The Cleopatra Service

MMEA Air Wing

Recently there have been an increase in MMEA’s purchase of aerial assets to boost it’s so called maritime surveillance and security capability. MMEA founded in 2005 with the aim of streamlining the multitude agencies overlapping authority on Malaysian territorial waters. What started as a singular organization to enforce maritime sovereignty of Malaysia, quickly became the darling service of he nation due to its being new.

The function of MMEA is to patrol the Malaysian waters from the continental shelf up to its outer boundary and to stop any vessels from encroaching into our territorial waters. Surveillance of Malaysian waters has always been carried out by RMAF and RMN, record shows that both these services has coordinated well in maintaining high level of vigilance by engaging and detaining vessels entering illegally into our waters.

It begs the question, why the establishment of MMEA in the first place, since the organization that it was suppose the streamline still exists, the Fisheries Dept, Marine Dept, Navy and not forgetting the ubiquitous Marine Police.

The founding of MMEA drained the Navy of crucial and key personals who have been trained by the Navy for specific task, such as PWO (primary warfare officers). MMEA attracted these highly capable officers via attractive promotion scheme and salary incentive. A Lieutenant in the Navy would be automatically promoted to Lieutenant Commander upon defection. This applies to the RMAF as well whose personnel left the service to fly the brand new helicopters purchased by the MMEA. However the Navy bore the brunt of defection in droves.

The Navy also transferred some of its asset to the MMEA in order for the service to bring up to speed its organization.

However latest development from MMEA especially within its air wing, raises some serious question as per listed below. Recently they have purchased 3 x Dauphin helicopters and 3 x AW 139 and currently 2 x Bombardier amphibious aircraft.


1) Malaysia being such a small country can ill-afford over saturation of services with air wing. This would lead to problem in coordination and enforcement.

2) The organization and expertise within the RMAF and RMN in relation to its air wing should be given priority. Rather than forming its own separate airwing MMEA should have used the existing air wing from the above two organization. MMEA officers or pilots should have been attached to RMN air wing or RMAF sqns.

3) No 16 Sqn of RMAF (SINTAR) surveillance, intelligence & reconnaissance fying the Beechcraft aircraft and No 20 Sqn with their venerable C-130 have been doing a sterling job performing the maritime enforcement duties for years. Why does the government have to establish MMEA air wing to duplicate these sqn function. Wouldn’t it be better for the pilots from MMEA to be seconded to these sqn, thereby reducing cost of setting up its own air wing from scratch and pay high fees for training.

4) If MMEA justify the purchase of helicopter by stating that one of its primary function is Search & Rescue (SAR) over the oceans, then what happens to the Nuri sqn of RMAF which is tasked with similar functions. The government should have enhanced the operational capability of the Nuri for Search & rescue by installing night vision instruments, terrain avoidance/ following radar and countless others that is vital for SAR. These Nuri pilots are highly trained individuals they should have been give the budget to improve their platforms before creating the Air Wing for MMEA.

5) Even the purchase of MMEA Air Wing seems to be laughable. Being a new organization with limited experience and assets in its inventory, it seems foolhardy to purchase two types of heli from two different manufacturers for a single function. What is more the performances, dimension and specification of these two heli are quite identical. Why do we need to purchase two different types of heli from two different type of manufacturer, whereas we could have purchased all from one, which would given us better deal in terms of pricing and also provision for maintenance. With two different platforms the chances of one type being AOG (aircraft on ground) is higher than all helicopters being of a similar type. Guess someone is trying to make every agents of manufacturer happy at the expense of national maritime security.

6) The purchase of fixed wing asset for MMEA in the form of 2 X Bombadier further highlights the wastage by the government. Even the RMN which had its own air wing earlier than MMEA does not have a fixed wing, albeit constant and justifiable request by their Admirals. RMN need the fixed wing aircraft for Anti Submarine Warfare, Martime Patrol, ELINT and multitude of aerial function peculiar to the Navy. Whereas MMEA would only be using it for SAR, with an added advantage of this aircraft being able to land in the sea. However to spend millions in tax payers money just to justify long range SAR seems far fetched. Even if they argue that the Bombardier carries SLAR (side looking airborne radar). The main function of this type of radar is for mapping and surveillance of large area like ocean. Don’t be deceived by its acronym, it is a simple radar and not highly sophisticated like phased array radar. Even private charter aircraft companies carry one for ground mapping and geological research purposes. We could have just bought the SLAR in a pod form and attached it to the existing C-130 aircraft tasked for maritime recon.

By wasting huge some of tax payer’s money in purchasing assets without proper planning, prioritizing, coordination with other services and with no sense of direction the government seems to give MMEA a free hand in purchasing of assets without subjecting them to scrutiny. The government should have clearly marked the boundary of MMEA function, so that it doesn’t overlap with other services. It also should have requested MMEA to ride on the air assets of RMAF and RMN at this juncture due to its infancy and rather purchased more pressing aerial assets from RMAF and RMN first.

Malaysia does not have the capacity or the capability similar to the US, while we need a Coast Guard, it need not be as extravagant especially with air assets like the US Coast Guard. We need to operate more on joint level in order to harness expertise, reduce overlapping and duplicating of function thereby increasing cohesiveness among the services.