficient aerial defense for the fleet since most of the logistic/landing platform only be equipped with point defense or CIWS.
    The minister stated that the new landing platform will be used in humanitarian aid and as power projection in future which need a very capable escort group to provide protection for this vessel. So i believe that air defense frigate is more critical if the navy planned to acquire the landing platform. I’ve read a few articles on the net and magazines as well about the possible candidates for air defense missiles on batch 2 frigates which i think it doesn’t really matter which is chosen, what is more important is the platform itself and system on board.
    At cost of about GBP 700 million for half stealth frigates, the navy can get a better option than the BAE. For example the Moroccan ordered FREMM at cost of USD 710 million each. Should Malaysia follow the step, it will cost us about USD 1.42 billion for two frigates which about the same cost of acquiring BAE frigates but with a better platform,larger,more capable, and stealthier. FREMM of more than 5000 tonnes,for example is designed for multi-mission but the air defense version can be equipped with up to 32 air defense missiles which the Aster 30/15 is been chosen by the french navy. It means that there will be no additional cost of system integration since the french has done that. In the future should the navy planned to boost the amphibious assault ability, the land-attack version is available based on the same platform but of course with slightly different armaments. Another option that i think should be considered is the MEKO-D design,designed by the same consortium who designed our NGPV RMN MEKO-100. MEKO-D design is multi-mission platform, which has the combination of wide ranges of air defense missiles for point defense and for fleet air defense,anti surface and anti submarine with two helicopter for over the horizontal target acquisition and anti submarine warfare,twin torpedo launcher on each side of the vessel. This platform is smaller than the FREMM with about 3500 tonnes. The vessel is stealthy,and crew of 93 should be main contender for the new frigate. Honestly, i think the government should consider MEKO-D since i believe it has all the abilities needed for an air defense frigate and can perform multi-mission as well. These two options are equipped with 3-D phased-array radar for search and guidance which match the proven American AEGIS radar thus make them more suitable for future threat since the new frigates are expected to enter the service in 2013 or 2014 which i believe the design will be obsolete by the time they enter the service.
    One might ask why should we have such a very capable platform and who is the enemy we are going against. My answer is no matter who will we face we should arm ourselves with the best. Bear in mind, to secure peace is to prepare for war. Given the current situation, we cannot assume the friends we have today will be our friends in 20 years time. The is no certain what will happen in the future so we have to prepare to face the future.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.