Lipan Bara Upgraded With Nav Equipment

SHAH ALAM: Lipan Bara upgraded with navigation equipment. The Lipan Bara high mobility armoured vehicle with the 5 Kor Armor DiRaja (5 KAD) has been upgraded with a tactical navigation equipment manufactured by its OEM DRB-HICOM Defence Technologies Sdn Bhd (Deftech). The 5 KAD Facebook page posted on March 16 announced the handover of the equipment by Deftech officials at the unit’s camp in Kota Belud, Sabah. 5 KAD is currently the sole operator of the Lipan Bara HMAV.

Soldiers from 5 KAD getting familiar with the tactical nav equipment. 5 KAD

PENERIMAAN SET TACTICAL NAVIGATION AV4 LIPAN BARA.
16 Mac 2021, 5 KAD, Kota Belud – Pasukan telah melaksanakan serah terima Tactical Navigation (TACNAV) bersama wakil DEFTECH, Lt Kol Bakhtiar Nor bin Md Alias (B) di Garaj Kenderaan A pasukan.
Disamping itu juga wakil DEFTECH telah melaksanakan Refresher Class bagi 28 anggota krew bagi memastikan ianya boleh dikendalikan dengan baik ketika melaksanakan sesuatu operasi.
Diharapkan agar aset ini dapat dimanfaatkan sebaik mungkin dalam operasi dan latihan bagi meningkatkan keupayaan pasukan serta keupayaan krew dalam pengendalian aset yang telah dipertanggungjawabkan kepada pasukan secara maksimum seperti yang terdapat di dalam Perintah Ulung PTD ke-28 iaitu Tonggak Pertama – Kelangsungan Misi dan Kesiagaan.

Installing the tac nav equipment in the vehicle

It is likely that the navigation equipment are not part of the original order for 20 Lipan Baras, purchased in 2015 for RM140.98 million. Malaysian Defence was previously told that the navigation equipment/BMS was indigenously developed by Deftech subsidiary, Deftech Systems Integration Sdn Bhd.
Getting ready to learn the new equipment.

The company had previously proposed the same equipment for Army vehicles to allow seamless command and control of the units not equipped with similar capability. It is unclear whether the latest development is the precursor for that move though. From the pictures it appears that the tablet sized interface of the navigation equipment could be installed on the vehicle and also carried by the leader of the dismounts.

–Malaysian Defence

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

Share
About Marhalim Abas 1512 Articles
Shah Alam

10 Comments

  1. Does this tactical navigation thing have functions like a BMS where everyone or the commander can see the location of every unit?

  2. Luqnam – “Does this tactical navigation thing have functions like a BMS”

    At the very least it will show the location of every vehicle in the squadron. Same like the TacNav system on Adnan. The downside is it’s GPS based so it’s not passive and can be jammed.

  3. A whooping 7 mil per vehicle !
    Astonishing when the selling price in the home country is a mere 2 mil apiece.

  4. To get a true picture we need a complete breakdown. We need to determine how much DEFTECH had to pay the OEM to have assemble/modify the vehicle here; what if any modifications were made; was there a spares and training package; etc.

    I have no doubt it would have been considerably cheaper to have bought them direct from the OEM without going via DEFTECH and having them modified here (due to our self defeating defence policy).

  5. @Mike
    It was pointed out previously that the pricetag was grossly expensive, however it could have included the KD assembly line setup cost (which isn’t cheap!), customisations, etc so unless we know either that or the actual per unit cost, its not easily ascertain if the actual unit price is THAT expensive or not.

  6. Malaysia defence player should aware that there is ICP Program ( Industrial Collaboration Program) for the government procurement more than RM100 mill.
    Most of the people are lack of awareness what is the aspiration behind the ICP.

    The ICP covered various areas including Malaysia Local Packages, Transfer of Technology up tonTRL9, R&D&C, Human Capital Development, etc. IPR (Intellectual Property Right) , job creation, creation of business opportunities are also part of the project.

    For those who requested for detailed breakdown, the Government policy is to look at activities that add value to a procurement made by the Government of Malaysia. Believed if we are looking at the positive impact, and high impact ICP which benefited Malaysia Government and Malaysians, then definitely we would like to have local company to have our Malaysia projects, instead of giving it direct to the OEMs.

    Anyway, this is just my 2 cents opinion.

    Tq Marhalim. Hope one fine day, we can have a coffee session.

  7. This whole business of a involving local companies as go betweens was intended to ensure that it wasn’t only the foreign OEMs which would benefit. According to the plan; local companies would benefit from ToTs and offsets; local jobs would be created, etc – resulting in long term tangible benefits for the nation.

    So went the plan – the reality turned out very differently. The practice of having local companies as go between has been a huge drain on resources; to the detriment of the armed services and taxpayer.

    The bulk of local companies have yet to offer any added value by making the transition from a go between to something else. The bulk of local companies merely keep doing the same thing over and over again and are paid for doing so.

    The Korean training ships and the Little Birds are merely 2 examples of local companies which were paid taxpayer ringgit for services rendered but failed to perform. Take the Light Guns; ADS as the go between handled the programme. It took delivery of the guns in kit form, assembled them and delivered them. Revenues gained benefits the company but how does it benefit the country?

    SME has been licensed manufacturing/assembling ammo for years but it has yet to transition to anything else. It’s reached a stage where where the lack of economics of scale and the fact that all the raw compliments needed have to be ordered from abroad and paid in hard foreign currency; where it’s cheaper to source ammo from abroad. Yet people are still taken in by the “self sufficiency” delusion.

    The interests of the armed services and the taxpayer must always that precedence over the local industry. Spoon feeding or granting local companies a license to make money does not equate with enabling actual long term tangible benefits for the country

  8. @Heiden
    What happen with defence industry mirrors the fallacy of our local automotive industry.

    We set it up to prioritise local companies & brands thereby disqualifying foreign direct involvement or via punitive taxation. All in the hopes that we can ‘force’ buyers to ‘choose’ local.

    What really happen is the artificial inflation of prices to cater for local involvement; a Civic here cost 20-30% higher than elsewhere if we’re to buy direct and that with inferior specs. Decades of supporting the local brands and still end up doing rebadges with no real local successes. At the end, taxpayers pays the higher prices, buyers don’t get the products they deserve, local industry doesn’t really benefit, and only the cronies became rich.

    The local APC makers can gloss over AV4 and HMAV calling it ‘local product’ but we know better. Why pay more for a rebadge when direct buys are cheaper and probably better?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*