SHAH ALAM: Upgrades for Kedah class, sort off. In my earlier post, Back to Future III, I mentioned that the Gem Electronica EOFCS will also be installed on another class of ship of the RMN. I can now report that four of the Kedah class will receive the system.
GEM Elettronica EOFCS115A, the EOD FCS for the Laksamana class ships signed at DSA 2016
RMN chief Admiral Reza Sany confirmed the installation of the new fire control system on the four Laksamana class and also the Kedah-class. From Kosmo newspaper. Scroll down to the bottom to see the statement below.
“Kita juga melaksanakan pemasangan sistem kawalan tembakan terhadap kapal-kapal Skuadron Kapal Ronda Ke-17 dan Korvet Ke-24 serta peningkatan keupayan sistem pengurusan tempur KD Jebat
My translation of the quote: “We are also installing a fire control system on the ships of the 17 PV and 24 Corvette squadrons and upgrading the capability of the combat management system of KD Jebat.”
A close up of Kedah class bridge. Note the EADS 3-D radar and Oerlikon Contraves TMX/EO X-band with electro-optic fire control director and thermal imager
As for the upgrading of the KD Jebat control system go here
So thats the extent of the upgrades on the Kedah class? Yes, I was told that for the moment that the new fire control was the only funded upgrade for the Kedah class. As for the ships getting the upgrades, it is likely the four Kedah class ships now based at the Kota Kinabalu naval base in Teluk Sepanggar. They are KD Selangor, KD Kelantan, KD Terengganu and KD Pahang.
A jack stay demonstration from KD Terengganu and KD Pahang at the KK Naval Base on May 28, during the 85th anniversary open day. KD Terengganu.
It must be noted that the other two ships in the squadron, KD Kedah and KD Perak are also assigned to patrol South China Sea near Kota Kinabalu under rotation with other ships. The RMN also has plans to transfer the two ships to Kota Kinabalu permenantly but this will depend on the availability of family quarters at the base.
Two Kedah class, KD Kelantan (175) and KD Selangor (176) berthed at Lumut jetty in early 2014. The ship on the other side is KD Mahawangsa. Malaysian Defence
I was told that that the navy had wanted a much more extensive upgrades for the Kedah class but only the Gem Electronic EOFCS have been greenlighted. This is likely due to the fact that its already paid for.
A model of the Kedah class with a full weapons suite at DSA 2016.
What about the other upgrades then? Well its not like what was reported before by Janes back in 2015 and also not involved in getting the “fitted for but not equipped with” things.
A sailor from KD Pahang firing the 30mm Breda Mauser gun located on top of the helicopter hangar aft. The gun can be fired manually from the mount or remotely from the combat information centre.
Infact, the Kedah-class is getting more and more like a patrol vessel, just like it what it supposed to do when it was first mooted. As for the other navy things reported during its 85th anniversary, it will be covered in future postings.
— Malaysian Defence
If you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment
So the Gem Electronica EOFCS is replacing?
Rheinmetall TMEO
Or
Oerlikon Contraves TMX/EO
?
If it is replacing the TMX/EO, then the capability to fit the RAM missile would surely be lost forever.
Surely now we can confirm that FFBNW means Fitted For But Never With…
The only remaining thing to do is to eventually pass them to MMEA.
Reply
Both things you mentioned are the same thing…Rheinmetall is the new name for the Oerlikon Contraves
” Turut dirancang proses menaik taraf kapal-kapal pembinasa laju melalui pemasangan sistem pengurusan tempur buatan tempatan ”
Why are they spending money on the FACs? Are they saying that the original 15 to 5 plan with the LMS is no longer going to be followed through?
Reply
Wait for it…
” Both things you mentioned are the same thing…Rheinmetall is the new name for the Oerlikon Contraves ”
It is 2 distinct equipments, both installed on the Kedah-class and the future Maharajalela-class too.
This is TMEO
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-AIyk7oiqYg8/UP4IcQ9WCsI/AAAAAAAAXRQ/XU_-eLzmiJM/s1600/TMEO.jpg
This is the TMX/EO
https://www.navyrecognition.com/images/stories/news/2013/january/Rheinmetall_T_XEO_Mk2_Fire_Control_Radar.jpg
Location on Maharajalela-class
https://uf.cari.com.my/forumx/cforum/forum/201301/29/104637xnvokawuibon23zn.jpg
Now another question crops up. If the same/similar equipments being installed on the Maharajalela-class, why is it being replaced on the Kedah-class?
Reply
It’s the same name , but to be exact the ones on Kedah is Oerlikon Contraves one, the ones on the LCS is the latest version with an X added to the designation
Well, the EOD on the KEDAH class were already obsolete way back in 2010. And you need US export license to get parts delivered, which is a pain….
Reply
Ding, ding….it will not be a pain if they signed a maintenance contract for them,
Just 13 years and those TMEO needed replacement?
@ api69
Can you explain that TMEO and TMX/EO is 2 different hardwares?
On Maharajalela both TMEO and TMX/EO is present, now in Mk2 guise.
Reply
Yes I know on the LCS, the EO/FCR are two items, but on the Kedah its a single piece, the FCR EO are on the same thing as pictured
@ api69
I always thought that german equipments are mostly ITAR-free? Which component need US export license?
Retry with my explanation.
Look at this Hi-res picture of KD Kelantan
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/94/f1/75/94f175d506f6f0bac891236d4eff3461.jpg
The TMX/EO is located on the roof of the Bridge.
The TMEO is located behind the 30mm Mauser gun, in-line with the bow of the RHIB boat.
It is really 2 different equipment!
On Maharajalela-Class there will be 2x TMX/EO and 1x TMEO installed.
Reply
I am wrong, not for the first time though!
So that is clear lets get back to my original question
1. So what is the Gem Electronica EOFCS is replacing? TMEO Or TMX/EO?
2. If the same/similar equipments being installed on the Maharajalela-class, why is it being replaced on the Kedah-class? Common sense would say keeping the TMEO and TMX/EO would ease long term servicibility.
http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/year-2013-news/january-2013-navy-world-naval-forces-maritime-industry-technology-news/848-royal-malaysian-navy-orders-rheinmetall-optronics-and-fcr-for-its-future-gowind-corvettes.html
Reply
Its the TMX-EO
Marhalim,
Export license is based on import country then end user. Malaysia, and gov agencies are not particularly trusted by neither EU nor US. Its not as if you have a service contract with the OEM and you are off to go. Spare gets 6 month delay at the port of embark alone is a common situation for Malaysia.
by the way, TMX/EO is a modular combination TMX radar + EO fire designator. TMEO is a pure electro-optic mainly for surveillance. As you said yourself, these boats are firmly put into patrol role. The ones on LCS are the same MK2 with “stealth fairing”.
…,
EO tech is dominated by US or Israel backed US company. There is always a part of it sourced from US. And our open secret role as a middle man role is not a welcome factor either.
Reply
Yes I know but if you have a maintenance contract in place it will be much easier to plan the service interval so one will not be caught out by delays in getting the parts due to export licenses. And even if it did happen, which happens all the time for various reasons, the services has some one to blame instead of just flapping in the winds
…,
The optics are from L3 Brashear, USA. Thus the need for a US export license.
Lesson learnt is even if a European equipment is bought, need to check whether any of the military-grade components are manufactured in the USA.
Reply
If they needed to get an export license for the parts or maintenance, the end user would have known from the start that they need to comply with the regulations. It is not as if six months after using it that only then they realised about it.
Last I heard from the Navy was that the main priority now is the SLEP of the FAC-Ms, followed by the MRSS.
“Export license is based on import country then end user. Malaysia, and gov agencies are not particularly trusted by neither EU nor US.”
Actually there is no supplier that provides better support than the US. The RMAF has said so.
“EO tech is dominated by US or Israel backed US company.”
Lol, your blanket comment shows you don’t even know.
@ api69
When going european, we should insist that the hardwares are ITAR-free ie. no components made in USA. If not we would still need USA export approval for spares.
Anyway. So the priority now is SLEP of FAC-M? Can you relate that to what is going to happen with the LMS? I really hope that they won’t go the R-LMS route (which is IMO is not fulfilling the missions LMS should be capable of)
@Marhalim,
From what I have been informed, the issue of the optics on the KEDAH class EODs were discovered when parts were needed during the combat system sea trials of the 6th ship at BNS. Thus, the RMN was aware of this way back in 2010. Whether they acted on the info in preparing for thru life support is beyond me.
@…
FAC-M SLEP as priority is what I was told. Any relation to the LMS program is best for Marhalim to investigate and tell us! LOL…
Reply
I was told they did not..
@Marhalim
“the services has some one to blame instead of just flapping in the winds”
That doesn’t solve the problem of long delay for spareparts just a convenient scapegoat to blame. Imho, we shouldn’t spend money to pay for the convenience of ready scapegoats. Better to spend that money and lobby for closer ties to US government.
@…
“When going european, we should insist that the hardwares are ITAR-free”
Even if ITAR free, they could be Israeli in origin which is also a big no for us. Another unlikely source would be from Russia which is another thorn for us. Of the 3, USA is still the known beast that we can deal with.
@ api69
If that system is troublesome (as what you said) then why did they choose to use the same system for the gowinds? Why cant the thru life service be piggybacked with the gowinds? Something just dont add up.
Marhalim,
Planing has nothing to do with contract but rather money.
AM,
It gets embarrass quickly when someone tried to pretend to be in the know.
By the way, i can easily recall no less than 10 items your trusted US supplier owe different agencies for more than 6 months.
Chill out guys…
Off topic
Nice pics from the latest borneo war exercise
http://pbs.twimg.com/media/D5aC6E5UwAALQtP.jpg
With 4 LMS and 6 LCS coming on stream in the next 4 years, MMEA adding new hulls though at snail pace why the sudden rush to reactivate old hulls some over 30 years old like the FAC.
I understand the need for the minesweeper because capability, maybe the corvette afaik slightly newer hulls but still old…… Couldn’t the money be used for the lekiu and kasturi, i believe still good for another 15 years
The navy seems seems in need more hulls short term, is there something brewing….
The Kedah may not have missiles but with the Super Lynx on board wiith the Sea Skua they can bet a capable deterrent.
What’s the point of building a big toothless warship? This FFBNW thing should be deleted from our defence planners brain. You don’t buy expensive warships when you can get a much smaller vessels armed to teeth. Look at SG with their Navy, they are doing the right thing. Pity TLDM
The RMAF said that not only was US support more efficient, they were also more transparent than the Russians with the maintenance requirements of the aircraft when we bought them.
https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2018/09/06/the-real-problem-with-the-sukhois-the-russians/
The issue of support is something discussed and covered numerous times on this page, by people more senior than I.
Alas, if you had been right about the US causing us such problems, the Air Force would be asking for more MKMs today, rather than considering the Super Hornet or another US engined fighter now. Indeed, the RMAF chief himself wanted Super Hornets just barely after ordering the MKMs.
If you say you have “10 cases” then you better back up your claim rather than leave them unsupported and standing against the Air Force chief himself.
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/37259/malaysia-looks-to-awacs,-super-hornet-(apr.-16).html
@ abuyane
The correct way to build an OPV is the MMEA way.
Correct
– Damen OPV 1800 USD57 million each
Wrong
– Meko A100 USD300 million each
I hear those who lament why cant we pour in more money into the Kedah class and fully arm them? IMO that boat has sailed long ago and any future money would be better used to buy more Gowinds instead.
And again, cant stress this enough. Please leave the OPV business to MMEA, and get more gowinds and submarines instead with the budget planned for those 12 more kedah class ships.
For 2.5 billion euro for 5 ships, might as well my government buy more maharaja lela