X

Say No to The AV8

The AV8Buster Logo

KUALA LUMPUR: It is plain obvious isnt it? I am against the AV8, the national 8X8 Armoured Combat Vehicle project.

Why? Its not that there are cheaper solutions, which there are of course. The main reason? Its the money of course, or the lack of it.

There are other valid reasons for going against the AV8 project. The past failures of national interest programmes were to first things that come to mind.

The latest failure is the Aludra UAV project which had not benefited the armed forces at all in terms of capability and capacity. It is such failure that Mindef do not even have the stomach to sign a production contract nor the instinct to kill it off for good measure.

As usual the thing will drag on for a few years more before it will die natural death, leaving the armed forces so behind the technology curve when it comes to UAV even when other nations in the region are contemplating UCAVs!

Furthermore, the Army, as we all know, has other numerous project which are as important as the 8X8 but the lack of funds has caused these projects to be shelved.

Of course we could argue until the moon turned blue which projects are more important and necessary to the Army but one cannot deny the fact that we cannot afford the AV8 project as it stands now.

I would even argue we cannot even afford to purchase 200++ 8X8 ACV off-the shelf now as it would also cost us at least RM3 billion to get the whole lot with another RM2 billion thrown in to maintain them for the next 20 years or so.

Yes, the Menhan had said that the project may or may not cost RM8 billion but certainly we dont have the luxury to spend even half of that amount. And we are supposed to spend RM1 billion annually to develop the AV8?

Yes the unit price could go much lower if we replace the Sibmas and Condor on one to one basis. But how do we know whether the unit price will go down even if we add another 200 vehicles to the original order?

So what next? Do we really need to replace the Condors and Sibmas? Of course we do and at the same time we must also helped our defence industry. How are we going to do it then? My solution is for us to embark an upgrade programme for the KIFV fleet bought for the Bosnian mission to the Adnan ACV standard. Done by Deftech in Pekan of course.

Since the UN paid for the KIFV, we already save almost RM1 billion in procurement costs and perhaps we need to spent only RM1 billion to upgrade these Korean imports and another RM1 billion to keep them working for at least another 15 years. I know the estimates above could be wrong but I believe this is a far fairer and cheaper solution to our needs considering our defence budget and ambitions.

Is there a way to keep the AV8 project and the other projects in the Armed Forces wish list? Of course there is. More money of course. Show me money!

— Malaysian Defence

If you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment
Marhalim Abas: Shah Alam

View Comments (75)

  • Cost wise there are a few that are damn cheap. Even the Thai bought 96 BTR 3 from Ukraine for around USD110 million. May be we can do the same, buy about 100 for USD 100 mil+ and provide another USD100 mil + for parts and maintenance for another. But dont know about the quality...

    Marhalim: The problem with us, Kamal, we end up specifying Mercedes engines for the same vehicles and god other what stuff and the deal suddenly goes from RM300 million plus to RM3 billion plus and zilch for maintenance....Just look at the PT91M...they havent got around securing the support contract, yet they only signed an LOI for it with Deftech at DSA 2010...

  • The only cost saving solution as I see it would be to put the interest of the country and army first above that of Deftech and procure something off the shelf. Something that comes the closest to meeting the army\'s requirements, whether the Piranha, Rosomak or Pars. All the vehicles that were trialed in 2006 can easily be configured into different variants.

    As for the KIFV/MIFV it already has received a new engine and transmission. Adding an OWS and applique/bar armour to provide protection to up to 12.7mm would be the next logical move and will not cost an arm and leg if the project is handled properly. The key word is ''IF'' handled properly

  • I have to disagree with you this time Marhalim. For me, it is the time for us to change our way of thinking. We should give the local the chance for them to show what their got. In this case, let the DEFTECH develop the 8x8 on their own and although it is based on the Turk's PARS, we should take this as the first step for more advanced things in future.

    I largely believe that this project will not going to be scrapped off like the UAV project. Trust me.

    Marhalim: I will also not say that the AV8 project will be scrapped...far from it, we will end up spending RM10 billion for a vehicle that will be retired before it is even past 10 years....

  • Since the 8x8 will be inducted into the Cavalry Regiments whose primary roles are surveillance and screening operations,why not explore other options where the two functions can be carried out with less cost and manpower.For example using UAVs the Cavalry Regiment can easily easily surveill the battlefront 24/7.As for screening operations, in our environment is best done by anti-tank and sniper teams on motorcyles and scout vehicles.The 8x8 is okay for desert and open plains but not for our Malaysian terrain and vegetation.

    Marhalim: As the other national project, the Aludra UAV remained in-service, there is no immediate concern for the Armed Forces to get operational UAVs in service in the near future. I believe MMEA will beat the Armed Forces in introducing an operational UAV into service soon...

  • A bit out of context, but if you realised past weeks some economic indicator came out. The country debts of RM362 billion(about 320 billion are local, mainly from our EPF) is now on par with its reserves and investment.

    Theoretically, unless we have a constant 7-8% growth next 10 years and a budget surplus or even budget, we may end up like greece.

    So hopefully those in EPU and MIndef who were planning these type of AV8 deal, to reconsider. Not that i am saying that we should cut deep any spending, but i am saying that with budgeted RM8 billion on the AV8, we could get more bang for our buck.

    Assuming (very big if) we look east for our procurement, the RM8 billion can give us the 257 8X8 that we wanted, new affordable personell weapon, maybe few dozen helicopters..

    Marhalim: Its a National Interest project, Kamal... it will be very difficult for them to re-consider...

  • As an outsider view, i thought that the Govt is following the NGPV model, where we buy the blueprint and one day Malaysia could build our own Armour car and export ourselves. And i think this plan is good if the project is farm out to as many as possible and create several rounds of economic multipliers.
    Economic multiplier is an economic term talking about the effect when say, for every 1 million spent, 500 k goes to salary which returns to the economy as food and etc and etc. 'Many rounds' is when the said food vendor spent 50% of it as his own salaries, buy supplies and etc.
    Therefore, if the 8b project is able to generate say 12b economic value (sum of above) within 5 years of implementation, then it is a good project. The Army get the hardware, the country gets the industrialization and the citizen gets the economic pie expended.
    On the basis and assumptions above, i think the project is good for Malaysia.

    Marhalim: Ah...but the NGPV is over-budget and over-due. They cannot even deliver the ships on time and on spec. Didnt I say that we have a long list of national interest projects that failed miserably and never live up to the promises?

  • Can this 8X8 run on rough road compare with the track cos our country most is terrain, any other choice? Do the MINDEF evaluated it in detailed? Cost? RM8 Billion is big for this project, can it be reduced to RM2 billion, the rest of budget still can be used for other, like get the AEWs and Medium SAMs for RMAF, ASW helos, PV and support ship for RMN and attack helos for the Army, beside the prices for AV8 still can be nego if the MINDEF still want it, be think wisely bro....

    Marhalim: Yes the AV8 will be able to go cross country. Personally, I would have preferred wheel AFVs for the army again due to our small budget. How many tank transporters we have? I dont have the exact numbers but I believed it is not more than 100 vehicles. We have more than 300 track vehicles nowdays........

  • Yes thats a good question Marhalim, how many low loaders do we have? If I'm not mistaken Defetech delivered only 25 Ivecos.

  • Dear Zul, I do not have the detailed cost breakdown of the 8x8 but I believe most of the 8 billion will go to Thales France as the integrator of the Fire Control System, Denel of South Africa, the supplier of the turret and armament systems and FNSS of Turkey the builder of the 8x8 body.Very little of the 8 billion will go to local vendors!

  • Rilek bro, the AV8 only costs US$2 million per piece. That's the price the gomen gonna pay to deftech for a piece. The rest of the money that mount to 8 billion RM is for deftec to build the capacity to produce the so called 100% malaysian made 8x8 locally, together with the support n service for the next 20 years. The production numbers might not be stagnant at 257 pieces. Might be many more than that according to the ATM requirement for the next 20 years and beyond that 20 years.Remember also the export potential of the said vehicle among Asean members and to other friendly nations across the globe.

    Marhalim: what export potential? Singapore has the Bionix, the Indons has their Pindads? The rest would rather buy Russians or Ukrainians. The same argument has been made when other National Interest projects was made,ie MD3, Steyrs, NGPV and Aludra.
    How do we know in 20 years time when the requirement no longer call for 8X8? What then?