MARINE CORPS : IS IT NECESSARY FOR MALAYSIA PART 2

MARINE CORPS : IS IT NECESSARY FOR MALAYSIA PART 2





G-wagon of the 9th RAMD exiting LCAC... photo taken from here

In the event of China ever growing military presence in the South China Sea...one would think that the decision made by Pak Hisham...our great Defence Minister in forming up a marine brigade (or something like that) is correct and in time....

i would like to differ in this opinion....

Instead what pak hisham should do is to revise our naval fleet capabilities...and at the same time...enhance our already capable land forces....

SURFACE AND SUB SURFACE FORCE



Now is the right time to arm our NGVP`s....

The most pressing issue currently bogging down our military forces is military presence in the South China Sea....

This can not be done by having a brigade of troops amphibious capable....but by having warships (and more of them) armed to its teeth....and submarines all over the place..

We all know the facts that...during the encroachment by the PLA Navy in James Shoal..we only have one (ONE) warship in the area facing the might of the PLA amphibious task force....which is by right is not enough to push them back (unless we have that ship fully armed and operational ready to give a fatal blow)

The lacking number of warship (2 fully armed frigate, 2 light frigate still in SLEP mode, 6 offshore patrol vessel..frigate size but lightly armed, 4 old corvette...but still capable of giving a fatal punch) is one issue ATM should address in seriousness....and the announcement made to fully armed the NGPV are a head start....

ATM should also take into consideration in expanding it submarine fleet...as our nation main deterrence capability in ensuring that our waters are not again being encroach....this should warn and should gave who ever have the intention to think twice before harassing our EEZ and territorial waters...

One should know also that...in preventing others to conduct amphibious assault against us....we ourselves should have naval forces capable of driving the enemy back where they came from...thus the term denying seaward invasion...

Malaysia...for a long time had been maintaining this stance...where what ever fight should settle at sea...and from here it is important to get combat capable warships and submarine for our naval forces...

AMPHIBIOUS CAPABILITIES



Up until today....our RDF are only capable of landing troops to shore via RHIB, CB90HEX and these boats...and there is no known landing craft that could take our Scorpion or Stormer...even the Condor or what more Sibmas together with our troops to shore..

Having marine troops without this capability would render them useless...

We all know for fact that our MPCSS have limited amphibious capabilities....with no landing craft available to send even Land Rover or Vamtac ashore apart from having them landed in proper port facilities...

The absence of landing craft...and associated platform to conduct amphibious landing operation (what more an assault) is what the Defence Ministries should look upon....we can send troops to shore and fight using boats...but how can you deploy 3 Mechanize Infantry Battalion from ship to shore for amphibious assault platform and landing craft suitable for it...

Apart from the KD SRI GAYA and KD SRI TIGA...and a dozen of CB90HEX....we still lack the ability to move mechanized or motorized troops for amphibious assault...what more tanks and artillery piece to shore....that is for fact...

For years we knew that whenever there is a deployment from east to west...its either being done via or by sea...and looking at our ship that had stretched its service from Perlis till Sabah...i am not surprised....on why ATM during Lahad Datu Incident had flown troops (via domestic airlines) and assault vehicle (via C-130) instead of sending them by sea using ship...

ATTACH AND AUGMENT







Stormer and Scorpion of the Royal Armor Squadron (Para)

An option which can be made for ATM is to attach various corps and regiment for certain combat requirement...

This is evident in the composition of 10th Brigade (para) where units such as armor and artillery are attached as combat support element to the fighting infantry regiment....

What can be done is to let say take 2 regiment...(one Ranger and one RAMD) for amphibious tactics...augment them with amour corps in line with amphibious capable mobile artillery battery and other combat support and support element...

However...looking at that 10TH brigade already have that structure...what i can say is to add another regiment within 10th Brigade (either ranger or RAMD..preferably ranger since within 10th bde there are already 2 RAMD...) with another armour corps that employs amphibious assault vehicle (AAV-7 or ZBD2000 as example)...and another artillery regiment...

This could make the 10th bde...a true RAPID DEPLOYMENT FORCE / RAPID REACTION FORCE....which consist of airborne troops and amphibious capable troops...

Plus it is not wrong to have both assault capabilities combined in one force...and it reads RAPID DEPLOYMENT FORCE...it deploys to combat by any means available....regardless..

This is what the Australian and surprisingly Singapore had been doing for years....where they have rapid reaction force trained in various delivery methods...and it is amphibious capable...

Take for example the Guards from Singapore...where they are known as heliborne troops...but at the same time they are also mechanized and amphibious capable in some way....making them a flexible fighting infantry...

This should be the essence for our fighting doctrine as well...where one should understands that...although one regiment is known to be airborne...does not mean they are not amphibious capable...

I for myself know that our forces are flexible and capable to fight anywhere and in any given circumstances and this is evident when even the airborne troops of 10th brigade engage in amphibious landing exercise....and one should not put our forces in a rigid stance...just like a rigid mentality that para are only airborne and can not do anything else...while marine are only amphibious and vice versa...

Even standard infantry regiment can do the same...provided there are training...equipment and assets readily available and at their disposal....




jangan jadi terlalu kaku...

sadinia

Comments

  1. Thanx brudder for this interesting pieces of work...made my night shift bearable...

    I agree that a marine corp,brigade,battallion etc in name does not ensure strength and capability if no coherent doctrine and equipments being available. We don't need a marine corp to conduct sea borne operation. During the Normandy landing in 1944 only US/British army elements were involved,the USMC being tied up in the Pacific but still the sea-borne assault was executed.

    Do we need a marine unit? It's good to have one but to add another branch of the armed services that will have fight for a piece of small military budget pie are way too unrealistic for Malaysia,at least for the time being.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. the aset are important.. without any means to transport the marin.. they will just become another infantry unit

      Delete
  2. Tahniah artikel yg bagus!
    Gomen spatutnya meletakkan insiden lahad datu dan james shoal sebagai 'alasan' untuk menaikkan bajet pertahanan...tapi perkara tersebut tak berlaku pun...ape yg berlaku ialah penubuhan marin...marine force is not the issue!...sepatutnya lengkapkan keupayaan ATM berdasarkan insiden tadi...cthnya..melengkapkan keupayaan kelas kedah,menambah keupayaan pendaratan amfibi,pembelian kapal logistik yg mmng perlu diganti pun dan ape2 yg berkaitan berdasarkan dengan dua insiden yg berlaku tadi....aku rasa ini adalah lebih realistik dari penubuhan pasukan marin...just perkasakan keupayaan MAB yg mmng dah wujud sebelum dua insiden itu lagi..
    seperti saudara admin sebut..jangan rigid!...aku yakin baik ramd baik rrd..kedua duanya dah lame boleh bertempur kat mane mane je...apetah lagi kalau diploy PAC...giler babeng marin malaysia berkebolehan airborne!...jangan rigid jangan jumud..kreatif la sikit...nak berhemat dalam berbelanjakan?..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. dulu penggunaan nama PAC di tarik balik kerana kita ni nak menjaga hati jiran2. Kita ni terlalu sopan.

      Delete
  3. Another brilliant article from admin.

    The scenario of the invasion of Terumbu Biskut by "Dragon Land" really interesting. My choice would be combination of A, B and C. However the current Defence Minister might choose E as his answer for PRC invasion. Using only C option might be too much for SOF alone to handle looking the strength of enemy force.

    IMO, the invasion is a classic example similar to Falklands War. The situation is rapidly disadvantage on our side given the developments 5 hours period after the invasion.

    I believe combination of special forces, paratroopers and amphibious assault would be the best answer to retake the reef. Assuming the Navy and Air Force have successfully blockade waters and air around the reef, SOF elements will landed covertly to conduct extensive recon on enemy position, sabotage enemy air defense, disrupt enemy communication etc. The commander has the sufficient intel he required to launch massive operation.

    Covertly insertion of Para used HAHO jump, the brigade will secure the safe landing point for marines. Coordinated attack lead by airstrike and naval bombardment followed by ground operation eventually leads to unconditional surrender of enemy force. Decisive victory for MAF. The limited conflict officially ended after UN intervention with both countries sign the peace treaty.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The question is what force kan be assembled in less 24 hours to react? Notes that the enemy engineers are working to build an air strip. Once that air strip completed, enemy fighters can impose an Air Patrol around the island which will make assault more dificult

      Delete
    2. Thank you bro GGK. Missed that part. IMHO, the only force we can deploy within 24 hours for the moment is RDF through airborne infiltration. Lacking of deployment assets severely affected MAF capability to respond in short notice.

      The great distance of the reef from the main land is a factor to consider. Para initially assemble at Terendak Camp, fly to Labuan to refuel and then to Terumbu Biskut. The recent James Shoal incident maybe an exercise by PLAN to calculate the time MAF needed to respond.

      Once the Para landed on the reef, hopefully they can defended their position until the main force arrived. However without mechanized support, it will be a tough task for them to resist the invasion force attack. The airstrip could not be completed at all cost. That the critical factor that can change the course of war.

      Delete
  4. Menhan tak paham military ke....atau Menhan poorly advised ke...atau ada 'kepentingan' lain..

    ReplyDelete
  5. Don't understand the brain behind our defence planning and procurements...I hate 'Fitted for but not with' concept that vame with our MEKO 100s... We should've armed them to max as they are now just hulls with minimum fighting capacity. Our defence procument sucks big time and we are the laughing stock of other nations. It took 20 over years before we got submarines and the on off MRCA saga but spend billions on A400M when there's options like C17s. We got the right to produce AUGs and now gone down the drain unlike Aussies taht comes up with F88 Austyer. What a shame! And now comes talk of setting up Marines when our BIS are even properly equipped.

    Someone please knock on the heads of those up there. I hope they read this blog and take heed our grouses.

    ReplyDelete
  6. What if gov modify mahawangsa n inderasakti side-mounted ramp to stern-mounted ramp capable of launching amphibi vehicle such as the Russian PTS-4 which can carry with them troops/assault vehicle/armoured elements and at the same time field howitzer loaded onto the PKP boat-like amphibious trailer with folded sponsons towed behind them.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I am agree with admin.
    But in goverenment side, i think the most important thing is the budget.
    And our society should be aware of this military necessity to safeguard our nation.
    Do see our neighbour, they are proud of their military even though some of them are poor.
    But us,..........

    Ps: Now I am in India.
    I see Indian people so much respect to their army and ex-army

    ReplyDelete
  8. 1.Steyr AUG sucks even the australian hate them
    2.Time 2006 East Timor, Australia minta bantuan, 24H later our force dah landing
    3.Lahad datu, Never been publicize 24 jam diperlukan untuk deploy PARA dengan G-wagon
    4.Under equip or not our Meko100 always got Super Lynx 300 with missile on board can at least do something until help come
    5. Do you know our new heli ec725 can be equip with exocet ?

    ReplyDelete
  9. In addition to inderasakti n mahawangsa modification...if gomen could buy the BM5 n 6 at sedara pnye price..modify it also to enable it to launch cb90 by davit ( at least 2 on each side) remove temporary hangar to make space for additional cb90s (lowered by the existing crane)...might be cost effective for long range amphibi deployment (larger fuel tank-extended range). The ships inner belly can be use for accommodations / hospitals.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Yah yah...no racist stuff ok ... i will delete it in no time .... and i hate politics, although i will allow political rants, be prepare for nasty flak from me if its contradict my view.

oh and please wrote your name even if its Anonymous. A person must responsible for his act and words. Dont be a coward.

Popular Posts