Part 2 on Latest Malaysia Military News, the link to the previous part :

Latest Malaysia Military News Part 1, From Apr 06-May 09

May 12, 2009 18:42 PM


No Plans To Retire MIG-29 Jet Fighters - Zahid






GEMAS, May 12 (Bernama) -- The MiG-29 Fulcrum jet fighters will continue to fly although the Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) has received its latest Sukhoi Su-30MKM aircraft.

Defence Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said there were no plans to retire the the MiG-29 jet fighters which have seen 15 years of service.

"We are aware that some of our equipments have dropped in value," he said after a visit to Syed Sirajuddin Camp here, Tuesday.

Zahid said this when asked whether the MiG-29 jet fighters would be retired as upgrading them would be too costly.

He also said the Malaysian Armed Forces (ATM) could become stronger even without new equipments provided the soldiers improve their knowledge and strengthen their spirit.

On infrastructure, Zahid said 11 army camps with wooden buildings would be replaced soon to improve the image of ATM.

During the visit, Zahid was given the opportunity to drive the main battle tank PT91 Pendekar.

Also present were his deputy Datuk Dr Abdul Latiff Ahmad and Army chief Tan Sri Muhammad Ismail Jamaluddin.

-- BERNAMA

hmmm didn't they say they will mothball the MiG29 due to "lack of pilots"?

Hi Spidey, is the name for the PT-91M, 'Pendekar' official?

For Info of non-malay speakers, Pendekar means martial arts grandmaster.


Wikipedia

yet another about face...to save face? :P but true, its still a capable and relatively new airframe, it will really be a shame to have to mothball it...i'm sure with the right incentives they can find thier pilots...

yes, their PT91M is called "Pendekar"....it means Warrior, martial arts grandmaster is known as "Maha Guru".....

i dont think it's an about face to save face....maybe before not enough pilot but now got train somemore, so maybe just about enough.....from how i interprete it is that they either cancel the proposed 2nd batch Su30 or buy it at a later date.

FYI.....from what i read at the other forum, their new minister of defence is not that popular with the servicemen....

What's the reason?

The migs have got a bit of airframe life left (thanks to grounding due to lack of spares). 20-25 years suggest end-date = 2014-2019. Doesn't make sense to mothball them.

News reports suggest there's sufficient pilots for all its sqns right now so a new sqn of Su-30s is more likely.

The noises coming out regarding the suks seems to be pretty satisfactory so far.

he does not know anything about defence and is a political appointee. nothing wrong except he has made some pretty far out pronouncements since appointed. and after that fiasco, he promptly abdicated the defence policy making to the PM.

Basically, he is leaving everything back to PM Razak to call the shots. How to gain respect of the men?

not sure about the political aspect as ours are different then theirs, we are either a soldiers, police or civil defence personel.....theirs are all civies....so cannot compare as per military knowledge among their politicians. But lay man speaking, it's more to do with the welfare, they prefer Najib, even Badawi are more highly regarded, for example, their home team like police and MMEA got their choppers and MPA's.

I'm not saying those guys at the other forum are right as nobody know what is happening behind the close door, but when people (as a civilian), read about the Police and MMEA got their chopper and MPA's while their air force got nothing despite those deadly crashes, people start to talk and scrutinise everything. Ofcourse the new guy is still new but past experience shows he is not that good.

Hi all,

Just back from Imdex and clarify a few things, I wrote the story on the Migs planned on being mothballed back in 06 or 07 if I'm not mistaken, now at that time it was thought that the Sukhois would have been delivered in 07 so the RMAF would have a problem on pilots (of course the Sukhois ended up being much later, thus alleviating that problem), after the story by me came out in Janes, there was an about turn and it was decided that the fate of the MiG-29s would be decided in 2010. There's some problems keeping the Mig fleet operational beyond that time particularly in regard to the engines.

I had the impression that ATSC had already completed (~2005) stage 3, 1000 hr depot level overhauls (incl engine) for the Mig-fleet (+ nice new colour scheme) . For the migs to have a further engine problem which wasn't ided during the recent overhaul seems strange esp with 200 hr intervals for PPRW + India license producing RD-33 engines + that was the reason for setting the MRO facility instead of sending it to bangalore.

I think I'll wait for official word when they're actually de-operationalised.

There are certain things about the MiGs not in the public domain which I believe not many here are aware of nor on the Sukhois which is not going as well as it should. Funny enough I spoke to a senior RMAF officer recently who said that the MiGs were on schedule for a 2010 deactivation just at the same time the Minister made his statement, be interesting to see what happens next.
BTW MMEA and Police got their aircraft because the deals were done before the Eurocopter furore and the numbers or cost were also less, the other reason why the RMAF haven't got their helos is because of the whole furore that occured when the deal was announced and the government probably doesn't want to lose public support in these times

I agree with the first sentence. Whilst I'm sure suks have their share of unanticipated problems eg India ran out of tires, I don't think it is on the scale of those the Migs faced in the late 90s. SG had similar engine issues with A-4s. Yet, the a/c was sufficiently important to get the issues resolved.

If I was a betting man, I'd put my money on rmaf re-engining the migs with the RD-33 series 3s thereby extending engine life past 2020. If that's the case, it may be the TVN version licensed produced by Hal, India.

http://en.klimov.ru/production/aircraft/RD-33-family/

The Eurocopter deal is a little overblown as a result of opposition politics. Nuri replacement is urgent and I can't see the deal being postponed too long.

Most of the RMAF officers I spoke to pretty much state the Nuris are still flyable (as it is, the army is supposed to take over some of them if the RMAF gets the Eurocopters), but do not have much capabilities hence the need to replace them, there is a common perception that the Nuri crashes have been due to their age, in reality much has been due to mechanical or pilot error rather than the age of the aircraft itself, most of these findings after crashes have been kept within the RMAF and in the case of pilot error, the RMAF prefers not to announce it publicly in order to spare grieving families of those killed while distilling the lessons internally.

Dzirhan, as usual many thanks for the informed clarifications on Malaysian matters to guide our discussions.

Any aircraft can be flyable with sufficient maintenance. That's how those spits and mustangs are still flying at airshows. The problem is that spares become more difficult and costly to obtain.

Mechanical failures are normally caused by wear and tear which correlates with age. If it was a matter of capabilities eg avionics, it would have been a simple matter to upgrade the helos instead of buying new ones.

I got my impressions of nuris by RMAF pilots from articles/news reports like this.
http://www.dapmalaysia.org/english/2007/ju...lks/lks4424.htm

Ironically, the nuris are reportedly scheduled for retirement in 2012, according to DN.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3753461&c=AME&s=AIR

Let me clarify a few things:

Lim Kit Siang and the DAP are not a legitmate source on news regardng Malaysian Armed Force given that they play hard and loose with the facts or play it up to suit their political agenda. Maybe I suggest speaking to people in person rather than rely on what's posted on the net, particularly by the opposition party or the Malaysian media. So far you have the testimony of one person based on what he claimed the pilot told him, it that reflective of all nuri pilots, and are we sure that it was true? BTW Capt Nor Azlan's father was a wealthy businessman or something as it was stated in the papers during the aftermath of the crash so it would not have been a problem financially for him to have bought out his contract, I have spoken to a number of RMAF officers who state that the nuri can still be flown. As for the defensenews story, it was decided by the government in the aftermath of the crash that the RMAF would withdraw the Nuris from service in 2011 but the army has been talking about taking over the aircraft after that.
Mechanical failures can also be caused by improper maintainance or neglect of procedures which was the case in one incident which was reported in an inhouse RMAF technical journal.
The requirement for a Nuri replacement is an issue of both capabilities and age but doesn't mean that the Nuri's cannot fly beyond 2011 or 2012 or will drop out of the sky anytime though the DAP would like that since they can make it a political issue.

Whilst I agree about taking politicians' views with a pinch of salt, if you look at the link, LKS referred to NST report entitled "captain feared flying nuri". At the same time, I acknowledge that I take newspapers and news mags' journos with equal pinches of salt so that's not really a question of legitimacy either.

But to be fair to LKS, he did reflect a pilot's view that 85% of nuri crashes were due to pilot error. It should be noted that the pilot's POV is not a substantiated % either. Its just another pilot's pov as well.

http://blog.limkitsiang.com/2008/11/03/are...flying-coffins/

What I do have is a statistic that states ~17-18 crashes out of 40 in service for 41 years and the now PM stating in Oct 07 that the nuris will be phased out by 2012 which makes a pilot's pov on its flyability moot (which ironically, they should be seeking technician's views since pilots don't keep helos running).

Whether the army actually takes over the nuris, taking into account how words and even contracts can change at a drop of a hat in MY, I'll wait for the official announcement.

Eurotorp hoping to sell Malaysia A244/s mod.3 too.

http://www.klsreview.com/HTML/2009Jan_Jun/20090519_03.html

Something in The Star today. I wonder why they chose to build it so close to their coastline if they had concerns in the first place..

Asia Pacific Defense reporter has an interesting report on the Su-30MKM in its Feb 09 issue. For those with access, I would suggest reading it.

Due to copyright, am not to reproduce the article here at this time.

we could be persuaded to relocate the range to Johor :lol:
in any case the usual "I think, therefore it is" reporting. RSAF do not conduct live firing in Sungei Gedong nor Sarimbun, not even helos I think.

:blink:

gunships?! impossible...the offending range is one used by armour for their live firing exercises...the last time a round bounced off the protective wall it landed up in a golf range in Jurong (the ammo type is never fired in Singapore from that day on)...to hit them the armoured vehs have to intentionally turn 90deg to face M'sia...

AFAIK all our ranges on that side of Singapore do not face out to sea (i.e. towards Malaysia)

The authors of the story NELSON BENJAMIN and MEERA VIJAYAN are IGNORANT SHIT STIRRING IDIOTS. Let me explain why:

(i) Singapore is a sovereign country. How land is used in Singapore is under our government's control (and not theirs), therefore there is no need to consult with neighbouring IDIOTS, unless Malaysia wants to inform us otherwise about our independence since 9 Aug 1965. The aircraft noise they complain about are caused by aircraft flying in our air space, so too bad about noise. The IDIOTS who want to complain are free to move to another location.

(ii) The land use of Sarimbun Camp has not changed. It is not our fault that the JB authorities choose to locate Nusajaya there. Perhaps the JB planning authorities were afraid for placing Nusajaya under the fight path of RMAF jets and helicopters and had chosen to locate it next to Singapore given RSAF's better safety record.

(iii) As bdique explained, 'all our ranges on that side of Singapore do not face out to sea (i.e. towards Malaysia)', so there is no risk to Nusajaya. Further our ranges are well maintained and are safe, as it should be (to cater for public safety in Singapore).

(iv) Finally, we don't do aircraft live firing on the main Singapore island, again there is no risk to Nusajaya from our helicopters. These authors don't check their facts before shooting off their mouths, therefore they are IDIOTS.

I hope that NELSON BENJAMIN and MEERA VIJAYAN will read this post and know what I think of them.

you are refering to this one is it? posted earlier at part 1 of malaysia military news....

That's the one. :)

Something doesn't look quite right about that Su-30MKM article....

Only 12 aircraft delivered so far

In any case, the low-flying nuisance near that region can probably be explained by our F-16s Landing over at Tengah. They were definitely not bombing Johor or any part of Sarimbun.

I get the feeling from this article that Sukhoi doesn't seem sincere about rectifying the problems. The perils of buying Russian... And whats that with the Defence Minister being out of the loop regarding the Mig-29 deactivation? Ridiculous.

Minister was asked the question prior to him being briefed fully by RMAF on the situation.

:huh: .... it's like Bernama vs Jane's Defence Weekly.... stay tune....

RMAF To Receive Final Consignment Of Six Sukhoi Aircraft By Year End


KUALA LUMPUR, May 29 (Bernama) -- The Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) are expected to take delivery of final consignment of six Sukhoi SU-30MKM fighter aircrafts from Russia by year end.

Chief of Air Force Jen Datuk Seri Azizan Ariffin said the final consignment of six Sukhoi SU-30MKM fighters will complete Malaysia's purchase of the 18 sophisticated aircraft and further bolster RMAF's inventory in defending Malaysia's air space.

He added that the consignment was also in tandem with RMAF's development plans to remain relevant and competitive and increase the country's defence capability with state-of-the-art air defence.

"We have already received 12 such aircrafts and the remaining six are expected to arrive by year end. The 12 aircrafts already in our inventory are used in training from time to time," said Azizan at a special interview at the Ministry of Defence here Friday, in conjunction with RMAF's 51st Anniversary celebrations on June 1.

All the aircrafts will be equipped with state-of-the-art radar systems for superior combat agility and maneuverability in the air.

Malaysia and the Russian government agency, Rosoboronexport, signed a US$900 million (RM3.4 billion) contract for 18 Sukhoi Su-30MKM (Modernizirovannyi Kommercheskiy Malaysia or Modernised Commercial Malaysia) aircraft.

In return for the purchase, Russia agreed to train and send a Malaysian astronaut to the International Space Station (ISS) and also buy palm oil from Malaysia.

Azizan said RMAF would also take delivery of four Airbus A400M aircrafts, two in 2013 and another two in 2014.

He added that RMAF also has plans to add to its current inventory but it would depend on the budget and government's capability.

Meanwhile, Azizan added that the RMAF base in Sungai Besi should be retained as a national heritage and not be demolished or commercialized since the base had served as an rescue operation centre for air traffic, especially RMAF, police and Fire services department.

-- BERNAMA


source from: http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsindex.php?id=414631

I filed the story about two weeks ago but it just came out, the bernama story is based on today's press conference with the RMAF chief in conjuction with RMAF day on June 1. I was at that press conference when the Chief mentioned the delivery date but AFAIK the remaining six aircraft have been ready for delivery since March so might ask why only end of this year and the fact that the time frame actually called for delivery to be completed by early this year. I did not want to bring up the matter since I did not want to tip my hand on what I already knew about the Sukhois in the presence of other reporters at the press conference.

If we view the article, the following needs to be recognised.

(i) These problems are likely to discourage Malaysia from buying additional Sukhois to replace its MiG-29 fleet, which is scheduled for deactivation in 2010.

- This assumes that the problems can't be fixed. If they can't, I'll find it strange that the RMAF will accept the a/c. And if they are fixed, there is no reason why this would discourage Malaysia from buying additional Sukhois.

(ii) Newly appointed Defence Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi told the Malaysian media on 12 May that there were no plans to retire the MiG-29s, which have seen 15 years' service. However, air force sources corrected the minister, saying the government had already approved the timeline for the MiGs' deactivation.

- I agree with YF. It seems strange that the Minister could get this so spectacularly wrong which leads to a credibility issue.

Also, a new fighter sqn will take several years to procure. Retiring of the Mig-29s in 2010 will lead to a capability gap ie what to do with the pilots in the interim. In effect, the suks will act as mig-29 replacements whilst quadrupling the pilot number. I doubt if the rmaf is that dumb.

Third, the retirement of the mig-29s together with the F-5s will leave only a single sukhoi sqn + a small F-18s sqn to maintain malaysian air defence does not seem consistent with rmaf plans for fighter force expansion.

I'll wait for the official announcement but I think I'll have to wait a little longer than expected.

(iii) The government of newly appointed Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak is now expected to restart the tender process rather than simply to award the contract to Eurocopter.

- Expectation without stating who is doing the expectation really gives rise to speculation. If its the public doing the expecting, then its not really factual reporting cos the tender process is determined solely by the Government. If its the Government doing the expectation, then its inconsistent cos then one will just report that the Government is going to restart the tender process. Conclusion: speculative.

(iv) Industry sources have also said that they expect Malaysia to issue a tender soon for the upgrade and service life extension of its S-61 helicopter fleet. The government announced in 2007, in the aftermath of an S-61 crash, that the fleet would be retired by 2011, but the sources said that the decision had been reconsidered because the 24 helicopters still in service have plenty of flying hours left in them.

The latter sentence contradicts the former. If the helos have plenty of flying hours left, then helos don't need a SLEP.

Also, the EC-725 was originally acquired as nuri replacements. If the helos aren't going to be replaced, then the premise for the EC-725s disappears.

That really provides a credibility issue for the acquisition process. It meant that the original acquisition was based on a false premise ie the nuris can't be upgraded or that the upgrade wasn't considered. That really gives one confidence in the rmaf acquisition process, not. The alternative is to assume that the acquisition process was thorough and that the upgrade is therefore speculative and highly suspect. At the same time, it supports the idea that a new tender process is speculative cos its equally likely that the EC-725s won't be needed as replacements.

I believe your assumption is incorrect. the problems was stated as having being fixed in the remaining aircraft awaiting delivery. this indicates that the problem is not a technical one but rather a contractual disagreement (as stated, actually) meaning Robo wants to be paid extra for retrofixing the already-delivered aircrafts.

The discouragement is simply Malaysia's view of how Robo does business in honour (or not) the contractual clauses.

Let me correct a few things, I always find it amusing and not to mention a little tiresome Weasel, that you in Sg seem to always know better about what is going on in Malaysian military circles than what I report and make conclusions purely based on armchair analysis.
First off, as Five-two pointed out it's a contractual disagreement as stated.
Two, the Minister was asked the questions when he was on a visit to an RMAF base where he was to be given a briefing by the RMAF on the RMAF's situation, unfortunately he gave an answer based on what he knew, and given that he was not involved in defence matters prior to his appointment, it's not suprising that this mistake was made. As for quadrupling the number of pilots, you're making the assumption 16 Migs are flying and that many pilots or more when that's not the case, the numbers are way below that. And some of the pilots flying in the Sqn are either pretty senior and due for staff postings after the Sqn, Col. Lim, the Sqn commander for instance (he was my student when I lectured at defence college) is due for a staff job and pretty much the most senior officer to be still flying fighters and some pilots would either attend courses or be reassigned to other Sqns (incl instructors, 6 MB-339s are due and once they are all here, will form a training squadron), administrative/staff posts, or military schools as per their career paths so your talk about quadrupling the pilot numbers is wrong.
F-5s aren't being retired. RMAF chief said yesterday that the seven in service will continue in operation, primarily for photo recon and cover/escorts for recon missions.
Three, it's not the public doing the expectation, public expectations is not the basis for any of my articles :rolleyes: it's within defence (DAs, industry etc) and RMAF circles here in KL, government has yet to give a position but the outlook from most involved one way or another on the military and industrial side is that the tender will be rebooted, as it is that was also initially reported in the media when the whole Eurocopter issue came up
Four, on the flying hours, the Nuris have a basic service life number of hours, that number is still significantly a way off and the helos can be used to that provided certain parts are replaced and overhauled, my mistake was to probably use the term SLEP for the work to be carried out taking it to mean the extension of it's years in service beyond the 2011 deadline rather than flying hours, unfortunately some of us are only human and not as perfect in getting everything about the military written without a slight slip occasionally as opposed to some on the internet who seem to postulate perfection in such.
Plans to acquire the EC-725 was partly to replace the Nuris but also to provide the RMAF with a CSAR capability that the Nuri did not have, the CSAR helo requirement was planned more than 10 years ago and as a additional helo fleet to operate with the Nuri but given the timeslip, it was thought to replace the Nuri with a specific airframe which be a mix of dedicated CSARs and utility frames but the budgetary considerations precluded a wholescale replacement of all the Nuris. Thus the reason for the upgrade/overhaul has to do with having more helos in service, there's also an issue with production schedules, if the EC725s aren't ordered before August, the RMAF will fall behind on the delivery scale and hence the need to still have the Nuris available as a fall back, further the numbers of EC725s required stated by the RMAF Chief at yesterdays PC is actually 24 but budgetary issues are only making 12 available, given that, it would not be prudent for the RMAF to reduce it's medium lift helo capabilities from 20+ to just 12 so the thought is to keep the Nuris in service alongside the 725s with the Nuris used for basic utility work. BTW upgrading the Nuris with CSAR capabilities similar to the 725s would have cost more and not really cost/service effective in contrast to having a new helo. Anyone working in the defence industry can tell you that upgrades are not always necessarily a cost effective solution for the long term and there are risks involved (i.e the work going wrong etc)

That's not exactly an unknown risk when dealing with Russian vendors. I would have tot this risk had already been identified at the outset when RMAF took the decision not to go with a MKI or standard MK concept.

But even then, the assumption stands. If RMAF takes delivery of the existing batch, the amount of payment and work for a next batch should already be established.

Actually, same vendor risk applies to boeing (eg wedgetail) and eads (eg A400M) esp when things are new. The only difference is that Aus govt is smart enough to force seller to bear risk of cost overrun in the case of the former.

AS/NZS 4360 risk management standard needs to be compulsorily taught and applied in MY.

Just went back to my original submission, actually wrote that industrial sources as the source for the expectations that the helo tender would be rebooted to ensure the opposition wouldn't make it a political issue but that bit was edited out along with some other parts (probably word and space constraints).