Submarines, we finally got our submarine

I am a bit of a military buff so this one deals a bit with my interest. Not too many Malaysians are thrilled or bothered when our first submarine reached our shore. She will be joined by another so we will have a pair.


From Nacho photos ... not mine, I did not have the means and time to visit the occassion.


The first submarines emerged way back in the 1860’s in the American civil war. Perhaps the most famous one was the Hunley which story was made into a TV movie and was aired over Astro recently. These early apparatus were used to attack military targets such as warship.

http://www.americancivilwar.com/tcwn/civil_war/naval_submarine.html

However, the really wide scale use of submarines came in World War II where Germany used its U-Boats to attack merchant ships bring in war and non-war supplies into the United Kingdom so that the nation can be starved and deprived into submission.

It became a strategic weapon whereby instead of directly attacking British warship in a conventional kill or be killed confrontation.

U Boats were used as "Wolf-Packs"approach where 3 to 20 submarines seek to envelop a group of merchant ships and try to sink as many ships and materials as possible.

http://www.uboat.net/ops/wolfpacks/overview.htm

The number of Allied ships lost was horrendous. More than 3,000 ships were lost in the Battle of Atlantic. Each ships carried tens of sailor so the casualties were very very high. The plight of the brave sailors injured with severe burns and broken limps floating in the icy cold and violent Atlantic Ocean was too horrible for me to imagine.

http://www.uboat.net/allies/merchants/losses_year.html

Later American submarines did the same to Japan in the closing stages of World War II and effectively put the entire Japanese population into a state of desperation and famine as supplies of raw materials and essential goods from sea was prevented successfully from entering into Japanese harbours. Some American commanders believed that the situation was so bad that even without the atomic bomb, Japan might surrender after another 6 months of blockade.

Nowadays, the greatest submarines in the world are nuclear submarines carrying nuclear Inter Continental Ballistic Missiles. These vessels are capable of submerging under the sea for months and able to launch nuclear missiles across thousand of miles. It is now a strategic deterrent weapon where if your nuclear opponent has wiped out your armies and air force, you still have your submarines hidden somewhere undetected to retaliate. A means to holocast.

So what did we Malaysians paid millions to acquire and maintain the 2 submarines for?

Malaysia comprise of a peninsular plus the northern shoreline of the formidable Borneo sub-continent so it has a vast area to cover. The most recent and significant threat comes from pirates with small, swift, powerful speedboats and we all remember the high profile Sipadan Island hostage taking case. It must have been a horrible experience for the victims and we must not allow this kind of thing to happen again.

But submarines are not designed to chase pirates in little boats. It s primary weapon is torpedoes which is meant to hit bigger, slower cargoes or warships. Its vision from periscope or its cone tower is very limited compared to helicopters which afforded greater vision to its personnel so submarines are not designed and built to locate and hunt down pirates.

Let’s see how our democratically elected leader explains it

http://bigdogdotcom.wordpress.com/2007/10/24/kd-tunku-abdul-rahman-launched/

“It is crucial for Malaysia to have a small but credible and effective naval force not only to safeguard its sovereignity and maritime interests against any eventuality but more importantly contribute to the maritime security and safety in the region,” he said at the launch and naming of Malaysia’s first Scorpene submarine at the DCN Shipyard, here.

- I don’t get it. Maybe I am stupid. Our shorelines are big and our sea area is huge, extending all the way up to Spratly Island, right? So how can our naval force cover that much area and remain small and effective?

- Imagine trying to hire 2 security guard to walk around the whole Putrajaya administration complex…..

- Submarines are not meant to counter anything and everything as its combat versatility is not great.

Najib’s wife, Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor, launched the submarine which was named after Malaysia’s first prime minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman.

- Must have been a charming spectacle, let’s move on….

Najib said the introduction of the Scorpene submarine would certainly strengthen RMN’s naval capability.



-
Huh? To do what? Reads like a karangan tingkatan lima if you ask me.

On the seabed lie underwater pipelines that transport Malaysia’s oil and gas ashore as well as cables that link major international communication networks.


- Naval submarines are not built to ferry civilian pipe engineers to sea bed or watch over miles and miles of cable, right?

- Am I missing anything?

One thing Badawi said about Malaysia is “First World Facility but Third World Mentality”. Given the Nuri accident rates, one wonders about the prevailing maintenance capability and culture.
Our intrepid current DPM who used the nation’s armed forces helicopter to attend his political party’s little powwow was stout, unperturbed and brave as the national asset was expertly landed when mechanical problem surfaced.

However, if our submarine were to suffer malfunction or accident severe enough to render it immobile or even sink it, do we have the capability to rescue our brave, expensively assembled and trained submariners?

Look what the Russians have to endure when the Kursk exploded and sunk

We need to learn from them ... oops another lawatan sambil belajar....

I remember some statistic was quoted to the effect that only 0.01% of the national service boys and girls died so 35 submariners out of thousand of naval personnel could provide a similar acceptable ratio, I suppose.

Whoever that has to explain things to the family of 0.01% has an unenviable task, that’s for sure.

20 comments:

  1. I don't think you see the strategic advantage of having 2 scorpennes submarines. India with a much larger coastline has only 8 of these types with a worst security situation than Malaysia and no, you don't use scorpennes to chase down pirates. Malaysia has better assets to do that. - Zamorin

    ReplyDelete
  2. two subs don't make any real strategic advantage for our coastline defence both in war and peace scenario. against pirates and the like, attack helos are better suited, or anti tank planes, if you have the stomach for it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Whichever way you cut it, the monies were spent for the benefits of someone's commission / pocket. Heard of hi-tech radar system purchased and sitting in dust in some military facilities. Incompetent nincompoops can't even operate them. WTF. My tax monies?? Try going to war with Sing, I believe we'll be whooped in no time.. Another embarassment..

    ReplyDelete
  4. Disagree. The submarines can be used to detect the millions of illegal immigrants coming underwater, as photo-ops for Defence Ministers, maybe even "field trips" for National Service childen. Don't try to stop progress!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Submarines are surprise weapons and even 2 has strategic advantage. Pakistan only had 1 in the 1965 war and it was used to cause ruckus/uncertainty against the IN. Its not a submarines job to hunt pirates. - Zamorin

    ReplyDelete
  6. Zamorin

    I don't see the strat4egic advantage of having subs for Malaysia because there isn't any. if you do see any strategic advantage for us to have the subs, care to share? please do not stop half way otherwise you might give the wrong impression that you are a cybertrooper.

    Pakistan and India were at a state of wr. What ruckus did Pakistan created and does Malaysia need to do that? The war between India and Pakistan arosed due to many factors such as land ownership, religious tension etc but does Malaysia face such issues with anyone?

    as for the Indian navy having their own submarines, they are not the best examples because their needs and strategic views and needs are not the same as ours.

    nor I believe we share the same situation as the 2 Koreas where submarines can be used to insert special forces for specific, short term objectives

    if we do have a state of tension with anyone, we might as well bring it to the UN. I do not believe as a nation, Malaysia needs to, and withstand going to, an all out conventional war.


    the more pressing need for us is for patrol vessels to counter piracy, human traffickers and smugglers. that is the need that M'sia faces.

    and the bottom line is this. Under the kebajikan masyarakat present rulings, Orang Kurang Upaya that can't work and can work qualifies for aid amounting to RM150 and RM300 per month respectively. They are not allowed to have Astro. Is Malaysia really that financially constrained that we can't allowed the less fortunate segment of society to live with dignity?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi Lee Wee Tak,

    If you want to counter piracy, human traffickers and smugglers, submarines are not the platform for it. For that we have fast attack crafts/OPV's and heli's. I think many people miss that point. Scorpennes role would be to counter hostile forces. Malaysia might not stand a chance against Singapore or Indonesia but that doesn't mean we give up on a deterrent. If that was the case, only the U.S will need to maintain its Navy as it can wipe out most of the world naval forces. Singapore also wouldn't need its Sjoormen-class submarines since it is not in the state of war with any nation. In Malaysia's case it is to cause at a minimum; unacceptable damage to an invading force so that they will be deterrent from attacking us. Which platform other than a submarine is better suited for that role and give us that strategical advantage? We don't have any secondary platforms such as a missile force/silo's and Scorpennes will be the most modern SSK submarines to patrol S.E.A. It also has tactical value to hunt down hostile frigates and destroyers and for sea denial roles. We should ideally be able to protect both our sovereignty and to counter pirates, traffickers etc.

    wrt to Indo/pak war my reference was PNS Hangor which sank an Indian frigate INS Khukri and damaged INS Kirpan effectively derailing IN's forward movement....all that with a single sub against a much larger Navy with an Aircraft carrier.

    My point is I'm no Najib fan nor did I like the way it was proccured (with mongolian blood) but that doesn't make the scorpennes a bad platform though personally I would have preferred U-214's with AIP.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Roy or Zamorin

    thanks for your explanation but to me the issue is not whether we need the sub to counter threat or not.

    call me foolhardy but I do not see Malaysia needs a submarine to counter sea borne conventional assault by another country because SUCH THREAT DOES NOT EXIST.

    even if it does, we already have aircraft which as more efficient in stopping assault onto our shores. we also signed defense treaty with other nations and we can also request UN intervention but that is another story.....

    I prefer the money being channelled to schools, hospitals, OKUs and all that. M'sia has more than a decade of deficit budget, now that has a bad impact on the exchange rate and pull down the standard of living. address that, more Malaysians will be happier than having that steel sausage

    Regards

    WT

    ReplyDelete
  9. Singapore has submarines, Indonesia has submarines. Therefore, Malaysia needs some too.

    The Scorpenes can place mines for sea denial and insert PASKAL counter-terrorist teams near hijacked oilrigs. Add Blackshark torpedos, Exocet ASM. A formidable asset, that we can't simply delay its procurement until a clear threat is present.

    Consider that Singapore will soon have 4 Stirling AIP equipped Vastergotlands (our Scorpene does NOT have AIP, which enables you to stay submerged longer), and China is staking claim of the Spratlys with their growing PLA Navy. The need for those expensive Scorpenes is justified.

    If you are of the opinion that we should go to the UN when Indonesia lands their paratroopers on our pineapple farm (which they did in 1960s Confrontation) or any other threats that might arise, why just oppose the submarines? What about the Pt-91M tanks and Su-30MKM fighter jets? The Astross MRLS, Jebat class F2000 frigates? These are all useless against pirates and smugglers. Singapore and Thailand are still militarily stronger. We should just completely disarm. And why put our expensive aircraft at harm's way from anti-aircraft measures on enemy escort ships when we can just launch torpedos?

    The only beef I have with this submarine is the kickbacks behind it, which could have been used for MESMA AIP. The submarine itself is a pressing requirement. Shake up the government for more funds towards people and development. We already spend the least percentage of our GDP (2%) on our armed forces compared to our neighbors. Having more money for the poor as a result of not getting the Scorpenes is useless if it is in the hands of same-old thieving squandering BN anyway. Don't deny MAF capacity building because we the electorate could not reign our leaders in.

    ReplyDelete
  10. WT,

    Unfortunately that's now what military planning work (under a non-threat scenario). We need to be at least be able to defend ourselves before our security partners or U.N intervenes.

    You state that fighter aircraft to be used to stop an attack from the shore. Which of our aircraft can be tasked with it? SU30's? Mig-29's? Then which aircraft is going to be used for air-superiority, escort or CAP missions?

    Scorpennes can effectively prevent a shore landing by engaging the landing crafts.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Roy,

    disagree submarines prevent shore landing. in all the amphibious assault from Gallipoli to Iwo Jima to Okinawa to Falklands and Grenada there is no track record of even submarines contesting the armada

    In an amphibious landing assault, there will be an armada of destroyers in the task force as well as anti-Submarine aircraft. What can 1 or 2 submarines do?

    besides, Malaysia do not have enemies capable to do so on a scale that support a full fledge invasion from the sea. If there is an enemy with such capabilities, I rather we make peace (and trade) with them

    just for argument sake. MIG 29 is an air superiority fighther. It can provide cover for our helicopters or bombers to attack landing craft. It there is such an attack, better to defend Okinawa style rather than get anniliated by the sea armada and air cover.

    Roy,

    do you honestly think we will be on war footing with anyone. Malaysia is not a lucrative military target and with the vast number of different nationality in Malaysia, the borderless world today will be the best defense.

    that's why Singapore is not a good place to invade. a salvo there and one might offend Americans, French, Chinese, British, Israelis, Malaysians, Italians etc.

    Roy, I checked your blog sites counterpunch and expert exchange and it doesn't look updated at all. how come? Are you one of the hired bloggers of BN?

    I read in Suara KeAdilan that they are hiring, if it is true, do they pay well? I sure can use some extra dough

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anom 29 September

    "Singapore has submarines, Indonesia has submarines. Therefore, Malaysia needs some too."

    - Singapore got Geylang legalised brothels Malaysia needs some too?

    "If you are of the opinion that we should go to the UN when Indonesia lands their paratroopers on our pineapple farm (which they did in 1960s Confrontation) or any other threats that might arise, why just oppose the submarines?"

    - if they land in mou farm the submarine is aint not frigging good.
    - I oppose the submarine purchase but I did not say we should disarm our army. We still need the grunts so don't go too gung ho.

    - Singapore and Indonesia do not discriminate people by having bumiputra status so Malaysia should do the same too?

    - my mum used to tell me if people eat sh@t then I should eat too....

    "Having more money for the poor as a result of not getting the Scorpenes is useless if it is in the hands of same-old thieving squandering BN anyway. Don't deny MAF capacity building because we the electorate could not reign our leaders in."

    - go ask the poor if giving them more money is useless or not
    - enough complaints already, what can you do about this "same-old thieving..."?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Lee Wee Tak,

    "disagree submarines prevent shore landing. in all the amphibious assault from Gallipoli to Iwo Jima to Okinawa to Falklands and Grenada there is no track record of even submarines contesting the armada"


    Was there even a submarine force to speak of, for the defenders? All of them were deciminated before the amphibious assaults began. That was a priority because submarines in the equation can be dangerous to the invaders.


    About your point about the invaders having anti-submarine aircrafts/weapons and Mig29's giving cover to heli's, surely the invasion will also feature anti-aircraft weapons.

    Its a lot more difficult to detect submarines than other types of platform especially when our armed forces are currently inferior. 2 Scorpennes is a good start. You don't have to engage them when they are near our shores, we can engage them during deployment/built-up (this is the chinese policy wrt a U.S attack)

    The point is to at least have weapons to stave off an invasion untill our partners or U.N intevenes else we will no longer be a soverign country.


    "do you honestly think we will be on war footing with anyone. Malaysia is not a lucrative military target and with the vast number of different nationality in Malaysia, the borderless world today will be the best defense."


    According to most military analysts the chances of war will increase as world resources dwindle. U don't start buliding up only when a eminent threat is present.


    "Roy, I checked your blog sites counterpunch and expert exchange and it doesn't look updated at all. how come? Are you one of the hired bloggers of BN?"

    That's below the belt. I don't update my blogs and experts-exchange is an IT site and has nothing to do with politics. If I were a BN blogger would I despise Najib/BN/UMNO/MCA/MIC/Gerakan so much? Would I need to risk myself attending many opposition discources or have been a member of DAP for more than 10 years?

    Anom 29,

    "
    - Singapore and Indonesia do not discriminate people by having bumiputra status so Malaysia should do the same too?"

    They don't have an official discriminatory policy doesn't mean it doesn't happen. With all the talk about meritocracy they could only find Lee Kwan Yews son to be the President.....I have faced discrimination in Singapore myself, maybe you don't face it as a chinese.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Lee Kwan Yews son to be the President

    I meant, Prime Minister

    ReplyDelete
  15. Roy,

    u clearly do not have an idea what you are trying to argue and you are confusing yourself.

    Calling u a cybertrooper is not below the belt but probably correct. You are going against your own argument in trying to justify the wrong decisions made.

    "Was there even a submarine force to speak of, for the defenders? All of them were decimated before the amphibious assaults began. That was a priority because submarines in the equation can be dangerous to the invaders."

    - in the Okinawa campaign, Kamikazi represented the greatest threat to the US task force.

    - the greatest armada ever assembled, close to 1,000 vessels with so many destroyers that they were split between radar picket and ASW duties and Jap submarine never had a part to play in attacking the US invasion fleet.

    - any decent amphibious assault task force would have ASW capabilities and given the advance state of existing submarines, first rate destroyers would have attained a high level of ASW efficiency and the 2 submarines would need to come in slowly to reach torpedo range. Once torpedoes are fired, they would be within depth charges range whereas aircraft with long range striking capability and supersonic speed would have a better survival chance and carry a greater threat.

    "According to most military analysts..."
    - who are you quoting?


    "You don't have to engage them when they are near our shores, we can engage them during deployment/built-up (this is the chinese policy wrt a U.S attack)"

    - how the hell you know about China's war plan? That's classified info or you got your scuttlebutt from some China doll in Pudu hawker centre?

    - China is a huge country while its navy may not be a match for US Navy, the vast land area represents supply and ground occupation problems for an invading army and in the very unlikely event of a US invasion, it makes more sense for China to utilise this advantage rather than trying to do what you somehow got to know.

    - are you telling our navy to sail the slow submarine all the way to enemies territory to attack their naval base? Are you telling the KD TAR to do a "Tora Tora Tora"?

    - Is that practical? you need proper intelligence and hell lot of time in advance and surface ships sail faster than submarines.

    the above contradict nicely with your other statement:

    "About your point about the invaders having anti-submarine aircrafts/weapons and Mig29's giving cover to heli's, surely the invasion will also feature anti-aircraft weapons."

    - the invasion force would also carry ASW capability. Which 1 is a greater and more efficient threat? 2 slow torpedo firing subs or a squadron or 2 of MiG-29s?


    "With all the talk about meritocracy they could only find Lee Kwan Yews son to be the President....."


    - before LHL came up Goh Chok Tong was the Prime Minister. so what? if he is good enough, he is good enough.

    - back in old good M'sia, Najib is son of Tun Razak and he also appointed his own cousin into the cabinet. Badawi's son in law rose quickly through the ranks while Mahathirs' son is a Deputy Minister

    - politics can be a family trait. I don't care if families are involved in politics. Just like a son taking over his dad's grocery store.
    What matters is if he is good enough.


    "I have faced discrimination in Singapore myself, maybe you don't face it as a chinese."

    - presto! definite sign of a cybertrooper
    1) play with racist remarks
    2) making unsubstantiated sweeping statement

    - can you please tell me how you got discriminated in Singapore? Are you a Singapore Malay being discriminated in Singapore? If yes, why the keen interest in defending defense spending by our BN government?

    Singaporeans do look down on Malaysians because some of them do feel that Malaysians take away their jobs. Not because if the M'sian is Brown, Dark Brown or Yellow.


    I done pointing out your shallow statement. Go bug someone else.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Let's not forget the manner in which the subs were purchased. This is much more of an integrity issue rather than stategy.

    Well, give Najib a chance to explain it the Parliament. Great post WT.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Thanks RWM

    LWT

    ReplyDelete
  18. Your post is full of insinuations and fiction. You claim to be a military buff on one hand and then you state this:

    "the greatest armada ever assembled, close to 1,000 vessels with so many destroyers that they were split between radar picket and ASW duties and Jap submarine never had a part to play in attacking the US invasion fleet."


    Even a novice military buff would know that the biggest armada ever assembled was in the European theater against Germany during the Normandy landings.


    I don't even want to debate with you on your other fictional pieces and assumptions and thus this is my last post.

    ReplyDelete
  19. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AInvasion_of_Normandy

    1,213 ships for the Normandy invasion and 1,300 for Okinawa

    In Normandy, there were a lot of landing craft, not ships that went accross the British Channel which was 20 miles.

    For Okinawa, the US and Britain Pacific Fleet had to sail accross the Pacific to land Marines and Solders there.

    Ships vs landing craft, see the difference?

    go home, go to your room and sulk.

    Regards
    Wee Tak

    ReplyDelete
  20. Good riddance roy. I don't find your comments constructive to the cause in any way.

    ReplyDelete