SHAH ALAM: MUH ready to roll. As pointed in an earlier article, RMN’s Maritime Utility Helicopters (MUH) – Leonardo AW139 twin engine helicopters are expected home soon.
A delegation from the Defence Ministry, RMN and the other officials visited Leonardo Helicopters in Vergiate, Italy on Nov. 10, RMN said in a release. The visit wa part of the Project Management Review conducted ahead of the pre-delivery inspection set to take place soon.
Basically the two helicopters scheduled for delivery late this year or early next year are ready to go as the ministry secretary-general and the RMN chief Admiral Reza Sany even took a ride on one of them (above).
MESYUARAT PROJECT MANAGEMENT REVIEW KETIGA PEROLEHAN HOM TLDM
VERGIATE, 10 Nov: Mesyuarat Project Management Review (PMR) Ketiga kontrak perolehan tiga buah Helikopter Operasi Maritim (HOM) TLDM telah diadakan hari ini bertempat di premis Leonardo Helicopter di Vergiate, Itali. Mesyuarat dipengerusikan oleh YBhg Dato’ Seri Muez bin Abd Aziz, Ketua Setiausaha Kementerian Pertahanan Malaysia bagi membincangkan status pembinaan dan kemajuan projek bagi HOM TLDM dari jenis AW139 yang dijangka akan memasuki perkhidmatan TLDM pada suku tahun kedua 2022. Turut hadir YBhg Laksamana Tan Sri Mohd Reza bin Mohd Sany, Panglima Tentera Laut.
Mesyuarat turut dihadiri wakil dari Kementerian Kewangan, Datin Rashidah binti Mohd Sies, Timbalan Ketua Setiausaha Perbendaharaan (Pengurusan), Laksamana Muda Dato’ Roslan bin Mohd Yunus, Panglima Wilayah Laut 2 dan Laksamana Pertama Ahmad Shafirudin bin Abu Bakar, Panglima Udara TLDM.
Delegasi dibawa melihat sendiri proses pemasangan helikopter dengan lebih dekat di final assembly line.
Delegasi turut berpeluang untuk mengikuti penerbangan bagi dua buah HOM yang telah sedia untuk menjalani fasa Pre-Delivery Inspection (PDI) dalam masa terdekat.
Artikel dan foto: Pasukan Projek HOM TLDM
From the pictures, the helicopters paint looked more appealing that the ones used by the CGI published by Galaxy Aerospace which won the tender.
The helicopters also looked very much like the Italian Air Force AW139s apart from the wire cutters, of course.
If you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment
— Malaysian Defence
Well now. Didn’t I say that some of our “hardworking officials” got their “well deserved” taxpayer-paid holiday to Italy? Again I was proven correct.
I heard that autumn & winter months in Arizona is particularly nice to visit as well.
Good to see something going in the right direction for the armed force.
Curious to know why our military helicopter does not have a chaff flare dispenser installed on them? Cost factor or because it was never in their requirement list?
Looks like a waste of money to me….a trip to Italy just for a photo opportunity. Really?
Sure enough RMN going to get their AW139 first before the MD530G
“Again I was proven correct”
That was to be expected even for many of the purchases we did before if not the Chief of the Navy or other high ranking officials, other government officials (military and civilians) would go. Nothing new, nothing to be surprised nor nothing to be proven correct. Just a normal routine ‘in the office’.
“cost factor or because it was never in their requirement list”
It wasn’t specified because of costs factors, plus the general threat environment in which we factor that there is little chance of them actually being under threat. The idea being if that something were to break out there would be time during the period before hostilties to equip them.
Its usually the cost factor as it will usually be in the requirements but will be listed as fitted for not equipped. The A400Ms are also not equipped with them
Yes and no. This things are always in written into the contracts, documentations need to be signed for the vendor to paid and this must done at the location of where the equipment is manufactured. Otherwise those signing them can be charged with CBT. Most other countries do it but they tend to shy away from publicising them.
The F-5s and Skyhawks were also never fitted with them.
If one goes for the whole works it can add as much as 15-2O percent of the contract value. A MAWS to alert the pilot he has been fired upon, from which direction and what is the nature of the threat. Chaff and flares to deal with the threat and a EW suite to jam the seekers of radar guided missiles. Aa it stands most aircraft are not equiped to deal with the threat posed by beam riders.
On top of that is the costs associated with maintaning and storing the equipment.
“Well now. Didn’t I say that some of our “hardworking officials” got their “well deserved” taxpayer-paid holiday to Italy? Again I was proven correct.” we paid millions and yet you expect officials dont go and inspect and sign hand over documents ?
Mofaz – “we paid millions and yet you expect officials dont go and inspect and sign hand over documents ?”
In his worldview officials only go on such trips for the leisure aspects with work being a facade. Then again, he’s “right again” as he points out or thinks …
Note however that at times stuff is oficially handed over to the Ambassador or another reprenstative who is already there.
Well there are some that thought our officials will be magnanimous and not take the opportunity,
“A high ranking member of the MAF doesn’t necessarily have to travel to the U S. for the handover. The handover can be conducted with the Amvassador or even the DA, with the actual ceremony done here”
“The handover will probably be to the DA or an embassy official with the official inducting ceremony here – common practice.”
In reply to you; “The handover will probably be to the DA or an embassy official with the official inducting ceremony here – common practice.” If these can be done by officials already there…
Simplistically put it, kinda ironic to invest in multi-million ringgit hardware only to ignore the one thing which is needed to keep them flying. Ya, our threat environment in the region does not call for it. Just look at the ASEAN EC725 operators, I have only seen photo of the Thailand helo with the chaff dispenser mounted. On the A400M, was once pointed to me the locations of these chaff flare outlets on the aircraft but I never ask if the dispensers were installed. At my level of relationship with them, the most I’ll get would be a PR level answer.
“Well there are some that thought our officials will be magnanimous and not take the opportunity”
There are some who also assume this will always be the case. Also, there is the possibility that the working trip was sponsored by the OEM -it has happened before.
Another factor is that such trips are placed under greater scrutiny now and have tight schedules. Not as if it’s a month long or even a couple of weeks trip.
Luqman – “Nothing new, nothing to be surprised nor nothing to be proven correct”
Indeed, it’s not as if it’s something new or that the trip is a leisure trip under the facade of offcial business and it’s not as if we’re the only ones or one of the few to do it.
The DAS suite on the A400Ms are fitted of course but not the chaff and flare dispenser as well as any DIRCM turrets…AFAIK none of the Thai helos are fitted with the chaff and flare dispensers as well. AFAIK in the region, only Singapore fitted their helos – combat ones – with a comprehensive DAS suite though they also sometimes don’t fly them with the chaff and flares as well.
As long as they are already integrated and are ‘fitted for’ it won’t take long to install them. The problem is how long i
it will take to be produced and delivered. The Cougars have the box or mounting for the EW system on the tail boom so installing it is not an issue, once it actually arrives.
For most air arms that don’t regularly deploy to war zones it’s about taking the gamble of not having them until absolutely needed and hoping it won’t be a wrong decision.
The RTAF did lose a F-B [former RMAF example] to a Laotian SA-7 in 1987/88. During the Kargil war the IAF was in the position of having its fighters but not its ground attack fighters fitted with defensive aids.
“There are some who also assume this will always be the case.”
So don’t assume it is “common practice”. Our “hardworking” officials will always jump at the opportunity for a paid trip. That is fact. So stop defending them.
“working trip was sponsored by the OEM”
If its a technical team going there for training on operations, maintenance, etc, and final buyoff, fine. But is this it? Why can’t the local official signoff if its “common practice”?
Well if you think our “hardworking” officials are there just for work, that’s up to you. All those working visits, study trips, lawatan sambil belajars must have done a heck lot of good for the country which we don’t see.
Even with the USAF and others, the bulk of transports are not fitted with defensive aids. Mainly the ones which operate/deploy in conflict zones where there’s a threat.
Fitting a MAWS, EW suite and dispenser , not to mention a defence against beam riders which most aircraft are still vulnerable to, sognificantly adds to the cost.
“Our “hardworking” officials will always jump at the opportunity for a paid trip”
Strange that. You started off by teling me not to assume anything yet you followed it up with another asumption and generalisation.
“That is fact. So stop defending them”
Sorry chum.. Just because you claim it’s a fact doesn’t mean it is.
“Why can’t the local official signoff if its “common practice”?
Sorry …. There is no “common practice” – depends on circumstances. I can give you a list of handovers stretching back to the 1980’s which would clearly show there is no “common practice” per see, as you claim.
” Well if you think our “hardworking” officials are there just for work, that’s up to you.”
And if you “assume” that such visits are are always for leisure then it’s no skin off my back. Yet you boldly told me not to “assume”.
Azlan “The F-5s and Skyhawks were also never fitted with them.”
Are you referring to chaff/flare dispensers or MAWS suites? I understand as ex-US aircraft, our A-4s would have had integral dispensers. I know for a fact Singapore’s did and we purchased the same variants.
AM – ”Are you referring to chaff/flare dispensers or MAWS suites?”
I knew an ex 12 Squadron ground guy who was scheduled to be sent to the U.S. for chaff/flare maintenance training. The plan was cancelled. The only aircraft we have with a MAWS suite are the Su-30MKMS and I doubt if MAWSs were around in the 1980’s.
Azlan: As to the Skyhawks, USN A-4C did have chaff/flare dispensers. As to our A-4B, C and L, I can’t be certain that they had chaff/flare dispensers and RWR prior to and after our modifications. I know Singapore’s A-4B and C did have them after the A-4SU Super Skyhawk upgrade but don’t know if they did before.
Btw it’s been said that the RSAF TA-4SU had a combat role and numbers acquired and the weapons delivery systems reflect this.
Azlan “I knew an ex 12 Squadron ground guy who was scheduled to be sent to the U.S. for chaff/flare maintenance training. The plan was cancelled. ”
What aircraft are we referring to here?
Azlan “The only aircraft we have with a MAWS suite are the Su-30MKMS and I doubt if MAWSs were around in the 1980’s.”
If you mean active radar, IR or laser based MAWS, you would be right. But RWRs have been around for a lot longer and the Hawks came with them.
I meant our F-5s and A-4s. None had flares/chaff.
12 Squadron was F-5E.
RWRs have been around since WW2 in various forms. They were even on U-Boats [Biscay Cross]. A MAWS which tell you from which angle the threat is coming from is much newer thing,
The MBB-3339CMs have RWRs.