Skip to content

Malaysian Mothership KD Sri Indera Sakti

June 28, 2009



  • Displacement-4300 tons full
  • Length-328 ft
  • Beam-49ft
  • Draught-15ft 7in
  • Speed-19 mph
  • Armament-2 × 57 mm DP guns
     2 × 20 mm anti-aircraft
  • Cargo-600 troops
    1,000 m³ cargo space
16 Comments leave one →
  1. yana95 permalink
    July 3, 2009 11:16 am

    ayah sye COB di kapal tu……….anak buah ayah saye sume sukeeeeeeeeee sgtttttttt ayah saye……….

  2. leesea permalink
    July 1, 2009 7:11 pm

    The RoyalNAVY has been using RFA ships for amphib support for some time. They have re-rated most of their RFA ships as naval auxiliaries. Some are also armed.

  3. Mike Burleson permalink
    June 30, 2009 8:19 pm

    Not solid proof Scott, just mounting evidence!

  4. Scott B. permalink
    June 30, 2009 3:54 pm

    Mike Burleson said : “Scott, more proof the LCS is a failed class and concept.”

    I am sure why you say the postponed trials of LCS-2 are *proof that it’s a failed concept*.

    However, it certainly casts serious doubts on the seriousness of the Harbor Acceptance Trials the Austal design supposedly went through.

  5. June 30, 2009 3:47 pm

    Mike thats good to hear, I was sold on them years ago; they were concieved by one admiral, designed under his successor, and built by the third…what did all those admirals have in comon..they served on the Staff of Commodore Clapp, the commander of the Amphibious Task Group, in the Falkands War…so they put that experience into the design..and the Bay Class is what you got

    yours sincerly


  6. Mike Burleson permalink
    June 30, 2009 3:30 pm

    Alex, you are selling me on the Bay class, if for nothing else but the price. I probably would have been more forgiving of the LCS class despite its faults if it had come anywhere near its original estimated cost. yeah littoral ships should be a generic term as I use “battleship”. They will come in all shapes and sizes, but basically the same function:seizing back the littorals for the West where cruise missiles, mines, and stealthy submarines have driven out the big ship navy.

    Scott, more proof the LCS is a failed class and concept.

  7. June 30, 2009 2:12 pm

    well you must remember that the RN is now considering, a small frigate (aka corvette) design for GP duties…the Bay class is a littoral ship, not a littoral combat ship, which does make it easier….plus its not stealthed in any way baring its size…however it certainly a procurement experience which bucked the trend…

    I really would have like all nine though, it would have made the RM/RN amphibious task group so much more capable; and almost completely self-sufficient in terms of carrying its own stores; well in fact enough stores for a two heavy brigade (6 combat battalions equivalents) division if all 9 were available; it would also have allowed a maintenance of 6 on operations; the amphibious task group getting three at any time, with the other three in the carribean, probaly somalia at the moment, and patroling the north sea; fitted up with their helicopters and extra boats they would be great in what mike calls the ‘mothership’ role, but what I prefer to term the Core Presence Vessel.

    yours sincerly


  8. Scott B. permalink
    June 30, 2009 1:50 pm

    Meanwhile, the US Navy’s newest *unrated mini-mothership of the flotilla*, aka LCS-2, is NOT going anywhere…

    LCS Independence sea trials still waiting; General Dynamics now quiet on schedule, problems

  9. June 30, 2009 11:40 am

    and mike it was not really a price jump…as it was on course to come in at that price until they cancelled them

    yours sincerly


    p.s. they are also fitted out to refuel and replenish ships at sea in a tertiary role; primary being carrying logistics and logisticans for the Amphibious Task group, Secondary Being Amphibious Assault ship with a full squadron, Tertiary (above), Quaduarary being counter drugs/area patrol ships with a helicopter & fast boats, and fith role being military lift….in support of army operations.

  10. June 30, 2009 11:36 am


    I am impressed with them as well; especially when you consider the last 2-4 were to be fitted with a hangar, and the 9th was to have what are termed ‘enhanced command and support capability’…she was to have been about 5m longer, and was going to be able to launch and retrieve the army/marines artillery scout UAVs with a special skyhook system.

    why the were not built I will never really understand, although I have heard that the conservative party are considering building them when they get into power; as they believe a reliance on STUFT (ships taken up from trade) will cripple us in any amphibious operation

    yours sincerly


  11. Mike Burleson permalink
    June 30, 2009 9:56 am

    I have to admit even with the price jump I am impressed! The USN couldn’t have built something like this for less than $500 million each!

  12. June 30, 2009 8:01 am

    have added this to the post as well

    Cost: £400 million for all four; this included cost of design, and it would have been cheaper per unit cost had all the orriginal 6 considered been bought, going on final cost that would have made to total £528million…which would have made a unit cost of about £88million each, rather than £100million, and if it had been the orriginally requested 9….it would have been 9 for the princley sum of £693million…or a unit cost of £77million each…something which I would really have supported

    yours sincerly


  13. June 30, 2009 6:38 am

    well here is my view on them

    yours sincerly


  14. Mike Burleson permalink
    June 29, 2009 8:21 am

    Those are excellent ships Alex, if not a tad bigger than what I had in mind!

  15. June 29, 2009 5:22 am

    actually this site is better

    yours sincerly


  16. June 29, 2009 5:20 am

    Mike have you considered these?

    they are called the Bay class(Despite what they say on wikipediat they are LSLa’s) and I am going to write a little entry like my LCS, but I think they might just be a little better than this one as a mothership

    yours sincerly


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: