KD Tun Razak and Lumut Naval Base

KUALA LUMPUR: Due to its late arrival, I was unable to cover the arrival of KD Tun Razak at Lumut on Friday. I am guessing however most are aware of the arrival of the second submarine of the Perdana Menteri-class.

The Star in its report on Saturday quoted the RMN chief as saying Speaking when receiving the submarine, Adm Abdul Aziz said the navy would not hesitate to take action against companies which leaked its secrets to the public.

He said the navy would recommend that the contracts of these companies, which have dealings with the navy, be cancelled or that legal action be taken against them.

Adm Abdul Aziz said that of late, there was a dangerous trend where information about the country’s strategic assets and sensitive information was made public via the Inter­net.

“Information about the submarines had also been purposely manipulated by certain parties for their own selfish reasons.”

Since I was not present at the PC I cannot say which company that is in danger of losing its contract for not being careful with their statements. As far as I know the only company that been issuing statements on RMN assets for the last three months is DCNS, the builder of two Perdana Menteri class submaines (though I am not suggesting that it was this company that Adm Aziz was referring too).

Although I was not in Lumut for the ceremony, linked below are pictures from the Lumut naval base, courtesy of a close friend. I hope no one will accuse me of making sensitive information open to the public as these images were taken from a ferry making its way to Pangkor Island. Hundreds of foreigners take the ferries to Pangkor as does thousands of locals on a daily basis….

–Malaysian Defence

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

Share
About Marhalim Abas 1718 Articles
Shah Alam

23 Comments

  1. Take what action? Lodge a police report? Cancel contracts? It can recommend the cancellation of a contract but that is under the purview of the MOD and MOF. Perhaps he’ll send a PASKAL team to hose down the offending persons.
    Perhaps the good admiral should ‘run silent, run deep’ given the controversies associated with these boats.
    Lest for example someone asks for reports concerning the ‘coordination activities’ of Perimekar S/B that warranted 114 Million Euros.

  2. On another note, is there any plan to increase the number of subs in the next RMK plus would they cancel project brave be resuscitated

    Marhalim: There was talk about getting more submarines for RMK12 but its a long shot….

  3. I can’t believe you would report that our subs are not operational. Reporting like this just gives strength to our enemies, who are legion and all servile to the Zionist Conspiracy(tm).

    We must adopt the North Korean model of responsible reporting.

    Maybe we should get Perimekar to coordinate a fix?

  4. More??? Impossible. How dare you repeat that treasonous slander about the over priced missiles and torpedoes!

    All hail the Beloved Leader, and his Wife.

  5. Which action should be taken against Marhalim?
    1) ISA, claim him as JI follower
    2) Official Secrets Act, he leaked ‘secret’ information
    3) Inciting Hatred/Slander
    4) Shoot him, claim that he attacked police first (with parang of course)

    Waiting for the ‘more to come’ part.. Good hunting.

  6. I, personally believe what the Admiral tried to say is those people who are not responsible like the one in the opposition (please note the words personally), will manipulated the matter regarding the submarine for their own political purposes. I suppose that the problem regarding the sub have been resolved.

  7. GGK,
    ‘Secrets’ and especially ‘deception’ apply to all kinds of warfare. The profound difference with undersea warfare I think the stealthy element involved.

  8. many years ago, when the subs were an ‘impian’ I suggested that our subs be berthed in big sheds rather than tied alongside. It was a cheaper solution than a submarine pen. I also suggested building fibreglass dummies that we can be towed about. Classic maskirovka steps that would not break the bank. I got really dirty looks from the flag officers.

    Simon

  9. Lets hear the explanation fron the chief of navy…

    Thanks to standupper for posting this to mymil.

    THE CHIEF OF NAVY CLARIFIES ON THE STATES OF
    SUBMARINE

    1. Lately there has been a spate of articles in the media reporting the ‘status’ of the Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN) submarines. Two reports in particular highlighted purported major defects in the nation’s first submarine, the KD TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN (KD TAR) that supposedly rendered it unable to dive. The RMN however regrets that these reports have been highly inaccurate and misleading resulting in the public being grossly misinformed of the actual status of the KD TAR. Based on the articles published in the media as mentioned above, the RMN wishes to state the following:

    a. Prior to arriving safely in Kota Kinabalu on 17 September 2009, the KD TAR
    had sailed approximately 8300 nautical miles with 31 days submerged out of the 43 days spent at sea. As such, the question of “Initial Operational Capability” or being “declared fully operational” does not arise as the submarine would not have completed the journey safely if it was not fully operational.

    b. At no point in time from the date of Physical Handover has the safety of both submarines and their crews been compromised by any defects on board. A submarine isconstantly subjected to, and operates in an extremely hostile and harsh environment which necessitates constant monitoring, maintenance and rectification of the systems and equipment on board. Inadvertently, as in any submarine in the world, some equipment or systems can and will fail or be degraded in performance. The KD TAR did encounter some defects and shortcomings but at no time did any of these defects endanger the crew or submarine to the extent of rendering it unable to dive, as claimed by the media. The RMN has developed a very rigorous and thorough safety inspection, appraisal and verification process, similar or even more stringent to that of aircraft safety process, to
    certify a submarine ‘safe- to-dive’ before it is allowed to embark on any mission.

    c. Similar to an aircraft, any submarine will have to undergo compulsory scheduled maintenance after a specified period of operations. These scheduled maintenance periods have been planned in advance to fit into the operational cycle of the submarines. The KD TAR has undergone, as scheduled, several of those maintenance periods since returning to Malaysia. Thus the statement “In February, The Paper That Cares reported that KD Tunku Abdul Rahman suffered a
    technical defect that prevented it from diving for three months.” is untrue as the KD TAR had in fact been undergoing its scheduled maintenance period during that period.

    d. The statement: “Since then, the submarine has remained at the naval base unfixed.”, is also irresponsible and conjures up an image of the submarine lying idle at the the naval base, unattended to and crippled. The fact is that the submarines, like all RMN surface ships, are manned 24 hours a day, everyday and all defects, however small or insignificant are acted on immediately. However, in this case the statement is untrue as the KD TAR has in fact been operational, a fact that the Chief of Defence Forces can attest to when he dived with the submarine during her operations in the South China Sea on 5 – 8 March 2010. Lately, the submarine had also successfully carried out a test firing of a mock-up missile during operations in the South China Sea.

    e. The statement by the same paper that “the arrival of the second Perdana Menteri-class submarine KD TUN RAZAK, on July 2, was a godsend for the crew of its sister ship, KD TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN. The crew is expected to take over the second submarine during its mandatory tropical water trial.” is false as the crew of any vessel, be it a surface ship and more so a submarine, cannot and do not simply ‘take over’ another vessel. The question of the the KD TAR crew losing their submariners rating if they remained on land as claimed by the article does not arise because, as has been explained above, the submarine has remained operational. However, in the unlikely event that the submarine is indeed rendered un-operational for an extended period, the crew will still be able to maintain currency via simulator training which is available at the Submarine Training Centre at the Submarine Base.

  10. the one that was thought as unserviceable and always seen floating without being attended by engineers to rectify the problem of cannot dive must be the fibreglass dummy one as recommended by you many years ago… well, at least even with the dirty looks from the flag officers given to you, deep in their hearts, they were listening to your suggestion….

  11. ”Lately, the submarine had also successfully carried out a test firing of a mock-up missile during operations in the South China Sea.”

    What does this mean? I known what a simulated nissile drill is but what does a test firing of a mock-up missile” mean? There is no need for any fibre glass subs for maskirovka as the 2 Zwaardis, not being worth much at present would probably do the job.

  12. The RDM boats dah scrap kan?
    Aha….they must have loaded the inert training round and fired it out the tube. This is possible as most shots are fired with compressed air vis ‘swim out’. RMN sets new standards of realism in drill by actually punching the big red button and sending a fish out the tube.
    I hope like training torps that the dummy is reusable. It would be terrible if MBDA sez…”Aiyoh! You were not meant to shoot it lah!”
    Anyway, MBDA is still in the shit for the Sea Rock fiasco.

    Simon

    Marhalim: yes the RDM boats had been scrapped already. The Ducth feared that PSC would sell it to the Chinese!

  13. For those here who are unaware of it, Dzirhan Mahadzir has written some very interesting posts in the ‘Latest Malaysia Military News’ section on the ‘militarynuts’ forum.

    In ‘militarynuts’ there is also an interesting thread – ‘Malaysia vs Singapore’. Written by a certain ‘grunt’, the thread contains a well thought out comparison and analysis of how the MAF compares to its neighbours, pacticularly Singapore off course [who else?]. The different pargraphs each contain the condescending title ‘Common Malaysian Illusions’ [lest we forget, unlike the Singaporeans who have their feet firmly on the ground and who know best, Malaysians live in a world of illusion with regards to defence]. The thread also mention several key problems effecting the MAF – political inteference, the policy of buying from too many sources, inadequate defence budget, etc.
    ‘Grunt’ also mentions the bilateral problems faced by Malaysia and Indonesia and of course he mentions ‘I’m sure the Malaysians given their past behaviour had a part to play in this”…. perhaps in reference to Pulau Batu Putih [opps sorry it’s Pedro Blanca!!] Well researched and back up by firm data and sources, the thread is let down by its
    pro-Singapore stance and lack of objectivity in certain areas.

  14. So the saga of the Zawaardis and Tigerhaai has finally ended….. At least there’s more berthing space at Lumut now.

    There was mention somewhere of 40 Exocets and 30 Blacksharks [overpriced]being ordered but the figures don’t make sense. The number of torps sounds about right but 40 missiles? Each boat at the most I think will carry no more than 3-4 missiles at the most. Any indications that mines have or are going to be ordered?

  15. I can’t see why more MM-40s would be bought unless of course for war reserves which is unlikely. The IN bought less than 40 SM-39s for its 6 Scorpene’s.

  16. On page 656 on the Malaysian section of ‘militaryphotos’ there are photos of thermals being issued for the Igla. Wonder if these were issued recently or were supplied as part of the original order.

  17. What do all of you think about the possibility of further enhancement in defense ties with the PR’s China. Recently, the armed forces had tested the FN-6 VSHORAD and give their thumb up and will look forward for more weaponry from china as it is slightly cheaper than those western-made weaponry.

  18. Syameer, I think the PRC has been pushing very hard for defence sales to Malaysia. They even went so far as to offer a few years ago, licensed production of the FN-6 if Malaysia bought the KS-1 medium range missile. Whether or not the top brass is keen on buying more ‘Made in China’ is something we have to wait and see.

  19. China has a test area against modern technology next door in Afghanistan. Discreetly supply some weaponary to the talibans for testing (with full denialability prepared) against western aircraft/leopard/patria/etc etc. If successful, imagine the export possibility!

  20. cheekucai, have you got any online sources for this, that China is passing goodies to the Talibs? China has always been very wary of the Talibs as it is worried about extremism being passed on to the Uighurs in Tukerstan or what Beijing calls Xinjiang.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*