Author Topic: Multi-Role Vessel (MRV) developments  (Read 255733 times)

TheInsider

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 360
Re: Multi-Role Vessel (MRV) developments
« Reply #15 on: December 06, 2011, 06:20:43 PM »
Thanks Insider. So they are leveraging the DSOM work that had already been completed.

Hopefully that means there won't any further roadblocks from Wikipedia-crazy junior Congressmen who want apply their so-called "military minds" to the detriment of the services.

will try to look again in my inbox for past interviews with afp and dnd officials regarding that matter and post it here....

killerain

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13
Re: Multi-Role Vessel (MRV) developments
« Reply #16 on: January 18, 2012, 10:48:08 PM »
found something interesting



credit to audry

charismabrix@TMW

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 162
Re: Multi-Role Vessel (MRV) developments
« Reply #17 on: January 24, 2012, 08:59:43 PM »
Still another marketing strategy for PT PAL.

'The Navy has been cleared to begin negotiations for the purchase of a multirole vessel from any of the friendly nations' as Adm. Pama connotes

Question is, can we not scout for other builders with established plants here in the Philippines and capable of building our Navy's requirements?

Hanjin Heavy Industries for instance who built ROKS Dokdo Class of LPH. They have a plant in Subic http://www.hhic-phil.com/ in which we're not only helping our foreign investors but our labor force as well. Just think of how many employment it can generate and chances are, these investors will intensify production of these ships including spare parts (as they know that there's a market - The Philippine Navy) and later make the Philippines a competitor for ship building worldwide just like what Indonesia is doing.

So much for imported 'off-the-shelf'... Malampaya is already here for us. I suggest we build them all here. We just have to provide these builders our indigenous design.
"I'd rather be lucky than good in any day."

kapitan ayyong

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 119
Re: Multi-Role Vessel (MRV) developments
« Reply #18 on: January 29, 2012, 06:19:57 PM »
read this from Business Mirror - http://businessmirror.com.ph/home/nation/22572-dnd-armed-forces-eye-italian-weapon

excerpt of which are the following:

"Over the weekend, Gazmin said the department will be acquiring weapons and assets for the Armed Forces amounting to P70 billion.

The budget for the acquisition will be spread up to 2020 or even beyond the term of the current administration.

Since the massive procurement could not be financed by the government in just one release, the defense chief said the acquisition will be done through a Multi-Year Obligation Agreement (MYOA) from Congress.

In fact, a contract for the delivery of a multirole vessel from South Korea was sealed by Gonzales under the same scheme. Payment of installments for the warship began last year."


will the vessels be from korean shipyards or from PT PAL? When can we see these MRV be delivered?

tagalacion@tmw

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 892
Re: Multi-Role Vessel (MRV) developments
« Reply #19 on: January 30, 2012, 01:30:07 AM »
At least we got some roundabout confirmation for the MRV/SSV project (discussed in this thread below)...

http://www.timawa.net/forum/index.php?topic=24883.480

What's strange is that, if the first tranche had already been given last year, then this ship is a definite 'go', yet the PN hasn't made any announcement... Is it still due to politics, perhaps?
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight. It's the size of the fight in the dog."


" A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one" - Alexander Hamilton

"I am more afraid of an army of 100 sheep led by a lion than an army of 100 lions led by a sheep" - Charles Maurice de Talleyrand

phichanad

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1886
Re: Multi-Role Vessel (MRV) developments
« Reply #20 on: January 30, 2012, 02:34:41 AM »
With the changes in the naming of this project, is it also possible that SSV and MRV are still different projects, with the MRV being the original Makassar-type ship, while the MRV being the smaller PT PAL derivative?

horge

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2555
Re: Multi-Role Vessel (MRV) developments
« Reply #21 on: January 30, 2012, 03:31:41 AM »
At least we got some roundabout confirmation for the MRV/SSV project (discussed in this thread below)...

http://www.timawa.net/forum/index.php?topic=24883.480

What's strange is that, if the first tranche had already been given last year, then this ship is a definite 'go', yet the PN hasn't made any announcement... Is it still due to politics, perhaps?

Payments can be held in escrow until the full amount has been disbursed.
IOW, until all of the money has been released, no amount will actually be
'paid', but that's not how things are most profitably done. Instead...

A buyer (PH) can avail of a low-interest credit facility offered by the vendor's
'friends'. However, the credit isn't actually released in payment to the vendor
until the whole contract price has been officially-budgeted. Mahirap nang
mag-pautang sa wala namang ipangbabayad (to wit, a full budget). The
actual (PH) budgetary disbursements can be parked in high-yield placements,
the interest earnings potentially outpacing the credit/loan's interest. Again,
until the whole budget has been allocated, or IOW formal commitment to
credit repayment is legislated, the creditor isn't going to release any credit.
Hindi naman siya bobo, e... haha.

The first tranche of the MRV budget could be earning intrest as we speak,
and this is one of the problems when it comes to financed projects in the
absence of a MYOA -- a lust for speculative profit can see 'use' of dormant
budgetary outlays as capital for unrelated investments. If profitable, this
can lead to foot-dragging in project implementation ---kasi kumikita ang
capital. Kapag nagstart ang project, bilang na ang araw ng speculators
(ab)using said capital.

I have every confidence that PN and PMC aren't going to countenance any
such shenanigans. For all my criticism vs. Secy Volts, I doubt he'd stand by
and let speculators run amuck --his early opposition to MRV (and LIFT+MRF)
acquisition seemed to have stemmed from a fundamentally (but honestly)
skewed view of what PH national defense should be all about, and even
THAT can be blamed on what his boss laid out as defense policy, very early
on, aka Oplan Bayanihan.

JM2
« Last Edit: January 30, 2012, 02:38:55 PM by horge »
Whatever my comments, I do not have all the facts.
Neither does the military.

tagalacion@tmw

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 892
Re: Multi-Role Vessel (MRV) developments
« Reply #22 on: January 30, 2012, 06:12:20 AM »
Wow!  I never realized how 'lucrative' these things can get.

Perhaps to avoid suspicions that this type of 'creative' (ab)use isn't happening even in this 'blessed' administration, they should at least make some formal announcement just to update everyone on the status of this project.

After all, if all we know is the project cost (PHP5B) but not the class nor quantity, not even the entities we dealt with (i.e. SK only, or an SK-Indonesian consortium, or only with Indonesia?) then this government might be opening itself up to accusations of possible corruption later on.  And the AFP's modernization drive doesn't need that kind of mess right now, especially in light of it's (apparently) escalating momentum...

Anyway, here's to hoping our president and his people are above such 'mischief' and that there's some innocent explanation as to why the government hasn't been very transparent about this project. 

"It's not the size of the dog in the fight. It's the size of the fight in the dog."


" A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one" - Alexander Hamilton

"I am more afraid of an army of 100 sheep led by a lion than an army of 100 lions led by a sheep" - Charles Maurice de Talleyrand

horge

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2555
Re: Multi-Role Vessel (MRV) developments
« Reply #23 on: January 30, 2012, 02:18:47 PM »
Wow!  I never realized how 'lucrative' these things can get.

Friendly, low-interest credit charges between 3% and 5%.
High-yield placements with acceptable risk earn between 3% and 6%

Since both can vary, if there's even 1% of daylight between the two, then
in the final accounting, how much is 1% of 1,000 Million pesos, annually?
That's not small change. Paano pa kung with multi-billion peso principal?

This does not automatically imply wrongdoing. There'll always be project
funds 'waiting' for utilization, and it's .gov's responsibility to the people to
wisely deposit such funds while funds are still 'waiting' --without harm to
the timely completion of projects.

Absent an MYOA (or other clear commitment from PH.gov that it will pay) a
big-$$$$ project won't get creditor support until all tranches of budgeted
funding are released. That means the early tranches HAVE to wait on the
final one --and depositing funds-in-waiting into high-yield placements is a
matter of due diligence.

Again...
Ang masama lang naman is when interest earned is neither accounted nor
reposited, which is clearly criminal; when the placements carry excessive
risk; or when projects get delayed just to let the 'waiting' funds earn even
more interest, which can be (under some circumstances) merely a matter
of administrative prerogative/policy, albeit harmful to those whom timely
completion of a project would benefit (i.e. the Filipino people).
« Last Edit: January 30, 2012, 03:25:04 PM by horge »
Whatever my comments, I do not have all the facts.
Neither does the military.

Adroth

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29344
  • Logo from: www.proudlypinoy.org
    • http://www.adroth.ph
Re: Multi-Role Vessel (MRV) developments
« Reply #24 on: February 19, 2012, 02:24:43 AM »
So . . . is Indonesia now out of consideration, or did the Star get it wrong?

From: http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=778928&publicationSubCategoryId=63

Quote
He said at least 138 defense contracts would be approved by July 31, adding that they are scouting for big military items from countries other than the US.

“Our defense system acquisition units went to South Korea. We have also dispatched our people to Spain. Some also went to France, all to determine the best offer and to know if we can foot the bills for these equipment that are being offered to us,” he said.

The AFP reportedly plans to acquire a Multi-Role Vessel from South Korea.

The AFP is also looking at France and Italy for fighter jets, aside from the reported plans to acquire a squadron of F16s from the US.
Don't get mad at China. GET EVEN. Join the movement to defy a Chinese "order".


LionFlyer

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 643
Re: Multi-Role Vessel (MRV) developments
« Reply #25 on: February 19, 2012, 04:30:56 AM »
I get the impression that the top half of the news is the latest update (138 projects) while the bottom half is just a rehash of existing news reports over the past year to support and add meat to the report. So I won't put too much credence into that.

cappelan

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 199
  • Rugby League: "The Greatest Game of All"
Re: Retitled: Multi-Purpose Vessel (MPV)
« Reply #26 on: March 22, 2012, 03:51:26 PM »
http://www.businessmirror.com.ph/home/nation/24927-navy-set-to-acquire-multirole-vessels-helicopters
Navy set to acquire multirole vessels, helicopters

Thursday, 22 March 2012 20:55 Rene Acosta / Reporter

TWO multirole vessels (MRVs) along with three new helicopters will be delivered to the Navy under the military’s ongoing modernization program.

Pama said defense and military authorities are expected to sign the contract for the delivery of the MRVs and the three helicopters, at least by July this year. However, he did not reveal the source or sources of the new assets.

A contract for the delivery of one MRV worth P5 billion from South Korea had been signed by the Arroyo administration. The amortization for the MRV amounting to P1 billion annually started last year.

phichanad

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1886
Re: Multi-Role Vessel (MRV) developments
« Reply #27 on: March 22, 2012, 08:35:02 PM »
^^ is this true, the Arroyo admin signed a contract with the SoKors already?

Adroth

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29344
  • Logo from: www.proudlypinoy.org
    • http://www.adroth.ph
Re: Multi-Role Vessel (MRV) developments
« Reply #28 on: March 22, 2012, 08:55:36 PM »
^^ is this true, the Arroyo admin signed a contract with the SoKors already?

That's what the first P2B allocated in 2010 was for. There ought to have been additional P1.5B from the 2011 and 2012 AFP Modernization budgets to complete the transaction.
Don't get mad at China. GET EVEN. Join the movement to defy a Chinese "order".


phichanad

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1886
Re: Multi-Role Vessel (MRV) developments
« Reply #29 on: March 22, 2012, 09:03:17 PM »
That's what the first P2B allocated in 2010 was for. There ought to have been additional P1.5B from the 2011 and 2012 AFP Modernization budgets to complete the transaction.

So it means the Navy's going for the Korean offer....I asked because I was thought the toss-up on who will supply the ships is still not yet final.