What's new

Indonesia Defence Forum

Vietnam Navy crewmen greeting the Indonesia president during ship march
20160423140011-6.jpg


nice dude, this is during komodo excercise?
 
Big platform acquisition is not only based on how many AShM can be carried on, most of the reason is to match the original perceptive threat we are currently facing, doctrine we are using right now, financial challenge and geographical area along with their challanges. KCR 60 is good for us, because they are maximizing their range patrol area they can cover, provision to carry spec ops along with RHIB boats and sufficient firepower to be a hard precense in contested area.

imho i don't think we can compare those two together. fully loaded both ships has a difference of displacement of almost 100ton. and don't forget, russian navy has that "distinct" view of naval warfare which make their ships slightly different with other navy...
oh and also keep in mind different navy have different definition for the term corvette, light frigate, destroyer escort, frigate, destroyer, and so on. it's not just about size...
as for the national corvette program, if i'm not mistaken the base idea of the program is that indonesia can build warships (bigger than patrol boat) by herself.. the development of the kcr(s) is based on the navy needs. and nobody said we're going to stop developing an even bigger warship..
kcr(s), the sigma assembly, nasdec, submarine production facility, and many other project involving warship production are proof that we are developing our own warship and we're not going to stop...

PS: somebody once told me that if you want to design a big ship, don't use a small ship design as your base... it doesn't work like that...

Ah OK. So the idea is we want to build bigger combat ship and we don't want a 60m corvette.

Vienam built 6x Molniya ( Tarantul V ) at that configuration.
the Pro as you said, the Con is reduction of trip to 10 days. So Tarantul V isnt suitable for long time patrol mission. The major mission should be for 2x Molniya made an extended coastal defense system like Bal-E with salvo of 32x AShM, 16 each ship as launcher.They attempt to launch a saturated attack to hostile ship group

It's true, BUT, if the mission is only patrol, especially during peace time, does Tarantul need that configuration (carrying full armament ) ? Probably not. So with less arms carried it can be at sea more than 10 days.

chinese flagged shipFV Hua Li-8 caught by TNI AL, after the incident about kway fey the tension probably will increase again
tribunnews,com/tribunners/2016/04/22/8-buronan-interpol-argentina-ditangkap-tni-al
maybe 2-4 missile each craft, the current production aim at anti air and anti surface



well we should prepare anything in case china rage

China has no reason to protest to us. The ship was caught far away for Natuna or SCS, and was at the request from Argentina via Interpol. If China wants to protest then it should directed to Argentina.
 
It's true, BUT, if the mission is only patrol, especially during peace time, does Tarantul need that configuration (carrying full armament ) ? Probably not. So with less arms carried it can be at sea more than 10 days.

One need to consider how big the area that must be patrolled. Our naval vessels need more endurance to patrol this very vast sea
80A04E07.gif
 
One need to consider how big the area that must be patrolled. Our naval vessels need more endurance to patrol this very vast sea
80A04E07.gif

I never say that we should use Tarantul instead of KCR-60. I only say that we should make KCR-60 missile capabilty similar to Tarantul, and that discussion have been concluded ( closed ) by me. But, if we want to talk about KCR-60 endurance at sea, then it's worse than Tarantul. Tarantul is 10 days, KCR-60 is 9 days worth of endurance at sea.

As you said, our seas are vast. So why are we ( TNI-AL ) still ordering KCR-60?

kcr-60-image02.jpg
 
I never say that we should use Tarantul instead of KCR-60. I only say that we should make KCR-60 missile capabilty similar to Tarantul, and that discussion have been concluded ( closed ) by me. But, if we want to talk about KCR-60 endurance at sea, then it's worse than Tarantul. Tarantul is 10 days, KCR-60 is 9 days worth of endurance at sea.

As you said, our seas are vast. So why are we ( TNI-AL ) still ordering KCR-60?

Better Stealth shape in my opinion,

Tarantul design is actually prioritizing the weapon system than Stealth needs, you need to ask that question to Navy as any design made by PT PAL of course comes from Navy input and needs

KCR 60

image310-e1432080997666.jpg
 
Last edited:
I never say that we should use Tarantul instead of KCR-60. I only say that we should make KCR-60 missile capabilty similar to Tarantul, and that discussion have been concluded ( closed ) by me.

My point is, Vietnam doesn't have any problem putting more missile on that small platform since their maritime territory is relatively limited, compared to, let's say Indonesia. They can utillize that firepower to their advantages. Especially if we consider SCS maritime dispute with China in mind.

In case of Indonesia, we have very vast sea with diverse characteristic and have relatively low threat. So we need more hull to establish present and control at sea as priority. With relatively low production & operational cost, KCR-40 & KCR-60 are our effort to answer this specific challange, to establish present and control at sea.

For more heavy duty job, we have SIGMA, for our future frigate. SIGMA design in my opinion can be adopted for OPV and corvette or even can be developed further into destroyer.


@BoQ77, do you have info about the production cost for tarantul-class corvette, complete with all the armament?


from this link: http://www.military-quotes.com/forum/price-russian-weapons-t98271.html
unit cost for tarantul-class corvette is around 60+ million.

KCR-60 hull production cost is around 12 million. Let's say we add 10 million more for armament, that around 22 million. We can get 3 units KCR-60 for 1 Tarantul-class.
 
Last edited:
Hehe ini kok komparasi role Kcr sama Tarantul :D

IMG-20160422-WA0028.jpg
IMG-20160422-WA0029.jpg


Apa tarantul dari segi cost operational cocok buat patroli? kalo ane liat sih KCR kita ajah udah over armed kok, apalagi mau dipasang CIWS

Buat yg pernah berlayar jauh pasti faham kalo ancaman dilaut bukan perang terbuka dan saling tembak, kapal kek fpb dan kcr sangat berguna buat patroli rutin dan ngisi lantamal yg kosong dari segi cost

PT PAL Products
_20160418_200811.JPG
_20160418_200751.JPG
 
facepalm... lol. apparently i wasn't clear b4....
guys please stop comparing tarantula and kcr60.
i am gonna rewrite some stuff i already write on my previous post.
1. different navies has different point of view of ship classes. and there are no international standard for this. for example a frigate for one navy might be as big as a destroyer for another.
2. our own navy too has a different point of view of warship classes.
example:
> for our navy the corvettes are: Bung Tomo class, Diponegoro class, Fatahillah class, Pattimura class. all of which have different spec for different operation.
>and then we have the "Fast missile Boat" (KCR) classes (or the way i see it they are a beefier-patrol-boat class or a light-corvette class).
3. the russian navy has a "unique" point of view of naval warfare. combining this and my point no1, they have tarantula class, which is a corvette.
4. kcr60 was not design as a corvette in mind. it was design based on the need of the navy. the reason why we need them is because our ocean is freakishly huge with islands everywhere. and i hope they continually build these ships...

*does this mean that our country should developed kcr 60 into a corvette?
no.. learn something from it's development, sure.. but don't start there..
*does this mean that our country never gonna develop our own navy's corvette class or frigate class?
no.. nobody says that.. think of all the investment that went into shipbuilding and supporting industries so far! it's heading somewhere...
*does this mean that our country should stop building these kcr?
no.. they are functional. the reason why some people think that they seems to be underpowered because they keep on comparing it to a different class from a different navies that has different point of view of warship classes and different needs... please stop doing that...
 
My point is, Vietnam doesn't have any problem putting more missile on that small platform since their maritime territory is relatively limited, compared to, let's say Indonesia. They can utillize that firepower to their advantages. Especially if we consider SCS maritime dispute with China in mind.

In case of Indonesia, we have very vast sea with diverse characteristic and have relatively low threat. So we need more hull to establish present and control at sea as priority. With relatively low production & operational cost, KCR-40 & KCR-60 are our effort to answer this specific challange, to establish present and control at sea.

For more heavy duty job, we have SIGMA, for our future frigate. SIGMA design in my opinion can be adopted for OPV and corvette or even can be developed further into destroyer.


@BoQ77, do you have info about the production cost for tarantul-class corvette, complete with all the armament?


from this link: http://www.military-quotes.com/forum/price-russian-weapons-t98271.html
unit cost for tarantul-class corvette is around 60+ million.

KCR-60 hull production cost is around 12 million. Let's say we add 10 million more for armament, that around 22 million. We can get 3 units KCR-60 for 1 Tarantul-class.

I dont think Vietnam put less weapon on Molniya for more operational days, they use another platform TT400 or DN2000 for that.
TT400 hull cost about 1 million, during few year Vietnam built dozen of them.

Tarantul and its AShM or TT-400 now all built domestically, so it's cheaper than quoted,
viet-nam-trinh-lang-phien-ban-ten-lua-kh35e-noi-dia_5529344.jpg

anh-qs-an-tuong-tuan-ten-lua-kct-15-cua-viet-nam.jpg


TT-400 Navy variant:
VN1_soha.vn-d2fe2.jpg


TT-400 Coastguard variant
canh-sat-bien-viet-nam-sap-nhan-du-9-tau-tuan-tra-tt400.jpg

canh-sat-bien-viet-nam-sap-nhan-du-9-tau-tuan-tra-tt400.jpg


DN-2000 class ( built domesticallly ) 8x in commission. It's a Damen 9014
img-3881-1412402750079.JPG

20150831075839-20.jpg
 
Last edited:
I dont think Vietnam put less weapon on Molniya for more operational days, they use another platform TT400 or DN2000 for that. TT400 hull cost about 1 million, during few year Vietnam built dozen of them. Tarantul and its AShM or TT-400 now all built domestically, so it's cheaper than quoted,

Impressive. Only 1 million for TT400 hull. Are you sure, that's very cheap. Even our local built marine & fishery patrol vessel and Customs vessel with comparable size cost more than 10 million.

60 metre Marine & Fishery patrol vessel.
image-10.jpg


60 metre Customs vessel
B%2526C%2B90002%2B2015-12-16%2Bat%2B03.57.32.jpg
 
Last edited:
Impressive. Only 1 million for TT400 hull. Are you sure, that's very cheap. Even our local built marine & fishery patrol vessel and Customs vessel with comparable size cost more than 10 million.

60 metre Marine & Fishery patrol vessel.
image-10.jpg


60 metre Customs vessel
B%2526C%2B90002%2B2015-12-16%2Bat%2B03.57.32.jpg

By self designing and producing, TT400 saved 90% of total cost for hull, if we buy it, it would cost 10 million.

Impressive. Only 1 million for TT400 hull. Are you sure, that's very cheap. Even our local built marine & fishery patrol vessel and Customs vessel with comparable size cost more than 10 million.

60 metre Marine & Fishery patrol vessel.
image-10.jpg


60 metre Customs vessel
B%2526C%2B90002%2B2015-12-16%2Bat%2B03.57.32.jpg

By self designing and producing, TT400 saved 90% of total cost for hull, if we buy it, it would cost 10 million.
btw it is a 54meter, 400 ton patrol boat, not 60m
 
By self designing and producing, TT400 saved 90% of total cost for hull, if we buy it, it would cost 10 million. btw it is a 54meter, 400 ton patrol boat, not 60m

Very impressive. We do design & built our patrol boat by ourselves, yet the production cost still exceed 10 Million. I can only compare your TT400, 54meter patrol boat to Indonesian, 60 meter patrol boat, since we don't have 54 meter patrol boat.
 
I never say that we should use Tarantul instead of KCR-60. I only say that we should make KCR-60 missile capabilty similar to Tarantul, and that discussion have been concluded ( closed ) by me. But, if we want to talk about KCR-60 endurance at sea, then it's worse than Tarantul. Tarantul is 10 days, KCR-60 is 9 days worth of endurance at sea.

As you said, our seas are vast. So why are we ( TNI-AL ) still ordering KCR-60?

kcr-60-image02.jpg

BTW, one need to consider the Molniya and tarantul class is top heavy design, optimized for littoral operation in Baltic and Black Sea, not to mention they are using COGOG engines in which very consuming if be used at their low to middle rates speed so the theoretically 10 days operation is usually less, especially if they must facing high seas water area in which need more work rates for their engines compared to the calm seas. That's why Indonesian Navy is not to fond with Russian combat boat design, regarding the specific task in our Naval planner mind to cope with Indonesian challenges.

Very impressive. We do design & built our patrol boat by ourselves, yet the production cost still exceed 10 Million. I can only compare your TT400, 54meter patrol boat to Indonesian, 60 meter patrol boat, since we don't have 54 meter patrol boat.

FPB 57 meter, designed along with Lurrsen shipyard is one the closest we had compared to Molniya class

ab79b9edc978ee1ed7793fc100bf2cbd.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom