10 Juli 2017

Kapal Misi Pesisir TLDM Dijangka Siap Menjelang 2021

10 Juli 2017


Littoral Mission Ship TLDM (image : Malaysian Defence)

KUALA LUMPUR - Projek kapal misi pesisir (LMS) yang diluluskan kerajaan di bawah program Transformasi Armada Tentera Laut Diraja Malaysia (TLDM) 15-to-5 dijangka siap secara berpe­ringkat bermula tahun 2019 hingga 2021.

Sehubungan itu, sebanyak 12 anggota TLDM yang terdiri daripada tujuh pegawai dan lima anggota lain-lain pangkat (LLP) di­terbangkan ke Wuhan, China esok bagi menjayakan projek tersebut.

Panglima Tentera Laut, Laksamana Tan Sri Ahmad Kamarulzaman Ahmad Badaruddin berkata, LMS melengkapkan TLDM de­ngan aset yang berkemampuan tinggi dalam melaksanakan operasi di perairan negara.

“Dengan adanya LMS, operasi secara berterusan di perairan maritim pasti dapat dilaksanakan dengan lebih baik sekali gus boleh memperkukuhkan kedau­latan negara.

“LMS juga dibina bagi menggantikan 15 armada TLDM sedia ada yang sudah menjangkau usia lebih 30 tahun,” katanya sewaktu ditemui pemberita dalam Majlis Mesra Tim Pasukan Projek LMS di KD Sri Gombak, di sini.

Turut hadir, Timbalan Pang­lima Tentera Laut, Laksamana Madya Datuk Anuwi Hassan.

Mengulas lanjut misi, Ahmad Kamarulzaman memberitahu kon­­trak perolehan empat buah LMS telah dimeterai secara run­dingan terus di antara kerajaan Malaysia dengan Syarikat Boustead Naval Shipyard Sdn. Bhd. (BNSSB) pada 23 Mac lalu.

“Oleh itu, BNSSB dengan kerjasama China Shipbuilding Offshore & International Corporation. Ltd. (CSOC) akan membina dua buah LMS di Wuhan Shipyard, China diikuti dua buah lagi di Lumut, Perak.

“Kerjasama dengan negara China dalam bidang tersebut akan mampu meningkatkan ke­upayaan negara untuk menjadi pengeluar kapal perang yang berpotensi tinggi kerana 12 anggota yang dihantar ke sana ditugaskan untuk belajar dan menimba ilmu,” katanya.

(Utusan)

21 komentar:

  1. I read this at malaysian defence blog and im a little puzzled with this acquisition. I also read the comments and it seems many are frustrated with the LMS. I think i share similar thoughts with them on the LMS. Firstly the LMS seems to not be at its max potential. Many have pointed out that a 30mm cannon is weak. Some say that this ship is not worth it as the coast guard can perform such roles and that their ships are better equiped than the LMS. Is this true? Any malaysians here that can share their thoughts? Another issue is 15 to 5. It is a good plan but it will take another 30 over years to complete. Some say by then some of the ships are not effective and the plan will not meet the challenges beyond 2040. That is hard to tell actually. One thing i agree with someone is by undergoing the 15 to 5 plan, if future navy leadership does not like the idea they could cancel it which can be both good and bad. Still another thing that i find it true is someone mention that 15 to 5 allows regional navy to change by revealing your plan they will have new plans meaning they will grow their navy. By 2040 the maritime environment will be different. Still i find that malaysia coast guard seems to have a better luck at getting their stuff.

    BalasHapus
    Balasan
    1. I thinks it's better you have this discussion at the Malaysian Defence blog itself. The blog have active commenters and most of them are willing to answer your questions. There will be incoming trolls soon enough. There is no point in trying to start a proper discussion /debate here. Just some friendly advice :)

      Hapus
    2. coast guard under pm while navy under mindef. you can see the reason now why navy always gets the short end of the stick. the navy envisioned lms is already ruined when the government decided to use the navy as their pawn in closing their ties with china. they were not even given any other option beside china. yes the lms is a total frustration for me as well. I like the concept but looks like our gov just don't care what the rmn want for their ships. on the timeline, its not really that bad. only the kedah class can be considered outdated by 2040 which is why they will be replace by another batch of sgpv. sadly the revealing part is unavoidable since rmn unfortunately have to answer to a bunch of very anti buying new stuff for the armed forces politicians and if they didn't give those son of a bitch the answer, the same politicians will bring it to the media and the navy will be blame at the end of it. sadly, that is the type of country malaysia is. the armed forces always get the short end of the stick.

      Hapus
    3. @honhon, haha too late dude but a good advice none the less.

      Hapus
    4. All malaysian needs depend on money,u have much money u have quality shipyard n quickly u have it,all about money dude,how great 15 to 5 program if u have no much money,the progress is low

      Hapus
    5. hope equipment on that lms not a rubbish.
      believe to them will using soon and no issue.

      Hapus
    6. equipment gerenti hilang songlap lah.....macam part radar kat harbour tu......kih kih

      Hapus
    7. To be honest. In my opinion i dont really find it necessary to have a coast guard i think a bigger navy would have been better for malaysia. Too have a coast guard is to complement the navy as the navy is actively out far in the ocean. The US and China as an example. I think Asean nations are small and need not a coast guard a navy will be good enough. Maybe indonesia and philippines need a bigger coast guard since they have quite a large geographic area and surrounded by waters.

      Hapus
    8. @luqman yeah it kinda feels like politics were at play for the lms. Still it would have been reasonable if it was operated by the coast guard. Though this 15 to 5 seems like the navy has smth to spend and enjoy compared to the rmaf as they have yet to select their aircraft fot the mrca. I wonder which will they choose. I myself personally dk which is better the eurofighter or the rafael? Still some say there is the griphen. What are everybody's thoughts between eurofighter and the rafael?

      Hapus
    9. Komentar ini telah dihapus oleh pengarang.

      Hapus
    10. Just tell me mr Ong...How much money spend for those LMS...Not worthit ATT All. tell me what Will u get for 68m Long LMS?, only LMS fitted with a China made 30mm RWS forward and two 12.7mm guns amidships. What a Shame....Indonesian build 42 LCS 45m Long with oto melara marlin until 2024, And now Indonesian already build 20 of itu...and 4 LMS 65m until 2017, And will be build More..(of course with missile n torpedos inside) so How many LMS or LCS u Have in 2025? U guys must be joking😂😂...Just dont tell me about another plan u Have for, frigate,MRSS or maybe submarine😆😱😱

      Hapus
    11. Well i want to bring whats best of the ship and maximise it. As a singaporean my country would do the same which is typical since they hold high standards. Still they always make sure one thing stands it must meet the operatiobal requirements and meet the needs. That does not mean u must necessary beef up the whole thing. Littoral mission vessel being over 70m long has a oto melera 76mm gun a typhoon 25mm gun at the rear, 16vls Mica anti air and anti missile-missile. 2x RWS 12.7mm oto melera gun at the side as well as manned 12.7mm guns. Other than that r non lethal platforms like water cannons, xenon light and some acoustic device. Still some sg peeps would complain it is a small ship and why it has no anti ship missile or ASW capability. I too initally thought somewhat same but at the end its operational needs. The lmv is not a frigate it is a vessel intended to replace the fearless class pvs it is actually a significant increase in capability indeed. Perhaps for the LMS in future its caoabilities will be enhanced. Like what many thought is it necessary? Perhaps thats why it is not so well armed as what we all hope for as it is not required. But then again why buy that many hmmmm? Many questions remain still i learned a lot actually because of this blog by the name as full frame blogpost. It has really interesting angles and point of views from the blogger he thinks alot and i admire his research though he has yet to post anything lately but do read his blogs on the regional developments. There isnt much but there is alot of insight.

      Hapus
    12. I agree atharu id rather cut 12 to 6 well armed ships

      Hapus
    13. @atharu

      For starters, RMN and TNI-AL have both different requirements. Indonesia definitely requires more ships then Malaysia as they have longer coastlines to defend. Plus with a bigger defence budget for spending it would be expected that TNI-AL would build more ships. With what budget RMN has (and political will), the LMS would be the best option for now.

      The RMN needs new ships ASAP as majority of their current ships are reaching retirement age. The question we should ask is how effective the LMS design would be, and how it benefits RMN.

      As a Malaysian, I agree with Benjamin and luqman that the LMS is questionable at best. But then again it's still to early to make conclusions. Who knows, maybe the ship design is very suitable for the RMN. Time will tell.

      As for the plans for 15to5 program. You can check out the Malaysian Defence blog. There is an article there regarding the time line for the program.

      (PS. You do know that the OTO Melara you mentioned is also a 30mm right?)

      Hapus
    14. @hon HoN
      Yes iknow that our 45 m fast patrol boat or LCS in Malaysia fill with oto melara, buat im sure that Indonesia 65m Long ship or LMS fill with missile And torpedos...And i realize the need of patrol boat or warship is diferent in each country, but i just wanna say that Malaysia should be get better and more ship for the money they spend..dont let houndred of Chinese fisherman fishing in your eez again wright.
      @mr Ong, Singapore military is always get the best equipment,not only for the navy, but also the army n airfroce...

      Hapus
    15. We dont necessary choose the best. Singapore could have bought brand new subs and new tanks back then but no, not for the sake of best but operational requirements. We choose a second hand leo2A4 as a starter for MBTs. It was a new capability we only knew light tanks. We need new strategies and doctorines to be included. Leo2A4 was decent although outdated then IBD had a solution to upgrade it to leo2sg with amap armour and modern systens. Conclusion is satisfactory. Not the best tank like T90ms or T14, Abrams, challenger 2, leo2A7 or merkava 4 but it suits us it has its role and its place and the army is pleased. The indonedian leo2Ri is an improved version. IBD upgrade was known as evolution. Rehinmentall if im not wrong the parent company and they enhanced it to revolution which indonesia has. Slight armour improvements like slope armour at the side of the turret. Looks good and modern. So u dont need the best. What u need is what suits u well. The subs we have been operating second hand subs from sweden. Challenger class and Archer class. Subs capabillity is not easy and takes a long time. For starters it would seem crazy in the 80s for singapore to have subs and to justify. Navy said to be a true navy u gotta need subs. Sounds very simple and funny but it is true. Govt know that subs are exp to find a solution sounds crazy and subs r no easy machines for starters. Swedish took the opportunity to sell theirs at a very cheap price. Govt mention smth about how the percentage is lower than gdp. Dk what they exactly said but they were happy and so were the navy as well as the swedish. So cheap yet it serve well after tropicalisation. With this a basic understanding as well as creating operations and doctorines of subs was found. In 2009 sweden out of nowhere told us hey we got subs to retire u want some? They're better. Happily the navy when to check it out and see what they can do. Archer was much bigger and have a bigger displacement than challenger smth the navy could use for longer ops and can improve their missions. Sweden said they can upgrade it and include an AIP system. Which extends the duration of being underwater and keeping the sub even quieter. A significant leap in capabillity and the navy wants it cheap again it was just the upgrade as AIP does cost alot as well as modernisation. The navy now has smth new in the textbooks heavyier and more capable subs satisfied the navy is pretty much an experienced sub operator once Archer and swordman achieved full operational capability. With new things learnt it was time for the navy to operate a sub that can fufil the missions effectively and one that is good. They go shopping for the challenger class replacement. With experience with subs the planners know what they want and need. There was a problem none of the subs on the market seem to fit the list. They needed a specially built sub. Custom made. One thing is clear it will be very expensive but at a time when u r ready for this after years of learning and understanding it is decided to go ahead. In the end they choose germany. Idk and im lazy to type out the name ot the company as it has a long name lol. So yeah the subs are german. Type 218sg a custom build sub one that satisfy all your needs after years of hard work at a cost of course. Sweden was propably a little sad they too have lots to offer for newly made subs but if u read one of the articles in full frame blogpost they were in trouble during that period. Also another interesting blog from full frame was the author did a case study between RMN scorpene and RSN Archers in the acquisition phase and capability. It shows that buying second hand subs with better capability is better than buying a first hand sub which is more expensive and less capability. At to the woes it had problems as well. So moral of the story is it is not about the best but about the needs and requirements that meets the challenge.

      Hapus
    16. @atharu

      And again, I'm sure the LMS would be upgraded in the future as well when there is budget allocated. The priority now is to get more ships. Probably not with missiles or torpedoes but with containerized modules. The NGPV I assume would be the one that is weaponized.If the 15to5 plan goes through. A BIG IF.

      Hapus
    17. @Benjamin

      I agree with you, different navies have different requirements. But purchasing second hand vessels is something the RMN simply couldn't afford. Sure, the cheaper price and existing capabilites sounds good. But there are other factors such as refitting the aging hulls that will drive the costs up even more. At the end of the day you will realised that whatever you saved by purchasing second hand will be used on upgrading the ships to operational status. This is something that RMN has experience in when conducting SLEP on its Kasturi class ships. They realised that the costs for the SLEP program can be used to purchase newer vessels. RSN have a bigger budget and expertise in upgrading as compare to the RMN. So purchasing new is the way to go for the RMN.


      Hapus
  2. desainnya sangat mirip dengan kapal BAKAMLA Bintang Laut class (tipe 48 M)

    BalasHapus
  3. hah????? Kapal nie pon nak siap 2021????nak bina kapal or nak songlap komisyen nie lama ya amat

    BalasHapus
  4. Satu tahun satu kapal...

    BalasHapus