Suggestion of Logistic Ship for RMN

1st Candidate

Type 071 (Yuzhao Class)(LPD)













Origin: PRC (People Republic of China)

* Displacement: 18,500+ tons
* Length: 210 m
* Beam: 28 m
* Draft: 7 m
* Speed: 22+ kt
* Range: 6,000 nm at 18 kts
* Propulsion: CODAD, 2-shaft, 4 x SEMT Pielstick 16 PC2.6 V400 Diesel engines (35,200 kW), 47, 200hp [3]
* Armaments:
o 1 x AK-176, 76 mm gun
o 4 x AK-630, 30 mm CIWS
o Possible installation of 2-4 heavy machine-guns (fitted for but not with)
o 4 x 18-tube Type 726-4 decoy/chaff launcher
* Sensors:
o Surface search radar: 1 x Type 360 Radar Seagull S, E/F-band
o Air search radar: 1 x Type 364 Radar, Seagull C, G-band, aft
o Fire control radar: 1 x Type 344 Radar, I band
o Navigational radar: 1
* Complement: 120
* Military lift:
o 4 x air-cushion vehicles plus 500-800 troops and 15-20 armoured vehicles
o 2 x LCVP port/starboard davits
* Helicopters: 2-4 Z-8 Super Frelon


2nd Candidate

Dokdo class amphibious assault ship (LHD)













Origin: South Korea
Tonnage: 14,300 tons (empty) / 18,800 tons (full)
Length: 199 m (653 ft)
Beam: 31 m (102 ft)
Draught: 7 m (23 ft)
Propulsion: 4 S.E.M.T. Pielstick 16 PC2.5 STC Diesel engine
Speed: 23 knots (43 km/h) maximum
18 knots (33 km/h) cruising
Boats and landing
craft carried: 2 LSF-II or LCAC
Capacity: Up to 200 vehicles
Troops: 720 marines, 6 tanks, 7 amphibious assault vehicles
Crew: 700
Armament: Two Goalkeeper CIWS, One RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile
Aircraft carried: Up to 10 helicopters
Aviation facilities: Flight deck and hanger


3rd Candidate

Galicia Class Landing Platform Dock (LPD)














Origin: Netherland & Spain
Displacement: 12.750 tonnes full load
Length: 166.20 m
Beam: 25.00 m
Draft: 5.80 m
Propulsion: Diesel-electric system 4 x Stork Wartsila 12SW28 diesel generators at 14.6 MW 4 x Holec electric motor (two in tandem per shaft) at 12 MW 2 shafts bow thruster
Speed: 19 knots (35 km/h)
Range: 6,000 nautical miles (11,000 km) at 12 kt
Endurance: 6 weeks
Boats and landing
craft carried: 4 LCM1-E and two RHIB
Complement: 185. The ships can transport 600 fully equipped soldiers or 170 APCs or 33 MBTs.
Sensors and
processing systems: DA08 air / surface search IRSCAN SATCOM, Link 1, JMCIS
Armament: 4 Sippican Hycor SRBOC MK36 launcher 1 AN/SLQ-25 Nixie torpedo decoy Indra SLQ-380 Aldebarán 2 x Oerlikon Contraves 20 mm cannons
Aircraft carried: 4 SH-3 Sea King or 6 NH-90 helicopters


4TH Candidate

Makassar Class Landing Platform Dock (LPD)









Origin: South Korea & Indonesia
Displacement: 7,300 tons standard displacement
11,394 tons full displacement
Length: 122 meters ~ 125 meters
Beam: 22 meters
Draft: 4.9 meters
Decks: (Tank Deck); 6.7 meter,(Truck Deck); 11.3 meter
Propulsion: CODAD, 2 shafts
2 x MAN B&W 8L28/32A diesel rated at 2666 BHP/1960 kW@ 775 RPM
Speed:
Maximum: 16 knots
Cruising: 14 knots
Economy: 12 knots
Range: 30 days, up to 10,000 Nm
Boats and landing
craft carried: 2 x LCVP
Troops: 218 troops
Complement: accommodations up to 518 persons
Crew: 126 crew
Armament:
'A' position: Bofors 40mm SAK40/L70 or 100mm
'B' position: 20mm Oerlikon
'B' position: 2 x Mistral Simbad
Aircraft carried: 5 helicopters


5TH Candidate

Endurance Class Landing Platform Dock Ship (LPD)














Origin: Singapore
Displacement: 6,500 tonnes (light)
8,500 tonnes (full)
Length: 141.0 m (463 ft)
Beam: 21.0 m (69 ft)
Draught: 5.0 m (16 ft)
Ramps: 2 × (bow and stern)
Installed power: 4 × Ruston 6RK215 diesel generators (700 kW each)
Propulsion: 2 × Ruston 16RK 270 diesels (5000 kW each) coupled to 2 × Kamewa controllable pitch propellers
Bow thruster
Speed: 15 knots (28 km/h) to 20 knots (37 km/h)
Range: 5,000 nautical miles (9,000 km) at 15 knots (28 km/h)
Boats and landing
craft carried: 4 × 13 m Fast Craft Equipment & Utility (FCEU) on davits
2 × 25 m Fast Craft Utility (FCU) inside well deck
Capacity: 18 tanks, 20 vehicles and bulk cargo
Troops: 350
Crew: 65 (8 officers and 57 men)
Sensors and
processing systems: Search radar type IAI/ELTA EL/M-2238
Navigation radar: Kelvin Hughes Type 1007 (I band)
Weapon control: CS Defense NAJIR 2000 electro-optronic director
Electronic warfare
and decoys: ESM/ECM: RAFAEL RAN 1101
Decoys: 2 × GEC Marconi Marine Shield III 102 mm sextuple fixed chaff/decoy launcher
Armament: Anti-air: Mistral missiles launched from 2 × Simbad twin launcher mounts
Main gun: Oto Melara 76 mm super rapid gun
Machine guns: 2 × M242 Bushmaster 25 mm automatic cannon
4 × CIS 50MG 12.7 mm HMG
Aircraft carried: AS 332M Super Puma or AS532UL/AL Cougar or CH-47SD Chinook helicopters
Aviation facilities: Flight deck and enclosed hangar for up to 2 medium-lift helicopters

From the 5 candidates that listed above, the author prefer the 4TH candidate because of a few factors that shows below:

1. The cheapest price among those candidates.
2. The willingness of the manufacturer to transfer the technology (built locally).
3. Still in production.

Any comment from the reader?????

(ref: http://en.wikipedia.org & http://www.globalsecurity.org)

A Change of the Structural Design Code from BS to Eurocode

Have you heard the rumors that Malaysia want to change the BS (British Standard)to Eurocode??. This is one of the issue that give the significant implication to civil & structural engineering practice in Malaysia. Even though before this BS is inheritance from British,but the change of this code of practice is hoped not giving to much difficulties to engineers in order to understand the principle of Eurocode. By the way, according to Ir. MC Hee, Vice-President of IEM, there are some changes of the terms only, for example in BS the term of dead load and live load are used but in Eurocode these terms are permanent load and variable load respectively.It may a bit difficult to local engineer to grasp the principle of Eurocode. Ir. Hee also pointed out that the Eurocodes is actually a perfermance code which has more advantage over BS 8110. Ir. Hee added that the utilisation of Eurocodes will be beneficial in long term. The latter is a state-of-the-art code and contains many improvements which one cannot find in the British Standard.

Nevertheless, the introduction of Eurocodes will still have an effect on engineering practice in general. As for this case, the author hope the implementation of this Eurocode can be implemented stage by stage. All the local university need to adopt the Eurocode in their curriculum especially for civil engineering syllabus. The professional boards such as BEM & IEM also can give the intensive course to engineers before this code of practice is implemented in Malaysia.

As the conclusion, the author need to highlight that the fundamental of designing the structure is just the same, the code of practice is only the guidline to engineer for designing the particular stucture. Last but not least...remember this words of wisdom, "no design codes can replace strong engineering fundamentals, codes do not design buildings, engineers do".

(Ref.JURUTERA september 2009)