General Discussion > Self-Reliant Defense Posture

Frigate Acquisition Project included provisions for local production

(1/4) > >>

Administrator's note: Companion thread on the forum's FB extension available here


One aspect of the Frigate Acquisition Project that appears to have been ignored in various discussions are the Self-Reliant Defense Posture provisions in the requirements. Details are available in the Supplemental Bid Bulletin #PN-FAP-06-01

The clearest statement of intent is on Section 22 page 66 which contains the following stipulation

This short provision, placed in the latter portion of the document, can be used interpret and/or highlight other sections of the document whose wording isn't overtly pro SRDP

The following are examples of sections that are clearly in support of domestic support.

Section 20, Page 53

SRDP related options are as obvious in Section 22, page 63. Note how construction plans are required as part of the requirements. Access to the schematics, combined with a requirement to either transfer the design, or allow us to produce the vessel under license . . .

. . . means that the next Frigates could very well be locally built.



As things currently stand, there are already a plethora of legislative support for this activity.

--- Quote from: adroth on October 09, 2016, 03:37:36 AM ---Basis in law

Incremental efforts, from the Ramos to the Arroyo administration have created a legal framework that actually reduces the legislative ground work that the Duterte administration needs to perform to implement the proposals listed above. The unprecedented volume of purchases completed or initiated during the Aquino administration is -- in truth -- a net effect of the efforts that have come before. There is, therefore, no legal or procedural impediment to continuation of the current trend.

The AFP modernization law explicitly favors locally-manufactured defense articles:

--- Quote ---Sec. 10. Self-Reliant Defense Posture Program. — (a) In implementing the modernization program, the AFP shall, as far as practicable, give  preference to Filipino contractors  and suppliers or to foreign contractors or suppliers willing and able to locate a substantial portion of, if not the entire, production process of the term(s) involved,  within the Philippines .

(b) In order to reduce foreign exchange outflow, generate local employment opportunities and enhance technology transfer to the Philippines, the Secretary of National Defense shall, as far as feasible, incorporate in each contract/agreement special  foreign exchange reduction  schemes such as countertrade, in country manufacture, co-production , or other innovative arrangements or combinations thereof.

(c) The AFP likewise ensure that in negotiating all applicable contracts or agreements, provisions are incorporated respecting the  transfer to the AFP of the principal technology  involved as well as the training of AFP personnel to operate and maintain such equipment or technology.
--- End quote ---
The "spirit of the law" favors a Filipino-First procurement scheme.

As things currently stand, all pending acquisitions are required to have a local Philippine partner. A requirement enshrined in the Carlos Garcia-era Republic Act 5183 prohibits the Philippine government from sourcing items from companies that aren’t majority Filipino owned. This means that any foreign vendor seeking to sell its wares to the AFP needs to establish arrangements with Philippine business entities, which will then be responsible for representing the vendor in public biddings and similar engagements.

The legal framework for domestic windfall from the billions of pesos slated for defense expenditure for already-ongoing projects is already in-place. All that a prospective Secretary of National Defense, Chief of Staff AFP, or defense adviser would need do is to highlight this prospectively unaware policy makers within a Duterte cabinet.[/size]

--- End quote ---

The question now is:

How can the DND-AFP operationalize the intent of the law AND this already-signed deal?

Before anyone says “We have many shipyards in the Philippines that can build these frigates”, we need a reality check about which of these shipyards are TRULY Philippine yards, and which ones are actually foreign owned, meant for foreign customers, that just happen to be in the PH.

Dr. Demented maintains that thread index:

--- Quote from: dr demented on June 03, 2017, 01:48:12 PM ---This is a list of links and references regarding the Philippine shipbuilding industry.  Included are other useful articles, since the topic of the Philippines building its own warships frequently comes up in both the forum and the group.

General articles
Incat Crowther --  this is the design for two 50 meter multi-mission response vessels under construction for BFAR by Josefa Slipways, Navotas:
"Shipbuilding and Ship Repair in the Philippines" by Thomas Wissman:
"Differences Between Military and Commercial Shipbuilding" by the Rand Corporation:
Maritime Industry Authority -- List of Registered Shipyards in the Maritime Regional Offices:

Domestic Shipyards
Herma Shipyards, Mariveles, Bataan:
Philippine Iron Construction and Marine Works (did the actual construction of BRP Tagabanua in conjunction with Propmech):
Colorado Shipyard, Consolacion, Cebu:
Josefa Slipways, Navotas (currently building two multi-mission response vessels for BFAR):
Propmech Corporation (builders of the MPACs):
Santiago Shipyard, Consolacion, Cebu:
Subic Drydock Corporation -- uses the facilities of the former US Navy base at Subic Bay:
Frabelle Shipyard, Navotas -- no website.  Ship repair. 

Foreign-owned shipyards
Austal Cebu -- while the parent company is the builder of the Independence class LCS and other warships, Austal Cebu is the company's hub for most of its commercial ship construction:
Hanjin Heavy Industries, Subic:
Keppel Philippines -- shipyards in both Batangas and Subic:
Tsuneishi Heavy Industries Cebu:

--- End quote ---

What design would the winning bidder sign up to hand over, or license, to us? Let's go back to the specs



When South Korea's Hyundai Heavy Industries won the FAP bid over India's Garden Reach Ship Builders, due to issues with the latter's financial capacity, it not only meant that the PN would get two brand-new Frigates from South Korea . . .

. . . it also meant that the Philippines would acquire the OPTION to produce follow-on frigates by itself.

The ship that HHI submitted for the project is based on its HDF-3000 design. A article from about this is available below.

--- Quote from: dr demented on October 25, 2016, 01:07:21 AM ---From Jane's Defense:

Hyundai discloses further details of Philippine Navy's new frigates
Ridzwan Rahmat, Singapore - IHS Jane's Navy International
24 October 2016

Key Points

Hyundai Heavy Industries has revealed further details of the two frigates that it will build for the Philippine Navy
The platform is slightly smaller than anticipated, but said to inherit main design features of South Korea's Incheon class

< Edited >

The company was previously reported to have won the contract with a design based on the company's HDF-3000 multipurpose frigate design, which features an overall length of 114.3 m, and has been used as the basis for the Republic of Korea Navy's (RoKN's) Incheon (FFX-I)-class guided-missile frigates.

--- End quote ---

HHI's representation of this ship on its website appears below.

Having the OPTION to build . . .

. . . doesn't mean that we CAN . . .

. . . or even if we SHOULD.

It's one thing to establish a shipbuilding industry. It's a whole matter to keep it viable. Domestic production requires a national COMMITMENT to retaining whatever jobs are created, and continuing to improve capabilities to keep abreast of technological change. That is why military shipbuilding nations the world over are forced to retire ships that would otherwise have remained serviceable to ensure that shipyards don't run out of orders.

The Royal Navy is an example. Note how young HMS Ocean was before they had to retire it to make way for construction of the QEB carriers.

--- Quote from: adroth on March 10, 2018, 02:40:09 PM ---MoD sells Royal Navy flagship HMS Ocean to Brazil for £84m
 Hannah Boland
17 FEBRUARY 2018 • 12:01AM

The Ministry of Defence has sold the Royal Navy flagship, HMS Ocean, to Brazil for around £84m, in a bid to plug a major funding black hole in its accounts.

HMS Ocean had already been due to be decommissioned later this year and be replaced by HMS Queen Elizabeth as the UK's new flagship.

The 22,000-ton vessel, which entered service in 1998, provided hurricane support in the Caribbean last year and played a key security role in the London 2012 Olympics.

< Edited >

--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: dr demented on April 16, 2017, 03:26:54 AM ---Could HMS Ocean find its next steward in the Asia-Pacific?

By Robert Farley
April 14, 2017

It looks as if HMS Ocean is for sale.

Constructed between 1993 and 1998, HMS Ocean has served as the Royal Navy’s primary amphibious assault ship since commissioning. She displaces 21,000 tons, makes 18 knots, and can carry up to 18 helicopters. She also has facilities for carrying and deploying boats, marines, and ground vehicles. In short, HMS Ocean is a fairly standard big, flat-decked amphibious warship, with a decent amount of wear and tear but also with some years left in her service window. The Royal Navy expects to need her less in anticipation of the completion of its two new large carriers, HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales.[/size]

--- End quote ---

Here is food for thought from one of our resident Singaporean navy pros.

--- Quote from: LionFlyer on September 25, 2016, 08:56:05 AM ---Shipbuilding is cyclical and capital intensive, and this is even more pronounced in naval shipbuilding. DMSE's recent cash flow issues makes it amply clear that having the world's best shipbuilding industry does not change this.

Policymakers need to be cognizant of this fact and not try to paint it as a convenient election tool for jobs creation or industry development, which are side benefits. (Reference Australian naval shipbuilding and their Government's attempt to keep capabilities during the lull periods).

For most countries, naval shipbuilding is a strategic capability, maintained and kept at a high cost.

Part 1 complete. To be continued in Part 2.

--- End quote ---


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version