SHAH ALAM: Days after MRSS on The Horizon posting, I received three comments asking me to check out a report by Jakarta Post that PT Pal will be signing the contract for the ship, this August.
I am unable to post the report here, unfortunately, as it is protected by a paywall and the free version only gave one paragraph which did not mentioned anything on the MRSS.
Anyhow, the report datelined Feb 4. from Surabaya mainly quoted PT Pal CEO M. Firmansyah Arifin on developments of the shipyard. Only at the very last, he spoke about the MRSS and said that the contract will be signed in August.
He also said that the MRSS will be similar to the Indonesian Makassar class LPD and the Philippines SSV, though it will be bigger and fully armed. Basically, it’s the same statement, he had been quoted before apart from the August date for the contract signing.
It appears that as usual, the other side seemed to know more about the contract than even RMN Chief Admiral Tan Sri Kamarulzaman Badaruddin.
When I met the Admiral on Thursday he explained that when he tweeted about the MRSS, he was not implying that “the contract is imminent”.
The national news agency, Bernama, also followed up on the tweet which led to a story in a Malaysian news portal that a multi-billion deal was imminent, which Kamarulzaman said was completely inaccurate.
“The minister was just giving his endorsement that the MRSS will be the next RMN project after the LMS“, he added. The endorsement means that now funding for the project could be secured if funds is available.
Asked whether the design will be the same as the Makassar class or the SSV, Kamarulzaman said it will be a different design.
On the cost, Kamarulzaman gave a figure that the RMN was looking at, which seemed to indicate that it will be a different design that the Makassar or the SSV. Based on the figure, it’s likely that the RMN among others want a much higher damage control standard.
Since they are still figuring out the contract, I will not publish the figure quoted by the RMN Chief so as to give them the leeway in the continuing negotiations.
So is a contract imminent? No, based on the conversation with Kamarulzaman. Further to that I had also reach out to other officials at the Defence Ministry, for a better idea on the project and the likelyhood of a contract. I was hoping for more information before writing a post but the story from Surabaya forced me to write about the issue sooner rather than later. I am not trying to discredit the report but I believed that I had to clarify the issue. So what is behind the reports from Indonesia about the MRSS then. I have no idea!
And if not this August when then? A more reasonable timeline will be 12 months from now, according to my sources. And even that will depend on various factors.
* the post has been updated for clarity.
— Malaysian Defence
If you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment
View Comments (28)
just Indonesia and their media game. hopefully we can see the design soon and also the budget for MRSS.
" It’s likely that the RMN want a much higher damage control standard."
can someone help me explaining what is higher damage control standard means in the MRSS? i dont understand.
Reply
Put it simply, it will be much more expensive than the Makassar or SSV. The SSV costs US$35 million, if I recall correctly.
Tbh I'm so hoping the rmn won't choose the pt pal proposal. Not only that it uses commercial built spec, it is also derived ferry design
zack,
More watertight compartments, more bulkheads, harder or higher grade steel, a higher spec fire suppression system, etc, etc.
People often say the Makassar is ''affordable'' citing what others paid for theirs but it depends totally on what the customer specifies for the ship. A good example is if a customer wanted Scorpenes but instead of props specified pumpjet propulsion and wanted the hull to have a similar level to USN SUBSAFE standards then this Scorpene would probably cost 3 times more what others paid.
Alex,
Commercial build specs doesn't automatically mean a ship is inferior
or is lacking any military spec features. If you think about it, some ships build to commercial standards are actually subjected to more stress than military ships build to military standards, e.g. oil & gas ships, drilling ships, etc. Also, HMS Ocean and several other ships were built to commercial standards. A ship built to commercial standards can later be re-registered.
Well, type 071 is better looking than makassar class.
It's of profound unimportance which is better looking. What's important is that whatever design we buy is built to specs specified by the RMN and not the industry. Getting the right trade off is the tricky part; if it's superflous for our needs by being too large and expensive to run [like the Dokdo and Mistral] it becomes a liability [like the RTN with the Chakri Naruebet] and if it's of the right tonnage but isn't fitted out for our needs then we don't get the needed capability.
thank you mr azlan for explaining. i think we better wait for the tender or spec from RMN. hopefully we can see other shipyard compete for the MRSS.
Slightly off topic, but what are problems of configuring catamarans for use as an MRSS ?
Is the 10th para trained in amphibious warfare? And what other units that can perform amphibious missions?
Reply
Yes they do, most of our infantry units are trained in amphibious warfare but its unlike the type trained by the US Marines. Its mostly involved riverine crossing though storming beaches exercise have been conducted but mostly small scale. Due to our terrain, its obvious that our soldiers need to be ready for such contingency.
I'm doubtful that we need a well deck, as our requirements are so different from Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines.
We are unlikely to ever need an amphibious landing capability, and even if we had one we would be hard pressed to protect it under combat conditions. Liken this to the discussions on why we aren't likely to need a large scale parachute assault force, and the challenges of escorting it and supporting it logistically. And the high cost of keeping up a level of readiness among all the moving parts across the 3 services.
Smaller scale amphibious operations are a different matter, in which case we don't need a well deck or even a very large vessel. And if we need a large logistics ship to move gear, then again we don't need a well deck and a direct replacement of the Indera Saktis would do.
Interesting
News said TNI is going to add their LPDs.
News also said this proposed LPD by PT Pal for RMN has 163 metres in length (dokdo 190 m). Looks like it is a mini dokdo already.
Is it coincidence? Will the new batch TNI's LPDs similar to the proposed LPD for RMN?
Reply
No idea