The shock wave surrounding the loss of KD Sri Perak on January 8, 1984 in turbulent weather in South China Sea pale in comparison to that of KD Seri Inderapura. The latter caught the attention of the whole nation including myself.
Questions inevitably crop up in the minds of those who have the nation’s safety at heart.
How could the guardian of our shoreline and shipping lane lost its biggest ship in peace time and worse while berthed at the main naval base in Lumut. How will they perform in time of war?
That question reverberated throughout the country and reignited my interest which otherwise would have died a natural death.
While browsing through the internet, I stumbled upon this story carried by our mainstream media dated August 28, 2000.
“The Royal Malaysian Navy today test-fired its Seawolf, Aspide and Exocet MM40 missiles aboard its guided missile corvettes, KD Hang Jebat and KD Laksamana Tun Pusmah, during the Operasi Taming Sari 12/2000 exercise in the South China Sea.
The Seawolf surface-to-air missile and Exocet surface-to-surface missiles were fired from the KD Hang Jebat while the Aspide surface-to-air missile was unleashed by KD Laksamana Tun Pusmah.
The Seawolf, a British-made missile with an effective range of six kilometres, smashed into a target drone towed…”
No one, and myself included, will dispute the effectiveness of the French Exocet, the surface to surface missile reputed to be one of the deadliest. What we are really concerned is the ability of our Seawolf Missile-carrying frigates, KD Jebat and KD Lekiu to counter aerial threats.
To start with, let me quote the content of an email from a friend who was actively involved in the launching of the Seawolf missile from the frigate (not corvette as mentioned by the reporter) KD Jebat.
“The target (drone) range was one kilometer…honestly speaking, it did not hit the target not because of system problem like the one encountered by KD Rahmat but more due to human error, i.e. premature activation of the ‘SAFE FIRE’ command…”
Which of the two, the reporter or the crew, would I trust?
On one hand, the reporter claimed that the Seawolf missile smashed into a target and on the other, the crew admitted the failure was caused by human error leaving the drone unscathed? Most probably, the reporter was prevented from being honest with his reporting.
I thought the spinning machine called media have stopped dishing out misleading information especially after what RTM did with KD Rahmat in 1976.
The semi-paralysed KD Rahmat sailed into Malaysian waters in 1972 with the fanfare of being one of the first missile equipped warship in South East Asia. For the next ten years, she agonisingly carried a pair of ‘white elephants’ on her deck in the form of surface-to-air ‘Seacat quadruple missile launcher’ and ‘director’.
From 1972 until 1982, the year she discarded that token symbol of superiority in favour of a conventional weapon, the anti-aircraft missile was tested only once. That was in 1976.
During the test-firing, KD Rahmat was accompanied by a Royal Australian Navy ‘river-class destroyer’ carrying similar missile system. While the missiles from the Australian Navy destroyer had to be diverted at the last moment in order to save the target, KD Rahmat had to be content with two launches that missed the target by miles. Realising the hopelessness of the situation, the commanding officer decided to abort the exercise leaving RTM with some spinning work to think about.
Two weeks later, RTM aired a jaw-dropping documentary “TLDM - KD Rahmat berjaya melancarkan peluru berpandu permukaan ke udara” focusing on the flame-belching missile leaving the launcher on a flight to nowhere.
No one can dispute that KD Rahmat had successfully launched her surface to air missiles. But in time of war, it is the hits that matter and not the number of launches. There is no pilot who will volunteer to fly his plane in the flight path of the missile so that the navy can record a hit, unless he is a jilted lover bent on committing suicide.
And twenty four years later, the spin is again repeated.
While Seacat missiles have been consigned to the history books, the Seawolf is still a potent weapon. In fact, it is reputed to be one of the most effective anti-aircraft missiles with 80 percent kill ratio and had proven its effectiveness during the Falklands War of 1982.
If the world at large have high regards for the British made Seawolf missile, why then they failed miserably in Malaysian waters? Is it due to contrasting atmosphere or because of constraints beyond the navy’s control?
We all have heard the old adage “practice makes perfect” but how serious are we and in this case TLDM of perfecting the practice.
Since arriving in Malaysian waters in 1999, we hardly hear KD Jebat and Lekiu test-firing the Seawolf missile except for that solitary botched attempt in August 2000. That was more than nine years ago. It is absurd to expect the two frigates to be in fighting trim if they are confined to one solitary practice in ten years.
Depriving the two major warships relevant requirements to enhance their defense capability is a grave mistake. It could even be catastrophic. Either discard the launcher / director and replace it with conventional weaponry or provide the necessary funds for the navy to acquire missiles and drones.
If cost is the main hindrance, why then the ministry paid more than half billion ringgit to a company (or crony) that cannot be relied upon to defend the country? We all know that wars and battles are not fought or won by armchair analysts. It is the front line men – the gritty soldiers, sailors and officers, and the wisdom of generals and admirals – that can decide the fate of a country.
In the event of war, ships that cannot defend themselves from air attack will be sitting ducks waiting their turn to be slaughtered.
Since the outbreak of the Second World War, victory or defeat had been decided by the fleet that controlled the sky. The era of warships bombarding each other in full view have long gone.
Remember the ‘demonstrations’ of air power during the curtain raiser of the Pacific War, Pearl Harbour December 1941. Remember the decisive sea Battle that turned the tide of the Pacific War, Battle of Midway Islands June 1942. Remember the tragic conclusion, Hiroshima and Nagasaki August 1945!
And nearer to our shores, the battleship Prince of Wales and the cruiser Repulse were doomed from the day the fleet left Singapore. Deprived of air cover, both ships were at the receiving end of sustained aerial attack by the Japanese land based aircraft.
Can our ships defend themselves in similar situation? After dissecting various journals and online forums, and comparing the numerical and technological strength of our navy relative to that of the purported “enemies”, I dread to think of the possibilities.
The Naval high command should not leave the ships’ fate in the hands of politicians. Plead, request or demand allocations even if it means falling out of line. If it still fail to knock some senses into their heads, dismantle the ‘white elephants’ onboard KD Jebat and Lekiu and regress to conventional anti-aircraft weaponry.
uish citer lama ... tapi den kurang tau tahap readiness militer nie, tapi mmg percaya kita mmg sedia untuk mengerakkan tukul pertama kita " Pasukan Atur-gerak Cepat - PAC" sementara the main force bersedia. Mungkin senior disini leh kasi penjelasan ..wa mmg minat issue nie .
aku pernah dgr cerite ni dgn org lama TLDM.Rasanya kalau nak tengok tahap 'reddiness' tentera laut seluruh rantau asia tenggara ni semuanya sama......kita tak jauh dibelakang singapore.
depa tak praktis pakai misil betui pon, depa hari2 ada simulator training tembak misl tuh.
yg tuh cukup utk maintain tahap readiness depa.
lagi satu, mungkin ada tembakan2 live yg depa buat tanpa menjemput reporters dan tak payah declare pon... military nih kan full of secrecy.... kita mana nak tau, kalu nak tau kena la join depa....
apakah fungsi air defense assets? adakah untuk menembak jatuh pesawat musuh? kalo itu ler jawapan yg bermain di benak, maka itulah jawapan yang...
salah.
tugas aset pertahanan udara adalah untuk mempertahankan aset yang dilindunginya daripada dimusnahkan oleh pesawat musuh. itu fungsi utama. kalo dapat tembak jatuh pesawat musuh, that's a bonus.
contoh. katakanlah sebuah pesawat pejuang musuh dgn bom sedang terbang rendah menuju ke arah KD Jebat. pastuh juruterbang dia baru jer nak commence pop-up, tetiba dia nampak satu Sea wolf sudah mari straight ke arah dia. apa dia mau buat? it's either eject or take evasive action. most probably its the latter. tapi mau wat evasive manuver dgn pesawat laden with bombs it not easy. so mau takmo, kena discard la itu bomb load. baru senang mau cabut. walopon seawolf tu mungkin miss, tapi pesawat pejuang tadi dah ilang hamping keseluruhan offensive capability.
lagipon, artikel blog tuh lupa nak ckp 2 perkara. pertama, sea wolf ada excellent combat record masa Falklands war. yang kedua, KD Jebat is bristling with guns, providing layered air defence.
kesimpulannya, again, ilmu cetek tapi mau tunjuk pandai. sapa yang cuba tipu rakyat skrg nih? fikirkanlah sendiri...
wa pon xbraper tau tahap mana persediaan ATM dlm menghadapi serangan mengejut nie..tapi wa yakin ATM kita berkebolehan mempertahankan bumi tercinta ni dari serangan musuh..
Yaa.. semua surface ship kita armed with guns dari large caliber hinggalah ke small caliber. Main gun mcm Jebat (57mm) & OPV (76mm) kita tu bukan saja leh guna utk surface target, tapi leh guna gak utk aerial target. Kesiap-siagaan navy kita pun dah terbukti spt dlm kes lanun di Somalia. Dlm masa singkat kita leh mobilize navy kita ke teluk aden. Bukan mudah utk gerakkan aset terutamanya ke tempat yang jauh. Jgn jadikan kes Inderapura satu benchmark kpd Navy kita. Rasanya tak adil. Kemalangan di kapal bukan saja pernah jadi kat TLDM, tetapi juga navy jiran kita Singapore, yg ramai anggap "yang terbaik" di mana kapal mereka pernah terlibat di dalam kemalangan yang meragut nyawa. Tapi takde pulak orang persoalkan kredibility navy depa. Ujian penembakan Exocet MM38 baru2 ni bukti maintenance Navy kita berada di tahap yang terbaik, oleh kerana kalau ikut jangkahayat yang ditetapkan oleh manufacturer dia, missile tu patutnya dah tak boleh nak pakai. Takde pulak orang nak puji Navy kita bab ni?
Bapa aku kru pertama KD Jebat. Aku tunjuk kat dia article pasak Si Jebat dan Lekiu ni. Pastu aku tanya pendapat dia.
Katanya: masa kat Uk, missile seawolf tu dapat tembak jatuh target yang dipanggil Rusten. Bila dah balik kat sini, sepatutnya boleh ulangi kejayaan di UK. Entah macam mana boleh gagal. Peliknya, kenapa jimat peluru berpandu tu. Apa salahnya buat latihan setahun sekali? Tak kan lah pasal gagal sekali, lepas tu tak nak cuba lagi.
Dia juga pesan...kalau nak berforum kenalah baca dan faham apa yang ditulis pemblog tu. Baru ada kick.
Dia kata dia tak dapat kesan pun penulis tu mempersoal kewibawaan Exocet dan Aspide. Yang dipersoalkan cuma kewibawaan seawolf sebagai penangkis kapal terbang. Kalau tak berlatih macamana nak kendali dengan sempurna.
Contoh2 yang dia bagi pun betul. Perang zaman ni banyak bergantung kepada kapal terbang dan kebolehan kapal permukaan melawan serangan udara. Kalau setakat guna meriam, heli pun belum tau boleh jatuh.
Oh ye nak lupa dah...katanya lagi penulis ada bagi contoh tentang keberkesanan seawolf dalam perang Falklands...
"In fact, it is reputed to be one of the most effective anti-aircraft missiles with 80 percent kill ratio and had proven its effectiveness during the Falklands War of 1982."
Sudahnya apa dia kata..."cuba tengok youtube tentang latihan menembak seawolf, aspide dan excocet. Aspide dia orang tunjuk target dalam radar yang musnah setelah ditembak, excocet dia orang tunjuk berulang-ulang macamana kontainer tu bersepai lepas dibedil, tapi bab seawolf bayang target pun tak nampak" Dia minta pembahas forum berdebat dengan fikiran terbuka dan bukan dengan perasaan.
ok... pertama2nya wa respek la bapak lu jadi kru pertama KD Jebat. bukan senang jadi pioneer nih. hanya terbaik jer yg boleh jadi.
keduanya, penulis blog tak kasik gambaran dan kebenaran sepenuhnya tentang keadaan. mcm disuruh citer pasal keta, dia citer pasal tayar jer. mmg ler dia citer tuh ada benarnya tapi kebenaran yang sekerat.
bab lu tanya apsal Sea Wolf ditest sekali jer, wa pon tatau. tapi ada beberapa kemungkinan seperti kos (satu sea wolf mahal reganya), payah nak wat latihan tembakan dan terdedah kpd usaha perisikan musuh (elint, sigint, telint dan sebagainya). Having said that, kalo tak salah wa, TLDM mmg ada wat test tembakan sea wolf beberapa kali.
bab guna meriam utk tembak pesawat, mmg ler susah nak kena kalo dioperasikan secara manual. cuba kalo dikawal oleh radar, jangankan heli, pesawat pejuang pon boleh bersepai kalo tak caya, cuba baca tentang peranan Shilka dalam menghancurkan pesawat pejuang Israel masa Perang Ramadan (org Israel panggil Yom Kippur War dan org barat panggil Six Days War).
last sekali bab youtube. Exocet boleh ditunjuk sebab dia bantai sasaran yang tak bergerak. jadi kamera boleh fokus kat sasaran tuh jer. pastuh Exocet nih bergerak pada kelajuan Mach 0.98 jadi boleh dilihat dgn mudah. Aspide pulak bergerak laju tapi kamera boleh fokus kat sasaran dia iaitu pesawat pejuang yg besao gedabak. tapi sea wolf nih masa test kali pertama, depa against peluru meriam. maknanya sea wolf nih kena intercept sebijik peluru meriam yg sedang meluru ke sasaran. jadi camno nak nak fokus tuh sebab sea wolf dan sasaran deduanya bergerak sangat laju. tapi.... untuk tidak menghampakan bapak lu, wa selak2 youtube, terjumpa la bidio nih. enjoy...
Mcm kes peluru Sea Skua dulu. Tapi TLDM cepat2 rectify the problem dan 2nd test is a success. Rasanya Sea Wolf tak pernah diuji sekali je, rasanya dah beberapa kali. Sama dgn Aspide kita.
Agaknya dia samakan gun kat kapal kita cam gun Perang Dunia Kedua dulu kot, main tembak manually je. Zaman skg ni, gun sudah accurate, tambah2 lagi dgn radar guided, yg keupayaan ni dimiliki oleh kapal2 kita. Gun modern skg ni, bukan kata helikopter, incoming missile pun dia leh tembak
Yang ditembak seawolf tu bukan peluru meriam tapi drone. Tau apa itu drone?
Peluru meriam walau guna apa jenis control pun tetap tak boleh dikawal. Ia macam robot yang dah di preprogram.
Satu hala aje dia pergi. Berbeza dengan peluru berpandu...sebab tu dipanggil berpandu kerana haluannya boleh diubah.
Cuba lihat video klip tu...target tu sebenarnya ada di belakang letupan, Lepas seawolf tu meletup, drone tu cantik molek aje. Betul le kata penulis tu, Sebab kurang latihan pegawai yang pegang kontrol gelabah. Kalau time perang, punah dah Jebat.
Dalam perang Falklands tu, attack pertama Argentina guna 4 jetfighter. 2 ditembak jatuh oleh exocet, satu terhempas cuba mengelak dan satu lagi berjaya melancar peluru berpandu udara ke kapal.
Serangan kedua, juga 4 buah jetfighter. Sepatutnya Royal Navy boleh mengulangi kejayaan tapi kerana kalut, kapal2 RN pulak yang kena belasah.
Kalau nak tau lebih lanjut, kena lah cari sendiri butirannya. Tapi ntahla ye, ada tak dalam Bahasa Melayu. Kalau faham Bahasa Inggeris, seronok juga baca.
Balik kepada Jebat kita. Baru latihan dah kalut. Kalau perang betul macamana?
Post time 23-11-2009 01:28 AM
变色卡
Author
kalo tak caya, cuba baca tentang peranan Shilka dalam menghancurkan pesawat pejuang Israel masa Perang Ramadan (org Israel panggil Yom Kippur War dan org barat panggil Six Days War).
