Indonesia Indonesian Navy, Tentara Nasional Indonesia-Angkatan Laut (TNI-AL)

norman88

Committed member
Messages
178
Reactions
133
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
Again, I don't want you to claim this falsehood unless you have any substantial evidence. Korea & Hanwha Ocean (formerly DSME) have recevied no complaint over any worksmanship & design done by Hanwha Ocean and continue to provide technical support for their submarine fleet in good faith. Even in your article, Indonesian side can't dare to put the blame on Korean side for whatever the problem that Indonesia has because Hanwha Ocean and Korea aren't at fault. Maintainance & overhaul to keep existing fleets in optimal conditions for operation is completely a normal process.

Indonesia assembled its first-ever locally-built submarine with ToT & technical assistance from Hanwha Ocean (formerly DSME). That's not insignificant ToT. Even President Jokowi himself acknowledged this said that "collaboration (with Korea & DSME) is good".

It is inconceivable for you to claim that ToT was very minimal while Indonesia boasts the fact that she is the only ASEAN country that is capable of building a submarine with ToT & technical assistance from DSME & Korea.


This is why PT PAL still insists that cooperation with Hanwha Ocean is in place (at least as of 2023) and Indonesia & PT PAL are liable for a contract concellation fee if they somehow decide not to execute the deal for additional 3 submarine with Korea & Hanwha Ocean.
"With the continuation of this ORE program, it is hoped that a comprehensive analysis of the damage to the Nagapasa-class submarine can be conducted, thereby providing solutions to the core problems of the submarine itself".

Statement from Fleet Commander, Rear Admiral Iwan Isnurwanto at the meeting with DAPA representatives, discussing the Operation Readiness Enhancement (ORE) of the Changbogo submarine.

 

Dosirak

Active member
Messages
42
Reactions
1 60
Nation of residence
Australia
Nation of origin
South Korea
"With the continuation of this ORE program, it is hoped that a comprehensive analysis of the damage to the Nagapasa-class submarine can be conducted, thereby providing solutions to the core problems of the submarine itself".

Statement from Fleet Commander, Rear Admiral Iwan Isnurwanto at the meeting with DAPA representatives, discussing the Operation Readiness Enhancement (ORE) of the Changbogo submarine.


Again, Indonesian representatives are not blaming Korean & Hanwha Ocean for any wrongdoing. What damage? Is it done by Indonesian Navy or PT PAL?

You were already wrong when you claimed that ToT from Korea was 'minimal'. I'd be appreciated if you could stop spreading this malicious rumours about poor worksmanship & design done by Hanwha Ocean & Korea over Nagapasa-class submarine without any serious evidence.
 

NEKO

Experienced member
Indonesia Correspondent
Messages
3,074
Reactions
3 2,688
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
Maybe you can start from here:
Leak of Nagapasa Class maintenance plan. (Sorry, looks like you need google translate to read them).

For KRI 403
View attachment 47032

For KRI 404
View attachment 47034

For KRI 405
View attachment 47033

Source:

A lot of us Indonesian military enthusiasts are asking why subs that are (as far as we know) not often sailed need to replace a lot of components?
Repeating this debate again, just go to that post and start around that page.
 

Dosirak

Active member
Messages
42
Reactions
1 60
Nation of residence
Australia
Nation of origin
South Korea
you would not get that kind of info in open forum like this

Then, please, stop speculating and spreading malicious rumours of Korean submarine. Korea has patiently waited almost 6 years for Indonesia to execute the order for additional 3 submarine.

What we DO know is
1. Indonesia received significant ToT from Hanwha Ocean and Korea and built its first-ever locally assembled submarine based on that ToT.
2. Both PT PAL and Indonesian Navy have never officially put the blame on Hanwha Ocean (formerlly DSME) or Korea for whatever the problem that they have.

Indonesia could choose to cancel the contract (I doubt they will), but they will be liable for a contract cancellation fee.
 
Last edited:

norman88

Committed member
Messages
178
Reactions
133
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
Again, Indonesian representatives are not blaming Korean & Hanwha Ocean for any wrongdoing. What damage? Is it done by Indonesian Navy or PT PAL?

You were already wrong when you claimed that ToT from Korea was 'minimal'. I'd be appreciated if you could stop spreading this malicious rumours about poor worksmanship & design done by Hanwha Ocean & Korea over Nagapasa-class submarine without any serious evidence.
This submarine has only been in service for 5 years, but during that time it also barely operated and became a hangar queen, then there are many damages and must be thoroughly checked, you can conclude it yourself whatever if you still want denial.
 

Gary

Experienced member
Messages
8,257
Reactions
22 12,777
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
The Korean supersonic ASM already in service? Japanese ASM-3? Hsiung Feng III? Therr are plenty and just because you're not aware, doesn't mean they don't exist.


Ideologically speaking, those countries are the 'West' but when I say the West I mean geographically speaking. That's no no-brainer, because the Navy doesn't have any history of equipping our arsenal from those "Western' countries you listed
Of course if Indonesia can get any of these is another question.

If you're implying financial capabilities, we will find a way to pay like how we pay for Rafale, If you're implying politics, we're not going to wait for either Korea, Japan, or even Taiwan to green light sales, We'll just find anyone who sells, like China.
 

Gary

Experienced member
Messages
8,257
Reactions
22 12,777
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
Thats new to me.. di we pay already for the neptune from ukraine..
Half a year before Ukraine got SMO'd by Putin we're still negotiating for the missiles.


So I don't think we have an effective contract or even pay anything yet
 

Ravager

Contributor
Messages
1,042
Reactions
3 1,184
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
Again, I don't want you to claim this falsehood unless you have any subtantial evidence. Korea & Hanwha Ocean (formerly DSME) have recevied no complaint over any worksmanship & design done by Hanwha Ocean and continue to provide tchnical support for fleet in good faith. Even in your article, Indonesian side can't dare to put the blame on Korean side for whatever the problem that Indonesia has because Hanwha Ocean and Korea aren't at fault. Maintainance & overhaul to keep existing fleets in optimal conditions for operation is completely a normal process.

Indonesia assembled its first-ever locally-built submarine with ToT & technical assistance from Hanwha Ocean (formerly DSME). That's not insignificant ToT. Even President Jokowi himself acknowledged this said that "collaboration (with Korea & DSME) is good".

It is inconceivable for you to claim that ToT was very minimal while Indonesia boasts the fact that she is the only ASEAN country that is capable of building a submarine with ToT & technical assistance from DSME & Korea.


This is why PT PAL still insists that cooperation with Hanwha Ocean is in place (at least as of 2023) and Indonesia & PT PAL are liable for a contract concellation fee if they somehow decide not to execute the deal for additional 3 submarine with Korea & Hanwha Ocean.

The way i see it both of Indonesia and SoKor are the victims in this shitshow ... Just follow the money's trails you would see a pattern there ...
Facts for it though ... All of thoses CBG's are a hanggar queen even after a deep maintenance from the korean's side ..
I don't know to whom i have to point a finger to ....but the animousity from the navy is real and they were the one who are so vehemently against this deal ...

There is a saying in Indonesian....without an ember inside there wouldn't be a smokes presence ...
 
Last edited:

Dosirak

Active member
Messages
42
Reactions
1 60
Nation of residence
Australia
Nation of origin
South Korea
This submarine has only been in service for 5 years, but during that time it also barely operated and became a hangar queen, then there are many damages and must be thoroughly checked, you can conclude it yourself whatever if you still want denial.

Again, Hanwha Ocean & Korea received no formal complaint over whatever the issue Indonesia has with Nagapasa-class. No poor worksmanship. No design fail. Whatever 'damage' you are referring to, you have so far failed to present any obejctive & factual evidence that Hanwha Ocean and Korea are at fault. You are the one who is denial and try to justify your speculation and completely unfounded hatred.

It was really disgraceful how you describe ToT from Korea is 'minimal' when Indonesia takes pride in her capabilty of building a submarine based on ToT that Indonesia has received from Kroea.
 

chibiyabi

Contributor
Messages
516
Reactions
3 438
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Togo
Then, please, stop speculating and spreading malicious rumours of Korean submarine. Korea has patiently waited almost 6 years for Indonesia to execute the order for additional 3 submarine.

What we DO know is
1. Indonesia received significant ToT from Hanwha Ocean and Korea and built its first-ever locally assembled submarine based on that ToT.
2. Both PT PAL and Indonesian Navy have never officially put the blame on Hanwha Ocean (formerlly DSME) or Korea for whatever the problem that they have.

Indonesia could choose to cancel the contract (I doubt they will), but they will be liable for a contract cancellation fee.
then why you not accept that the delivered submarines had major problems so they can only be hanggar queens, why you always force us to accomodate Sokor interest without gave us substantialy way out regarding our brand new submarines purchased. stop being rude force us to say Sokor is in the right position n Indo is the jack ass. we bought those submarines using our taxes. we buyer should have submarines operational in normal manner, buyer and seller, both side must happy with the transaction ,before move to another transaction

its already fuck*ing long since the first one arrive. thanks god we don't have neigbour like the NK.
 

Dosirak

Active member
Messages
42
Reactions
1 60
Nation of residence
Australia
Nation of origin
South Korea
then why you not accept that the delivered submarines had major problems so they can only be hanggar queens, why you always force us to accomodate Sokor interest without gave us substantialy way out regarding our brand new submarines purchased. stop being rude force us to say Sokor is in the right position n Indo is the jack ass. we bought those submarines using our taxes. we buyer should have submarines operational in normal manner, buyer and seller, both side must happy with the transaction ,before move to another transaction

its already fuck*ing long since the first one arrive. thanks god we don't have neigbour like the NK.

I don't accept that whatever major problem you are referring to is caused by Hanwha Ocean & Korea.

You have zero substantial evidence. Zero.

What you should accept is that if what you say is true, then it makes both Indonesian Navy & PT PAL a bunch of fuc*ing cowards who have zero guts to officially say that there are fundemental problems with the ship and they are caused by Hanwha Ocean & Korea in the face of Hanwha Ocean & Korea, yet keep leaking information to Indonesian Public to hint that they don't like the ship. Plus, PT PAL insists that cooperation with Hanwha Ocean & Korea is still in place as they receive technical support from Hanwha Ocean & Korea.

Korea does not 'always force us to accomodate Sokor interest'. Indonesia was not held at gunpoint to sign a submarine deal with Korea and Korea wasn't blackmailed by Indonesia to give ToT to Indonesia over how to assemble a submarine.

This is strictly a business.

If Indonesia doesn't like a product, then she should formally request a warranty repair, a refund or even compensation. If Indonesia wouldn't do that and keeps bitching about the product behind its business partner and spreading malicious rumours about the product without any substantial evidence that the manufacturer is at fault. Then your business partner (Korea) is rightfully annoyed.

A contract comes with obligation and if one party decides to terminate the contract unilaterally without any contractual breach by the other party, then the party that is terminating the contract is liable for compensation.

If Indonesia dislikes the submarine from Korea so much, then she should pay up the contract cancellation fee and let us all move on from this ugly mess.
 
Last edited:

chibiyabi

Contributor
Messages
516
Reactions
3 438
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Togo
I don't accept that whatever major problem you are referring to is caused by Hanwha Ocean & Korea.

You have zero substantial evidence. Zero.

What you should accept is that if what you say is true, then it makes both Indonesian Navy & PT PAL a bunch of fuc*ing cowards who have zero guts to officially say that there are fundemental problems with the ship and they are caused by Hanwha Ocean & Korea in the face of Hanwha Ocean & Korea, yet keep leaking information to Indonesian Public to hint that they don't like the ship. Plus, PT PAL insists that cooperation with Hanwha Ocean & Korea is still in place as they receive technical support from Hanwha Ocean & Korea.

Korea does not 'always force us to accomodate Sokor interest'. Indonesia was not held at gunpoint to sign a submarine deal with Korea and Korea wasn't blackmailed by Indonesia to give ToT to Indonesia over how to assemble a submarine.

This is strictly a mutually benetficial business.

If Indonesia doesn't like a product, then she should formally request a warranty repair. If Indonesia wouldn't do that and keeps bitching about the product behind its business partner and spreading malicious rumours about the product without any substantial evidence that the manufacturer is at fault. Then your business partner is rightfully annoyed.

A contract comes with obligation and if one party decides to terminate the contract unilaterally without any contractual breach by the other party, then the party that is terminating the contract is liable for compensation.

If Indonesia dislikes the submarine from Korea so much, then she should pay up the contract cancellation fee and let us all move on from this ugly mess.
if this is the way Korea sold a product, than, 100 % I support what MINDEF did. no more project with Korea.
 

Dosirak

Active member
Messages
42
Reactions
1 60
Nation of residence
Australia
Nation of origin
South Korea
if this is the way Korea sold a product, than, 100 % I support what MINDEF did. no more project with Korea.

Feeling is mutual if this is how Indonesian conducts a business and treats a business contract.

Two things are sure - Indonesia will still boast about her capability of building a submarine based on ToT she has received from Korea and Indonesia is still liable for any unilateral termination of the submarine contract that she signed with Korea.
 

chibiyabi

Contributor
Messages
516
Reactions
3 438
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Togo
Feeling is mutual if this is how Indonesian conducts a business and treats a business contract.

Two things are sure - Indonesia will still boast about her capability of building a submarine based on ToT she has received from Korea and Indonesia is still liable for any unilateral termination of the submarine contract that she signed with Korea.
I working in manufacturing industry, doing some toll manufaturing too for multinasional companies and local companies. when the principal came to our company they can bring their own production methode/technology or using our method, bring their own raw material or using our existing material. prinsipal/customer had the right to choose what they want, but as manufacuring company, when prinsipal came with their own method an material, we conduct assesment and risk analysys, what we can and what can't do, an always tell all of the risk that can be occure with their choice if the product still want to be manufactured in our site, we also gave the solution for all the rrisk that can be occure. we sign secrecy agreement regarding manufacturing proces. when production run, we validate the process to guarrantee the product quality. and as product manufacturer we responsible for the product quality until end of its life cycle, with main term n condition, as long as the product packaging are in good conditions. for the technology that prinsipal bring to our company we had secrecy agreement and the principal should aware and understand that we, our company can learn, modify, apply some of the technology to improve our production without broke secrecy agreement. becoming transfer of technology. its risk doing toll manufacturing. all bussinessman should understand and aware of this

back to the Submarine problems, is it wrong for us to halt another project because the first batch had many problems. where does the manufacturer responsibility regarding this problem. for the third one what i said maybe can be quetioned, because the segmen was assembled in indonesia, but how about the 1st and 2nd .. it 100 % builted in DMSE facilities. and no way indonesia can modified the 1st, 2nd and the 3rd from its original design from DSME

and please don tell us like we stole the segments assembling process, we pay for those transfer technology...
 

norman88

Committed member
Messages
178
Reactions
133
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
was really disgraceful how you describe ToT from Korea is 'minimal' when Indonesia takes pride in her capabilty of building a submarine based on ToT that Indonesia has received from Kroea.
If you compare the ToT between TKMS and Turkiye, with almost the same contract value, the ToT between Indonesia and DSME is very, very minimal.
 

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,249
Solutions
2
Reactions
101 23,493
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
If you compare the ToT between TKMS and Turkiye, with almost the same contract value, the ToT between Indonesia and DSME is very, very minimal.
And now i step in,
The deal with TKMS (or rather Germans as the shipyard ownership and the name has changed several times) and Turkish submarine industry dates back to 70s, this is nowhere close or comparable to DSME-Indonesia deal that took place in 2010s. If approved, TKMS-Turkish-Indonesia deal would have provided even less ToT than what Koreans have offered and delivered.
 
Last edited:

Anmdt

Experienced member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
5,249
Solutions
2
Reactions
101 23,493
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
I working in manufacturing industry, doing some toll manufaturing too for multinasional companies and local companies. when the principal came to our company they can bring their own production methode/technology or using our method, bring their own raw material or using our existing material. prinsipal/customer had the right to choose what they want, but as manufacuring company, when prinsipal came with their own method an material, we conduct assesment and risk analysys, what we can and what can't do, an always tell all of the risk that can be occure with their choice if the product still want to be manufactured in our site, we also gave the solution for all the rrisk that can be occure. we sign secrecy agreement regarding manufacturing proces. when production run, we validate the process to guarrantee the product quality. and as product manufacturer we responsible for the product quality until end of its life cycle, with main term n condition, as long as the product packaging are in good conditions. for the technology that prinsipal bring to our company we had secrecy agreement and the principal should aware and understand that we, our company can learn, modify, apply some of the technology to improve our production without broke secrecy agreement. becoming transfer of technology. its risk doing toll manufacturing. all bussinessman should understand and aware of this

back to the Submarine problems, is it wrong for us to halt another project because the first batch had many problems. where does the manufacturer responsibility regarding this problem. for the third one what i said maybe can be quetioned, because the segmen was assembled in indonesia, but how about the 1st and 2nd .. it 100 % builted in DMSE facilities. and no way indonesia can modified the 1st, 2nd and the 3rd from its original design from DSME

and please don tell us like we stole the segments assembling process, we pay for those transfer technology...
Just want to make sure that you also know how contracts are carried out and Indonesia has known the terms and conditions which were included to be covered during warranty term. For anything occuring beyond the warranty term, and anything occuring within the planned maintenance schedule the operator is responsible, unless a separate long term support agreement has been signed. This works as such for all industries, for some this contract has been signed with the first actual contract, sometimes after commissioning.
Not telling that Koreans are 100% pure and clean here but i can sense Indonesia owns majority of the nonsense that still goes on.
 

NEKO

Experienced member
Indonesia Correspondent
Messages
3,074
Reactions
3 2,688
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia


Wow guys, chill.

Btw what do you think? Should navy be equipped with Cougar + Exocet/Atmaca ? It will have commonality with Air Force.


I'm sure Kemhan will order contract for PT DI somewhere in the future just to keep the line open.
How about:
images

We can put it in our panther.
 
Top Bottom