# Pakistan navy post 2020 - Future Plans



## aziqbal

As far back as I can remember the navy has not had such a procurement bonanza for decades if ever, so heres a list 

4 x MILGEM 2,300 ton corvettes steel for first unit cut 29th Sep 2019 with 54 month delivery time for first unit so around Spring 2024 

4 x Type 054AP 4,000+ ton frigates steel for second unit cut 20th Dec 2018 and all 4 due to be handed over by 2021

8 x S20 2,800 ton SSK due between 2021-2028

2 x OPV 2,300 ton from Damen first launched in May 2019 both due to be handed over in 2020 

3,000 Ton Oceanographic vessel launched in Dec 2018 by China due to be handed over soon

thats 19 units over 55,000 tons of warships and submarines coming between 2019-2028 or 10 years with average of 2 per year 

For missiles 

Second strike Babur III, Coastal defence Zarb and JF17 with anti-ship missiles 2 squadrons 

Good times ahead and plenty to watch

Reactions: Like Like:
56


----------



## Moonlight

@Zibago @PakSword


----------



## Hakikat ve Hikmet

I am pretty sure MilDen (National Submarine) will have her rightful place somewhere in between...

Reactions: Like Like:
17


----------



## war&peace

aziqbal said:


> 4 x MILGEM 2,300 ton corvettes steel for first unit cut 29th Sep 2019 with *54 month delivery time for first unit* so around Spring 2024


Please recheck your info since 54 months for a corvette is too long.


----------



## Tipu7

Swiftclass vessels.
New Midget subs.



war&peace said:


> Please recheck your info since 54 months for a corvette is too long.


Timings are correct. It's not wise to call PN MILGEMs as corvettes. Their firepower will surpass several frigates currently operational in South Asia.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## truthseeker2010

aziqbal said:


> As far back as I can remember the navy has not had such a procurement bonanza for decades if ever, so heres a list
> 
> 4 x MILGEM 2,300 ton corvettes steel for first unit cut 29th Sep 2019 with 54 month delivery time for first unit so around Spring 2024
> 
> 4 x Type 054AP 4,000+ ton frigates steel for second unit cut 20th Dec 2018 and all 4 due to be handed over by 2021
> 
> 8 x S20 2,800 ton SSK due between 2021-2028
> 
> 2 x OPV 2,300 ton from Damen first launched in May 2019 both due to be handed over in 2020
> 
> 3,000 Ton Oceanographic vessel launched in Dec 2018 by China due to be handed over soon
> 
> thats 19 units over 55,000 tons of warships and submarines coming between 2019-2028 or 10 years with average of 2 per year
> 
> For missiles
> 
> Second strike Babur III, Coastal defence Zarb and JF17 with anti-ship missiles 2 squadrons
> 
> Good times ahead and plenty to watch



Navy is the most expensive of the three branches in terms of acquisition. So GDP will have a direct correlation of how things workout for PN and military modernization as a whole. 

The two biggest chunks (subs and 54's) are because of CPEC. 

The interesting thing will be balance b/w AF and Navy as post 27 feb has changed the dynamics of future indo pak conflicts. Pak army will have to sacrifice their unnecessary spending spree in future to make pak military more dynamic and pack a more bang for a buck force........

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Areesh

You missed these:

Azmat Class FACs
Augusta 90 submarine getting upgraded
Aerial platforms getting upgraded

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## war&peace

Tipu7 said:


> Swiftclass vessels.
> New Midget subs.
> 
> 
> Timings are correct. It's not wise to call PN MILGEMs as corvettes. Their firepower will surpass several frigates currently operational in South Asia.


These classifications are based on weight and size... mostly the weight or displacement. It is not reflective of the firepower so nothing is wrong... in calling it corvette or lightweight frigate. I'm just wondering that we are getting only ONE corvette @2300 tons in 4.5 years while FOUR 54APs @4000+ tones each i.e. 16000+ tonnes in 3 years...



aziqbal said:


> Second strike Babur III, Coastal defence Zarb and JF17 with anti-ship missiles 2 squadrons


CM400AKG, CM802 and some new locally produced supersonic cruise missile with longer ranges and more lethal warheads.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## CHACHA"G"

I think PN will go for 2nd Tanker Ship (from turkey) we already build one in Karachi .. And F-22P mid-life upgrade will also happen in these 10 years ..


aziqbal said:


> As far back as I can remember the navy has not had such a procurement bonanza for decades if ever, so heres a list
> 
> 4 x MILGEM 2,300 ton corvettes steel for first unit cut 29th Sep 2019 with 54 month delivery time for first unit so around Spring 2024
> 
> 4 x Type 054AP 4,000+ ton frigates steel for second unit cut 20th Dec 2018 and all 4 due to be handed over by 2021
> 
> 8 x S20 2,800 ton SSK due between 2021-2028
> 
> 2 x OPV 2,300 ton from Damen first launched in May 2019 both due to be handed over in 2020
> 
> 3,000 Ton Oceanographic vessel launched in Dec 2018 by China due to be handed over soon
> 
> thats 19 units over 55,000 tons of warships and submarines coming between 2019-2028 or 10 years with average of 2 per year
> 
> For missiles
> 
> Second strike Babur III, Coastal defence Zarb and JF17 with anti-ship missiles 2 squadrons
> 
> Good times ahead and plenty to watch



Yes bro , PN will surly go for it ,,,, Keep in mind we have to replace Agus-70 and PN total requirement was 14+ SSKs (saw that number here on PDF long ago)


Hakikat ve Hikmet said:


> I am pretty sure MilDen (National Submarine) will have her rightful place somewhere in between...





Tipu7 said:


> Swiftclass vessels.


WE do have Swift steel fast boat(check the latest video the boat people taking as Mp-33 is Swift Fast boat) …. But are we going for Coverts too ??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shabi1

What happened to the additional improved F-22Ps, are they still on order or were bypassed for the other ships.


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Only stuff available short notice are *4 destroyer ships* China retired which have a similar missile on board as our F22P frigates, 3 more ships will be decommissioned soon by China
An ideal *short term solution*

They have SAMs
They have anti Submarine focus
They have Ship to Ship combat capabilities

Follow the discussion on the existing thread
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/4-ch...-purchase-decommissioned-2-months-ago.633768/

These would be a great pick up for 4 year period till new stuff joins Pakistani Navy

I would consider buying these Destroyer ships great investment till our Submarines and Type 054 ships arrive in Pakistan Navy

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bullzz

054AP has been classified as improved F-22Ps by Pakistan Navy

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Imran Khan

PN will be very shape after 2020

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tipu7

war&peace said:


> These classifications are based on weight and size... mostly the weight or displacement


Not necessarily. There is no official criteria available to classify cetagories of surface vessels. In World, there are some corvettes with more tonnage than frigates. And there are frigates with more displacement than Destroyers. And there are missile boats with more displacement than corvettes. Hence, while classifying surface vessels, a combination of factors are needed to be put into perspective. 


war&peace said:


> I'm just wondering that we are getting only ONE corvette @2300 tons in 4.5 years while FOUR 54APs @4000+ tones each i.e. 16000+ tonnes in 3 years


Because Milgum will be heavily upgraded variant thus demanding more R&D and hence more time. Plus, the production capacity of China is far ahead of Turkey.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Pakistan Ka Beta

In Sha ALLAH . u forgot about induction of 2 Upgraded Agosta Submarines ( 3rd is on optional for now ) 1st in 2020 n 2nd in 2021 n 4th Azmat class FAC expected this year or in 2020 .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rashid Mahmood

PN will probably replace the Sea King Mk-45s in the next 4/5 years.
The main contender is AW-101.

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

aziqbal said:


> As far back as I can remember the navy has not had such a procurement bonanza for decades if ever, so heres a list
> 
> 4 x MILGEM 2,300 ton corvettes steel for first unit cut 29th Sep 2019 with 54 month delivery time for first unit so around Spring 2024
> 
> 4 x Type 054AP 4,000+ ton frigates steel for second unit cut 20th Dec 2018 and all 4 due to be handed over by 2021
> 
> 8 x S20 2,800 ton SSK due between 2021-2028
> 
> 2 x OPV 2,300 ton from Damen first launched in May 2019 both due to be handed over in 2020
> 
> 3,000 Ton Oceanographic vessel launched in Dec 2018 by China due to be handed over soon
> 
> thats 19 units over 55,000 tons of warships and submarines coming between 2019-2028 or 10 years with average of 2 per year
> 
> For missiles
> 
> Second strike Babur III, Coastal defence Zarb and JF17 with anti-ship missiles 2 squadrons
> 
> Good times ahead and plenty to watch


Well for surface vessels only type 054AP is something. We need something like Type 54D aue Type 55



Areesh said:


> You missed these:
> 
> Azmat Class FACs
> Augusta 90 submarine getting upgraded
> Aerial platforms getting upgraded


Which aerial plateforms?


----------



## Haris Ali2140

Can someone provide a list of current PN vessels???

How long will Agosta 90b last???


----------



## Pakistan Ka Beta

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Well for surface vessels only type 054AP is something. We need something like Type 54D aue Type 55
> 
> 
> Which aerial plateforms?


With 16 cells HQ 16 Milgem Corvettes will be a good force too even much better than todays F22P Frigates of PN plus in 2020-2030 decade 4 F22P frigates are expected to go through upgrades as well becoming almost 054A/P frigates .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

Pakistan Ka Beta said:


> With 16 cells HQ 16 Milgem Corvettes will be a good force too even much better than todays F22P Frigates of PN plus in 2020-2030 decade 4 F22P frigates are expected to go through upgrades as well becoming almost 054A/P frigates .


Milgem will be having Chineese SAM?


----------



## dBSPL

Areesh said:


> You missed these:
> 
> Azmat Class FACs
> Augusta 90 submarine getting upgraded
> Aerial platforms getting upgraded


Rather than the number of platforms, most important thing here is Pakistan navy will experience a significant increase in capability.

For example, nuclear-capable Babur SLCM makes me very excited!



Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Milgem will be having Chineese SAM?


Yep. ESSM equivalent Chinese lo-to-medium air defense system. CIWS system is expected to be Aselsan Gökdeniz. A broad Turkish-Chinese partnership is expected in Jinnah class light frigate's all navionics.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Ultima Thule

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Well for surface vessels only type 054AP is something. We need something like Type 54D aue Type 55


There is no Type-54D, just Type-54/A/B are, Type-55 is overpowering the capability of PN, Type-52D or E will more suitable to PN (3-4) @Syed Hammad Ahmed

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The Accountant

aziqbal said:


> As far back as I can remember the navy has not had such a procurement bonanza for decades if ever, so heres a list
> 
> 4 x MILGEM 2,300 ton corvettes steel for first unit cut 29th Sep 2019 with 54 month delivery time for first unit so around Spring 2024
> 
> 4 x Type 054AP 4,000+ ton frigates steel for second unit cut 20th Dec 2018 and all 4 due to be handed over by 2021
> 
> 8 x S20 2,800 ton SSK due between 2021-2028
> 
> 2 x OPV 2,300 ton from Damen first launched in May 2019 both due to be handed over in 2020
> 
> 3,000 Ton Oceanographic vessel launched in Dec 2018 by China due to be handed over soon
> 
> thats 19 units over 55,000 tons of warships and submarines coming between 2019-2028 or 10 years with average of 2 per year
> 
> For missiles
> 
> Second strike Babur III, Coastal defence Zarb and JF17 with anti-ship missiles 2 squadrons
> 
> Good times ahead and plenty to watch


Upgradation of F22P was also on the cards. Any updates on that ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomahawk

aziqbal said:


> 4 x MILGEM 2,300 ton corvettes steel for first unit cut 29th Sep 2019 with 54 month delivery time for first unit so around Spring 2024



Contract was signed on 05 July 2018 and according to Turkey’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) the first PN corvette will be built in 54 months from the current date with the remaining three due within 60, 66 and 72 months respectively.
So with that all four ships shall be delivered to the PN by 2024.

1st Ship - Jan 2023
2nd Ship - July 2023
3rd Ship - Jan 2024
4th Ship - July 2024.

https://quwa.org/2018/07/07/pakistan-inks-contract-for-4-milgem-ada-corvettes-from-turkey/
https://quwa.org/2019/09/29/steel-cut-for-pakistans-first-milgem-corvette/

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 313ghazi

Looking forward to the massive upgrade. Hopefully the economy takes off and we can go even further. I'd like to see a large, dedicated PN air wing.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## war&peace

Tipu7 said:


> Because Milgum will be heavily upgraded variant thus demanding more R&D and hence more time. Plus, the production capacity of China is far ahead of Turkey.


No you're wrong about the timings. The post below puts explains it nicely and now I remember reading on PDF and he also included the reference so you cannot deny it. 


Tomahawk said:


> Contract was signed on 05 July 2018 and according to Turkey’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) the first PN corvette will be built in 54 months from the current date with the remaining three due within 60, 66 and 72 months respectively.
> So with that all four ships shall be delivered to the PN by 2024.
> 
> 1st Ship - Jan 2023
> 2nd Ship - July 2023
> 3rd Ship - Jan 2024
> 4th Ship - July 2024.
> 
> https://quwa.org/2018/07/07/pakistan-inks-contract-for-4-milgem-ada-corvettes-from-turkey/
> https://quwa.org/2019/09/29/steel-cut-for-pakistans-first-milgem-corvette/


----------



## SD 10

Areesh said:


> You missed these:
> 
> Azmat Class FACs
> Augusta 90 submarine getting upgraded
> Aerial platforms getting upgraded


which aerial platform is getting upgraded?


----------



## Areesh

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Which aerial plateforms?



https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/pakistan-navy-receives-second-atr-72-mpa.626704/



SD 10 said:


> which aerial platform is getting upgraded?



https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/pakistan-navy-receives-second-atr-72-mpa.626704/

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakistan Ka Beta

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Milgem will be having Chineese SAM?


Yes it was confirmed by CNS Admiral Zafar Mehmood Abbasi to Turkish media in Aman 2019 exercise . first it was thought that only 4th Ship ( Jinnah class ) will have HQ 16 but now all four will have HQ 16 . u can check Quwa n Turkish sources as well .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakhtoon yum

Rashid Mahmood said:


> PN will probably replace the Sea King Mk-45s in the next 4/5 years.
> The main contender is AW-101.
> 
> View attachment 582145


What about the new Chinese Z-20? Couldn't PA, PAF and PN get TOT for those and use them for all 3 services like the US, with its Seahawks?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Pakhtoon yum said:


> What about the new Chinese Z-20? Couldn't PA, PAF and PN get TOT for those and use them for all 3 services like the US, with its Seahawks?


Z-20 is basically a medium lift TRANSPORT Heli,we are yet to see a anti sub version of Z-20 @Pakhtoon yum

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Vapnope

I would like to see a dedicated attack aerial arm of Navy. 2 squadrons of JF17s blk 2 and B version will make it a force to reckon with.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tomahawk

One important point is the indigenous development of supersonic missile for PN as per MODP 2017-18 year book. If this is ship-borne system which might be the case most likely; then it would be requiring bigger platform – Destroyer. So; we might expect positive development regarding the procurement of Destroyers by PN in near future.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## WarKa DaNG

Good to see our navy getting some goodies


----------



## LKJ86

pakistanipower said:


> Z-20 is basically a medium lift TRANSPORT Heli,we are yet to see a anti sub version of Z-20 @Pakhtoon yum


It had made its maiden flight already.

And it would be carried by Type 055 and upgraded Type 052D DDGs soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

LKJ86 said:


> It had made its maiden flight already.


But testing/development not in production


----------



## Areesh

Tomahawk said:


> One important point is the indigenous development of supersonic missile for PN as per MODP 2017-18 year book. If this is ship-borne system which might be the case most likely; then it would be requiring bigger platform – Destroyer. So; we might expect positive development regarding the procurement of Destroyers by PN in near future.
> 
> View attachment 582167



Type 052D can be a real possibility 4-5 years from now for PN

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## S.Y.A

2 more of each ship(not submarines) is needed. so, total 6x type 54As and Jinnah class each. plus, up-gradation of F22Ps. it is also sad to see a ship like OHP going to waste, need to upgrade that as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## YeBeWarned

S.Y.A said:


> 2 more of each ship(not submarines) is needed. so, total 6x type 54As and Jinnah class each. plus, up-gradation of F22Ps. it is also sad to see a ship like OHP going to waste, need to upgrade that as well.



I second that , hopefully PN will order 2-4 more of each type .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aziqbal

interesting thing is the VLS count 

4 x MILGEM with 16 x VLS gives =64 missiles 
4 x Type 054AP with 32 x VLS = 128 missiles 

Total VLS 192 missiles 

whats the count on the Indian VLS for Kolkata Class, Shivalik Class and Talwar Class

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TsAr

PN would now have the offensive punch that was missing for a while now......IN would think twice before taking any action against Pakistan...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Syed1.

If Pakistan had any strategic sense, it would have had an expansionist navy and be the top dog of the Arabian Sea being the only nuclear armed country around the Arab peninsula and Straits of Hormuz.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Stealth

Pakistan Navy logically incapable to run all this massive inductions even after 5 - 7 years... our economy is not in shape to support such heavy fleet of ships, submarines, anti systems, squadrons etc etc and etc... until unless Pakistan's economy will something around 5.5 - 6GDP + not much dependent on foreign loans... else... NOWAY!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rashid Mahmood

Pakhtoon yum said:


> What about the new Chinese Z-20? Couldn't PA, PAF and PN get TOT for those and use them for all 3 services like the US, with its Seahawks?



First priority is the AW101, which is a proven platform.



Syed1. said:


> If Pakistan had any strategic sense, it would have had an expansionist navy and be the top dog of the Arabian Sea being the only nuclear armed country around the Arab peninsula and Straits of Hormuz.



At least someone has that strategic sense.

The one's serving are duffers.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Signalian

What do Pakistan Marines get ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakhtoon yum

pakistanipower said:


> Z-20 is basically a medium lift TRANSPORT Heli,we are yet to see a anti sub version of Z-20 @Pakhtoon yum


I just want the 3 branches to stick to one frame and build up on that instead of getting small number of aircraft from foreign countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bullzz

Signalian said:


> What do Pakistan Marines get ?



Exactly. At least Marines should be decently armed, which i am sure would be in pipeline.


----------



## Tipu7

war&peace said:


> No you're wrong about the timings. The post below puts explains it nicely and now I remember reading on PDF and he also included the reference so you cannot deny it.


I believe I have stated the same thing. 
Milgum are highly modernized according to PN demands, hence more time for R&D. 
Type-54AP on the other hand are comparatively less customized wrt to standard variant already operational. Hence less R&D and less time. 
Plus, China has much higher production capacity in comparison of Turkey, hence it will be delivering 2 Frigates per year and complete the deliveries even before arrival of Milgums.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AMG_12

Signalian said:


> What do Pakistan Marines get ?


More hovercrafts?


----------



## DOTO for life

Need couple of destroyers as well.


----------



## Bullzz

Game.Invade said:


> More hovercrafts?



Nope. They should be transform into Mechanized Force with equipment required for armoured warfare.


----------



## Ra's al Ghul

what about having a N-submarine on lease with china ?


----------



## HRK

Rashid Mahmood said:


> At least someone has that strategic sense.
> 
> The one's serving are duffers.


Sir its not about serving personal in case of Navy, I mean what chief and his team could do if he do not have enough budget even to meet operational expenses of the service; all of our governments including the military governments in past have displayed attitude of sea blindness at its finest, hack they didn't even bother to develop proper merchant navy fleet despite the fact that Pakistan is situated at the one of most important global sea route, just look at PNSC they do not have sufficient number of oil tankers nor bulk LPG carriers

During this 70+ years after creation of Pakistan our economic managers developed only one functional port and remained ignorant about the fact that we have 1,100 km coastline, neithet a proper shipbuilding industry is eastablished. 

You name just one thing related to a coastal economy or sea based economy which either we have not ruined or ignore completely



Signalian said:


> What do Pakistan Marines get ?


Dua aur dalasa ...... 



Un ka bhi waqat aye ga kabi na kabi

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## M.AsfandYar

Signalian said:


> What do Pakistan Marines get ?


Mangoes and Coke


----------



## LKJ86

seven0seven said:


> Z-20 is basically a medium lift TRANSPORT Heli,we are yet to see a anti sub version of Z-20 @Pakhtoon yum





LKJ86 said:


> It had made its maiden flight already.
> 
> And it would be carried by Type 055 and upgraded Type 052D DDGs soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## khanasifm

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/mil...vy-tests-new-z-20-helicopter-use-its-warships


----------



## khanasifm

4 ton z-9 with 400 km range to 10-11 ton z-20 with ~1000 km range options

The big question is what the helo platform for 054a/p and Turkish vessels ordered ?

Even damen ships has medium lift helo capability up to 10 ton deck

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## khanasifm



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

khanasifm said:


> 4 ton z-9 with 400 km range to 10-11 ton z-20 with ~1000 km range options
> 
> The big question is what the helo platform for 054a/p and Turkish vessels ordered ?
> 
> Even damen ships has medium lift helo capability up to 10 ton deck





khanasifm said:


> View attachment 583989


The PN will probably acquire either the Z-20 or the NH90 to equip the 054A/P, MILGEM and Damen Corvettes. The winning helicopter for those 3 ships will also replace the Sea Kings in the troop transport/marines role. SAR and all other utility roles will go the replacement of the Alouette III (either AW139 or T625).

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Rashid Mahmood

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> The PN will probably acquire either the Z-20 or the NH90 to equip the 054A/P, MILGEM and Damen Corvettes. The winning helicopter for those 3 ships will also replace the Sea Kings in the troop transport/marines role. SAR and all other utility roles will go the replacement of the Alouette III (either AW139 or T625).



Uptill now only the AW101 is being considered as a replacement for the Sea Kings.
Z-20 is at a very early stage, so cannot be evaluated in comparison. 
NH-90 is not being considered at the moment as it has some restrictions.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## khanasifm

Rashid Mahmood said:


> Uptill now only the AW101 is being considered as a replacement for the Sea Kings.
> Z-20 is at a very early stage, so cannot be evaluated in comparison.
> NH-90 is not being considered at the moment as it has some restrictions.



Doubt that seaking will go in next ۵ years especially as there are many available 10 years down the road ??


----------



## Rashid Mahmood

khanasifm said:


> Doubt that seaking will go in next ۵ years especially as there are many available 10 years down the road ??



Some air frames will reach the limit of their designed life after that.
Replacement also takes time, and another 3/4 years will be required for procurement, training's, logistics and operatability.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Dazzler

Rashid Mahmood said:


> Uptill now only the AW101 is being considered as a replacement for the Sea Kings.
> Z-20 is at a very early stage, so cannot be evaluated in comparison.
> NH-90 is not being considered at the moment as it has some restrictions.



Isnt AW101 too old? It's been around since 87.


----------



## GriffinsRule

Rashid Mahmood said:


> Uptill now only the AW101 is being considered as a replacement for the Sea Kings.
> Z-20 is at a very early stage, so cannot be evaluated in comparison.
> NH-90 is not being considered at the moment as it has some restrictions.


What about Eurocopter EC725 Super Pumas/Cougars or similar helicopter? Also, how does the PN feel about British helos after the whole Lynx debacle?



Dazzler said:


> Isnt AW101 too old? It's been around since 87.


That's comparatively pretty new.


----------



## Rashid Mahmood

Dazzler said:


> Isnt AW101 too old? It's been around since 87.



The EH-101 was inducted after 2000.
AW101 was developed from EH-101 in 2010.



GriffinsRule said:


> What about Eurocopter EC725 Super Pumas/Cougars or similar helicopter? Also, how does the PN feel about British helos after the whole Lynx debacle?
> 
> .



AW101 (EH101) just like the Sea King was designed as a Naval helicopter for ASW/ASV.

Puma's & Cougars are conversions.

We have flown the British Westland Sea Kings since the late 70s, so we have had a good experience.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Khafee

Rashid Mahmood said:


> The EH-101 was inducted after 2000.
> AW101 was developed from EH-101 in 2010.
> 
> 
> 
> AW101 (EH101) just like the Sea King was designed as a Naval helicopter for ASW/ASV.
> 
> Puma's & Cougars are conversions.
> 
> We have flown the British Westland Sea Kings since the late 70s, so we have had a good experience.


No possibility of S-92b ? After all the Sea King is the British version of the S-61.

*Sikorsky upgrades S-92 with new B-model variant*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Rashid Mahmood said:


> Uptill now only the AW101 is being considered as a replacement for the Sea Kings.
> Z-20 is at a very early stage, so cannot be evaluated in comparison.
> NH-90 is not being considered at the moment as it has some restrictions.


Yea I was aware of them considering the AW101 for the Sea King, but initially it was on the higher cost side. 

So, one idea (according to a retired PN officer) was to do a 'Hi/Lo' with the AW101 as the heavy/high-end and buy more Z-9 for the light/low-end. Leonardo also offered the AW159 (while highlighting engine commonality with the T129 of the PA and T625, which is a candidate for replacing Alouette IIIs in the PA and PN). 

However, someone else (albeit from the industry) said the PN would rather move towards one ship-based platform, and it needs to be multi-mission. In this case, they asked for info about the NH-90 and MH-60. But, as you said, it seems both helicopters have a restriction, the simplest one being US parts (NH-90 uses a US engine). 

That said, it turns out that the total cost (procurement, maintenance, etc) of the AW101, NH-90 and MH-60 is all quite close at around $100 m per helicopter. So, in the end, the PN could (as you said) just go for the AW101 and build around it. We might see an end of small ASW helicopters entirely; the PN could move to just AW101 for all naval and marine mission ops, while use the AW139 or T625 for utility and SAR.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## khanasifm

https://www.defensenews.com/global/...nese-media-reveals-specs-of-harbin-z-20-helo/


----------



## Rashid Mahmood

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Yea I was aware of them considering the AW101 for the Sea King, but initially it was on the higher cost side.
> 
> So, one idea (according to a retired PN officer) was to do a 'Hi/Lo' with the AW101 as the heavy/high-end and buy more Z-9 for the light/low-end. Leonardo also offered the AW159 (while highlighting engine commonality with the T129 of the PA and T625, which is a candidate for replacing Alouette IIIs in the PA and PN).
> 
> However, someone else (albeit from the industry) said the PN would rather move towards one ship-based platform, and it needs to be multi-mission. In this case, they asked for info about the NH-90 and MH-60. But, as you said, it seems both helicopters have a restriction, the simplest one being US parts (NH-90 uses a US engine).
> 
> That said, it turns out that the total cost (procurement, maintenance, etc) of the AW101, NH-90 and MH-60 is all quite close at around $100 m per helicopter. So, in the end, the PN could (as you said) just go for the AW101 and build around it. We might see an end of small ASW helicopters entirely; the PN could move to just AW101 for all naval and marine mission ops, while use the AW139 or T625 for utility and SAR.



Yes, small helo's do not provide the time on task enough to conduct effective ASW.
The only limitation was small flight decks which could not accommodate larger helo's.

Sea King has a 4+ hour ToT for ASW, which was quite comfortable.
Specially when embarked, they would provide more ToT.

PN proposes the AW101 for the main roles, while Z-9/AW139 for the SAR/Utility role in the future.



Khafee said:


> No possibility of S-92b ? After all the Sea King is the British version of the S-61.
> 
> *Sikorsky upgrades S-92 with new B-model variant*



Nope.


----------



## khanasifm

Aw101 is 15 ton and would not fit any pn ships perhaps only tankers 

Unless aw101 is to operate from shore like sea-kings, z-9 4 ton and medium weight 10 upto max can operate from Turkish, danish and 054


----------



## khanasifm

Z-9 provide asw capability to ships by attacking subs over the horizon at extended range once the ship detects it at least get some indication of threat , current ship based asw weapons ie torpedos has max range of 10-20 km with heli ship can attack at say 100-350km or beyond the range of sub weapons 

Seaking class ie 12-15 tons range is twice of z-9 class so looking at 700-800 km out at seas so can operate from shore or larger ship such as tankers


----------



## khanasifm

Z-9EC ASW Helicopter

The Z-9EC is an ASW helicopter developed by Harbin Aircraft based on Harbin Z-9 helicopter, a license-built version of the French AS365 Dauphin. The Z-9EC is operated by the Pakistan Navy’s Naval Air Arm.

The helicopter integrates advanced anti-submarine systems such as search radar, dipping sonar system, and ET-52C anti-submarine torpedoes for hunting submarines. The Harpoon landing/take-off system aboard the helicopter ensures operations from ships.

The Z-9EC enhances the operational range of the host platform while meeting the challenging requirements of modern ASW warfare. 

The helicopter has a maximum range of 427km and can remain airborne for 2.27 


AW101 (Military)

The AW101 (formerly EH101 Merlin) multi-role helicopter is capable of performing a wide range of missions in maritime and littoral environments. The helicopter can be deployed in medium-sized transport, ASW, ASuW, long-range search-and-rescue (SAR), airborne mine countermeasures and ship-based utility missions.

The AW101 helicopters configured for autonomous ASW and ASuW missions integrate a mission system composed of dipping sonar, sonobuoys and electronic warfare suite. The helicopter has four torpedoes/depth charges in its weaponry.

The helicopter can also be armed with anti-ship missiles, air-to-air missiles, air-to-surface missiles, rockets and gun systems. 

The typical range and endurance of the AW101 are 1,300km and six hours respectively.


----------



## Tipu7

Rashid Mahmood said:


> Yes, small helo's do not provide the time on task enough to conduct effective ASW.
> The only limitation was small flight decks which could not accommodate larger helo's.
> 
> Sea King has a 4+ hour ToT for ASW, which was quite comfortable.
> Specially when embarked, they would provide more ToT.


Will PN Damen & Jinnah class vessels be able to support such a large heli?


----------



## Khafee

Rashid Mahmood said:


> Nope.



I understand why not, but in comparison to the AW101, much better reliability, and much easier maintenance. 

Anyways, the AW101 comes with as an AWAC version as well, wishful thinking on my part, but hope you get it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Tipu7 said:


> Will PN Damen & Jinnah class vessels be able to support such a large heli?


They support up to 10 tons.

If the PN is interested in the AW101, then it means it'll procure additional Z-9ECs to support ASW/utility operations from its new ships.

OTOH, if the PN opts for a 10-ton helicopter -- such as NH90 or MH60 -- then it'll standardize on that platform for ASW, AShW and troop transport, while leaving the Z-9, AW139 or T625 for utility and SAR.

The PN must make its decision in the next 12-18 months as all 12 new ships will be in place by 2023/2024. @khanasifm you'll be interested to know that South Korea got the MH-60 for $67 m a helicopter (DSCA), which isn't bad, but it depends on the US. 

I'd rather the PN go for a 10-ton type as it'll mean buying that type in numbers (18~24) to support the new frigates/corvettes and replace the Sea Kings.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tipu7

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> If the PN is interested in the AW101, then it means it'll procure additional Z-9ECs to support ASW/utility operations from its new ships


PN is not fond of Z9E. So far the platform has turned out to be a headache as far as its maintainance is concerned. I believe PN will avoid increasing the fleet of Z9. Instead it will replace them in longer term with same option which will be replacing Alouettes. Be it T625, be it AW139.



Khafee said:


> I understand why not, but in comparison to the AW101, much better reliability, and much easier maintenance.
> 
> Anyways, the AW101 comes with as an AWAC version as well, wishful thinking on my part, but hope you get it.


We have four ZDK-03 for Southern sectors; including Arabian sea, for this role. Pakistan will avoid procurement of systems with overlapping capabilities.
The AEWC version of Marlin is meant for those navies which have to use their surface fleets for oceanic power projection, something which is not in accordance of Pakistan's naval posture.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Tipu7 said:


> PN is not fond of Z9E. So far the platform has turned out to be a headache as far as its maintainance is concerned. I believe PN will avoid increasing the fleet of Z9. Instead it will replace them in longer term with same option which will be replacing Alouettes. Be it T625, be it AW139.
> 
> 
> We have four ZDK-03 for Southern sectors; including Arabian sea, for this role. Pakistan will avoid procurement of systems with overlapping capabilities.
> The AEWC version of Marlin is meant for those navies which have to use their surface fleets for oceanic power projection, something which is not in accordance of Pakistan's naval posture.


If Lockheed Martin's sitting on a potential $4 b deal with the PAF on F-16 Block-72s and F-16V upgrades, then it's probably sitting on a $1 bn PN helicopter deal too (MH-60). And then the Army's Pumas are still kicking about, one can imagine a proposal dossier with mixed surplus UH-60s and new S-70is at GHQ. @Oscar Any chance LM's lobbying efforts go up a notch in the next 12-18 months?


----------



## Tipu7

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> If Lockheed Martin's sitting on a potential $4 b deal with the PAF on F-16 Block-72s and F-16V upgrades, then it's probably sitting on a $1 bn PN helicopter deal too (MH-60). And then the Army's Pumas are still kicking about, one can imagine a proposal dossier with mixed surplus UH-60s and new S-70is at GHQ. @Oscar Any chance LM's lobbying efforts go up a notch in the next 12-18 months?


Isn't it better to take Bell on board for Venoms? after all our AH1Z are still there and Bell offers a very promising combination of Venom & Viper with over 70% parts commonality.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Tipu7 said:


> Isn't it better to take Bell on board for Venoms? after all our AH1Z are still there and Bell offers a very promising combination of Venom & Viper with over 70% parts commonality.


I'd reckon the surplus UH-60As and even transport-only S-70i are cheaper, especially for the numbers the PAA will need. The AH-1Z/UH-1Y combo is better suited for our SOFs and, from a political standpoint, may be more palatable to the US as it'd imply a stronger COIN/CT focus.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LKJ86

Tipu7 said:


> Isn't it better to take Bell on board for Venoms? after all our AH1Z are still there and Bell offers a very promising combination of Venom & Viper with over 70% parts commonality.


A good choice in times of peace.


----------



## Khafee

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> I'd reckon the surplus UH-60As and even transport-only S-70i are cheaper, especially for the numbers the PAA will need. The AH-1Z/UH-1Y combo is better suited for our SOFs and, from a political standpoint, may be more palatable to the US as it'd imply a stronger COIN/CT focus.


There is a lot more going on, but no point talking about it.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Readerdefence

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> If Lockheed Martin's sitting on a potential $4 b deal with the PAF on F-16 Block-72s and F-16V upgrades, then it's probably sitting on a $1 bn PN helicopter deal too (MH-60). And then the Army's Pumas are still kicking about, one can imagine a proposal dossier with mixed surplus UH-60s and new S-70is at GHQ. @Oscar Any chance LM's lobbying efforts go up a notch in the next 12-18 months?


Hi just a thought if DT can come out from impeachment scenario cleanly there is a chance of LM
To through a $1 billion towards his campaign for the second term there can be a chance for them to get it done through that way or the other 
Thank you


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Readerdefence said:


> Hi just a thought if DT can come out from impeachment scenario cleanly there is a chance of LM
> To through a $1 billion towards his campaign for the second term there can be a chance for them to get it done through that way or the other
> Thank you


No longer are US arms contracts tied to the White House. Rather, if US interests as a whole say it's OK, it'll happen one way or another. If LM is convinced it can secure $5-6 b in contracts in Pakistan, then it needs to convince the right people in the White House, State Department, DoD and Congress of that fact.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## SQ8

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> If Lockheed Martin's sitting on a potential $4 b deal with the PAF on F-16 Block-72s and F-16V upgrades, then it's probably sitting on a $1 bn PN helicopter deal too (MH-60). And then the Army's Pumas are still kicking about, one can imagine a proposal dossier with mixed surplus UH-60s and new S-70is at GHQ. @Oscar Any chance LM's lobbying efforts go up a notch in the next 12-18 months?


Leonardo is pitching a 139 derivative for the PN. LM may lobby but as such it is focused on the Indian pie for now.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Oscar said:


> Leonardo is pitching a 139 derivative for the PN. LM may lobby but as such it is focused on the Indian pie for now.


PAC said at IDEAS 2018 that it was setting-up a depot-level MRO site for the AW139 as well, so I think they'd prefer the PN and PA to double-down on that platform. So, it now seems like a Hi/Lo mix of the AW101 and AW139, funds permitting.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Readerdefence

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> No longer are US arms contracts tied to the White House. Rather, if US interests as a whole say it's OK, it'll happen one way or another. If LM is convinced it can secure $5-6 b in contracts in Pakistan, then it needs to convince the right people in the White House, State Department, DoD and Congress of that fact.


Hi so if I’m not wrong if Pakistan can secure 5-6 B it’s possible for LM to cut through the Indian lobby and make DT or whoever the next president to over rule the congress and give a waver for Pakistan 
Thank you


----------



## khanasifm

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> PAC said at IDEAS 2018 that it was setting-up a depot-level MRO site for the AW139 as well, so I think they'd prefer the PN and PA to double-down on that platform. So, it now seems like a Hi/Lo mix of the AW101 and AW139, funds permitting.



Even for medium lift mi-17 paa and paf went together as single platform but mi-17 has no asw Version nor pn is right now in need seaking will go for another 5/10 years 

But aw-139 is a success story with large active fleet around the world


----------



## cabatli_53

PN 2020 naval power projection, Is there any AAV requirement that PN has described for amphibious forces ? I would like to see ZAHA to join into a tough trials against rivals in Pakistan. Zaha is in its critical design phase at present and first prototype reached 7,5knots on a dam lake.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## CHACHA"G"

cabatli_53 said:


> PN 2020 naval power projection, Is there any AAV requirement that PN has described for amphibious forces ? I would like to see ZAHA to join into a tough trials against rivals in Pakistan. Zaha is in its critical design phase at present and first prototype reached 7,5knots on a dam lake.


Pakistan building Marines forces , This means Marines need proper eqm like helis , amphib/ships , IFVs , etc..



khanasifm said:


> Even for medium lift mi-17 paa and paf went together as single platform but mi-17 has no asw Version nor pn is right now in need seaking will go for another 5/10 years
> 
> But aw-139 is a success story with large active fleet around the world


Combo of Mi-17 with AW-139 or Aw-101 will make it to Pakistan Marine one day ,, If we look closely Pakistan Marine will go for 2 types of helis Just like PAA (Mi-17 and Puma)..



Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> PAC said at IDEAS 2018 that it was setting-up a depot-level MRO site for the AW139 as well, so I think they'd prefer the PN and PA to double-down on that platform. So, it now seems like a Hi/Lo mix of the AW101 and AW139, funds permitting.


Dear Sir , PAA soon have to replace PUMA and we all know Pakistan military is expanding (in terms of capabilities) , Pakistan Marines is latest addition , they too need helis for both (sea and land) base operations ..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

CHACHA"G" said:


> Pakistan building Marines forces , This means Marines need proper eqm like helis , amphib/ships , IFVs , etc..
> 
> 
> Combo of Mi-17 with AW-139 or Aw-101 will make it to Pakistan Marine one day ,, If we look closely Pakistan Marine will go for 2 types of helis Just like PAA (Mi-17 and Puma)..
> 
> 
> Dear Sir , PAA soon have to replace PUMA and we all know Pakistan military is expanding (in terms of capabilities) , Pakistan Marines is latest addition , they too need helis for both (sea and land) base operations ..


Re: the Pumas, the PAA can look at the AW139 (similar MTOW) or heavier options, like the AW189K (basically the AW149 with a French engine), Super Puma, Caracal, and Chinese Z-20. But if it's up to me, I'd do something nuts like get the AW189K and use the same engine on the Rooivalk Mk2.


----------



## zainkhan24

I have one huge surprise news related to Pak Navy but can't share it. 
there will be very big surprise for the world and India.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mzain

zainkhan24 said:


> I have one huge surprise news related to Pak Navy but can't share it.
> there will be very big surprise for the world and India.


Is it related to ships or weapons?


----------



## Shah_Deu

zainkhan24 said:


> I have one huge surprise news related to Pak Navy but can't share it.
> there will be very big surprise for the world and India.


Probably a longer range submarine launched cruise missile or maybe some update regarding our super secret nuclear submarine project


----------



## syed_yusuf

zainkhan24 said:


> I have one huge surprise news related to Pak Navy but can't share it.
> there will be very big surprise for the world and India.


Is it this month ?


----------



## khanasifm

zainkhan24 said:


> I have one huge surprise news related to Pak Navy but can't share it.
> there will be very big surprise for the world and India.



054 launch [emoji573] or new weapon ? Or bs?


----------



## araz

zainkhan24 said:


> I have one huge surprise news related to Pak Navy but can't share it.
> there will be very big surprise for the world and India.


If you cant share it then keep your gob shut. What is the meaning of this rubbish that you have news but cannot share it.
Too many beans are spilt by enthusiastic people like you hearing this or that from their brother, father or uncle and then jumping up and down like morons.
If you were given a secret then keep it to your self. Remember your open mouth will sink you and your source as the MI is very good at linking you to your contacts and then the source.
So dont jeoperdize any one's career by opening your mouth. Take this as sincere advice from an elder brother.
Regards
A

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## GriffinsRule

Sub-launched missiles, or 054 launch/induction, or even new helicopters ... none of these are big surprises for anyone as we all expect them to happen sooner or later. The biggest surprises could be:

A. Navy is being disbanded altogether. 
B. That fake news about the Chinese carrier wasnt fake.
C. PN chief on another foreign visit breaking all records.
D. Su-35!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakhtoon yum

GriffinsRule said:


> Sub-launched missiles, or 054 launch/induction, or even new helicopters ... none of these are big surprises for anyone as we all expect them to happen sooner or later. The biggest surprises could be:
> 
> A. Navy is being disbanded altogether.
> B. That fake news about the Chinese carrier wasnt fake.
> C. PN chief on another foreign visit breaking all records.
> D. Su-35!!


A. What do you mean
B. It's fake 
C. So? 
D. It's dead, chapter closed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## zainkhan24

Shah_Deu said:


> Probably a longer range submarine launched cruise missile or maybe some update regarding our super secret nuclear submarine project



yup. you are right.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Philip the Arab

@Quwa 
@Bilal Khan (Quwa) 
Wouldn't Baynunah class have been a good choice for Pakistan? 920 tons but armed with 8 50km anti-air missiles(RIM-162ESSM.)


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Philip the Arab said:


> @Quwa
> @Bilal Khan (Quwa)
> Wouldn't Baynunah class have been a good choice for Pakistan? 920 tons but armed with 8 50km anti-air missiles(RIM-162ESSM.)


Pakistan isn't on good terms with the French right now. But I do think an option is there to work with Turkey to design a very similar corvette, assuming the PN needs it. Otherwise, another option is to just work on the Damen design and make it do more.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philip the Arab

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Pakistan isn't on good terms with the French right now. But I do think an option is there to work with Turkey to design a very similar corvette, assuming the PN needs it. Otherwise, another option is to just work on the Damen design and make it do more.


Would America let Pakistan have ESSM even? Also, UAE may be developing future ships indigenously that we don't know about so cooperation is vital. Pakistan may be able to contribute Harbah missile, and other missiles to projects.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> Would America let Pakistan have ESSM even?


we have other option from China named Fl-3000 which is similar to ESSM and RAM missiles of USA

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> we have other option from China named Fl-3000 which is similar to ESSM and RAM missiles of USA


LOL, no ESSM offers 50km range. FL-3000 is less than 10km.


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Philip the Arab said:


> Would America let Pakistan have ESSM even? Also, UAE may be developing future ships indigenously that we don't know about so cooperation is vital. Pakistan may be able to contribute Harbah missile, and other missiles to projects.


Pakistan opt into various alternatives to the ESSM, e.g., Umkhonto, Hisar, Aster-15, and CAMM. As for AShW, I'd look at equipping small and fast ships with the supersonic-cruising AShM.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> LOL, no ESSM offers 50km range. FL-3000 is less than 10km.


for defense from supersonic anti ship missiles range doesn't matters, but accuracy that matters and you know what is the layered defense is


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> for defense from supersonic anti ship missiles range doesn't matters, but accuracy that matters and you know what is the layered defense is


Defense from aircraft is important as well. Operating near ports whole cities can be protected from enemy aircraft. Ships include 21 RAM missiles so more than enough for supersonic anti-ship missiles.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> Defense from aircraft is important as well. Operating near ports whole cities can be protected from enemy aircraft. Ships include 21 RAM missiles so more than enough for supersonic anti-ship missiles.


we will have HQ-16B with a range of 72 , and have the other option as well like British CAMM/ Aster-15/Turkish Hisar/ South African Umkhonto

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> we will have HQ-16B with a range of 72 , and have the other option as well like British CAMM/ Aster-15/Turkish Hisar/ South African Umkhonto


At sea?


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> At sea?


yeah these are all short range to medium range Naval Surface to air missiles, do research before you post

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> yeah these are all short range to medium range Naval Surface to air missiles, do research before you post


None are on ships that displace 920 tons.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> None are on ships that displace 920 tons.


bro what is you talking about If Pakistan thinking to Put HQ-16 on upcoming Turkish corvette, they are all have capability to install on corvettes

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> bro what is you talking about If Pakistan thinking to Put HQ-16 on upcoming Turkish corvette, they are all have capability to install on corvettes


Turkish corvette is double that size. 920 is fast attack craft territory.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> Turkish corvette is double that size. 920 is fast attack craft territory.


Fast attack boat don't need these Sams because they utilized different tactics then all other big naval ships, they relied on shoot and scoot tactics

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> Fast attack boat don't need these Sams because they utilized different tactics then all other big naval ships, they relied on shoot and scoot tactics


50 KM SAMs mean it can easily sit in Karachi and protect the whole city from aircraft attack, and take care of naval threats approaching. It is a corvette but tonnage size is borderline fast attack craft. DO YOU NOT GET THAT IT IS A VERY CHEAP SHIP THAT CAN DESTROY INDIAN AIRCRAFT?


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> 50 KM SAMs mean it can easily sit in Karachi and protect the whole city from aircraft attack, and take care of naval threats approaching. It is a corvette but tonnage size is borderline fast attack craft.


first clarify me that are you talking about land based SAM or Naval SAM, if you talking about land based SAM we have HQ-16 in Karachi for defense, and as i said fast attack crafts not needed meium range SAM all fast attack craft is using either short range SAMs or ManPads, and don't ridicule yourself more

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> first clarify me that are you talking about land based SAM or Naval SAM, if you talking about land based SAM we have HQ-16 in Karachi for defense, and as i said fast attack crafts not needed meium range SAM all fast attack craft is using either short range SAMs or ManPads, and don't ridicule yourself more


You don't think its a plus to have long range naval SAMs on small ships? You stupid? Radars on Baynunah class corvette are more than capable of detecting aircraft well above 50 km and engaging at 50km.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> You don't think its a plus to have long range naval SAMs on small ships? You stupid?


and tell me how many fast attack crafts are using long rage naval SAMs in the world, long range SAMs are the huge sytem and can be fitted on small ships


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> and tell me how many fast attack crafts are using long rage naval SAMs in the world, long range SAMs are the huge sytem and can be fitted on small ships


A 920 corvette carries 8 ESSMs with 50km range. Not much bigger than FAC which size ends at 800 tons.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> A 920 corvette carries 8 ESSMs with 50km range. Not much bigger than FAC which size ends at 800 tons.


and don't contradict yourself, first you said pud long range SAMs on fast attack craft and now medium range SAMs, and fast attack craft are have much less tonnage then corverttes, biggest fast attack craft can't displace tonnage of more then 500 tons

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> and don't contradict yourself, first you said pud long range SAMs on fast attack craft and now medium range SAMs, and fast attack craft are have much less tonnage then corverttes, biggest fast attack craft can't displace tonnage of more then 500 tons


No, official fast attack craft designation stops at 800 tons according to Wikipedia. This craft is roughly 100 tons over, and not much bigger. I'm 100% FAC could carry exact same SAM in same configuration.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> No, official fast attack craft designation stops at 800 tons according to Wikipedia. This craft is roughly 100 tons over, and not much bigger.


fast attack crafts don't need medium range SAMs, and Wikipedia is unreliable source, its utilized different tactics than larger naval ships (shoot and Scoot) do you what is the meaning of this term


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> fast attack crafts don't need medium range SAMs, and Wikipedia is unreliable source, its utilized different tactics than larger naval ships (shoot and Scoot) do you what is the meaning of this term


I know what the meaning of this is, but it can easily be twisted to fit different roles. I would rather have a ship that can be multirole than be one role. WHO WOULDN'T WANT A SHIP THAT CAN FULFILL ALL DUTIES?
You are an old man thinking of old military doctrine, it changes constantly m8 and your thinking will die off with your generation.

IF AZMAT CLASS CAN CARRY HARBAH LACM WHY COULDN'T IT CARRY SAMS? Launching LACMs is now shoot and scoot huh?


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> I know what the meaning of this is, but it can easily be twisted to fit different roles. I would rather have a ship that can be multirole than be one role. WHO WOULDN'T WANT A SHIP THAT CAN FULFILL ALL DUTIES?
> You are an old man thinking of old military doctrine, it changes constantly m8 and your thinking will die off with your generation.


please tell me how can fast attack crafts will full fill a duties of destroyer or frigates, main job of fast attack crafts are attack enemy ships from stand off distance and run


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> please tell me how can fast attack crafts will full fill a duties of destroyer or frigates, main job of fast attack crafts are attack enemy ships from stand off distance and run








Why does it have LACM then? This is made for LAND ATTACK, not sinking ships. Hence, using SAMs is not out of Pakistan's doctrines if they are willing to use long range cruise missiles on Azmat class FAC.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> Why does it have LACM then?


are you have a comprehension problem, Harba is stand off anti ship and land attack cruise missile, i am saying same thing, so why fast attack craft need Medium range SAMs, think logically


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> are you have a comprehension problem, Harba is stand off anti ship and land attack cruise missile, i am saying same thing, so why fast attack craft need Medium range SAMs, think logically


My God, medium range SAMs are beneficial whatever ship they are on, it would expand a small, and cheap ship(Azmat) into a multirole platform that could fulfill a lot of PN needs while as I said being very cheap. 10 Azmat equipped with ESSM could layer and protect coastal cities from Indian attacks while allowing land based SAMs to operate far inside of Pakistani land and let PN deal with air defense for coast.

Land attack cruise missiles are just as wild of a concept as SAMs bruh.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> My God, medium range SAMs are beneficial whatever ship they are on, it would expand a small, and cheap ship(Azmat) into a multirole platform that could fulfill a lot of PN needs while as I said being very cheap. 10 Azmat equipped with ESSM could layer and protect coastal cities from Indian attacks while allowing land based SAMs to operate far inside of Pakistani land and let PN deal with air defense for coast.
> 
> Land attack cruise missiles are just as wild of a concept as SAMs bruh.


i have to say you have a special brain, when fast attack craft launches land attack cruise missiles and anti ship missiles against enemy ships and and Land they will well outside their defense lines and thinks that when fast attack crafts does expand their medium range SAMS (Few) these will become easy oray for enemy


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> i have to say you have a special brain, when fast attack craft launches land attack cruise missiles and anti ship missiles against enemy ships and and Land they will well outside their defense lines and thinks that when fast attack crafts does expand their medium range SAMS (Few) these will become easy oray for enemy


50 kms away from a plane is fairly far away, and equipping FAC with RAMs would more than guarantee safety for anti-ship missiles launched towards ship.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> 50 kms away from a plane is fairly far away, and equipping FAC with RAMs would more than guarantee safety for anti-ship missiles launched towards ship.


And ESSM/RAM aren't only options left for PN, British CAMM (Based on ASRAAM) Aster-15/ Chinese DK-50 (Based on PL-12/S-10) have also same ranges


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> And ESSM/RAM aren't only options left for PN, British CAMM (Based on ASRAAM) Aster-15/ Chinese DK-50 (Based on PL-12/S-10) have also same ranges


DK-50 is way too wide with canister, but CAMM is possibility although American systems are better than British systems.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> DK-50 is way too wide with canister, but CAMM is possibility although American systems are better than British systems.


 and how can assume that US system is better, because you live in USA, ESSM/RAM are based on AIM-7 sparrow air to air missiles of 60s/70s with only upgraded electronics, CAMM is based on ASRAAM from 90s, and ASTER-15 is totally new missiles with latest electronics, you're not technical neutral guy to guess which system are best and which are not


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> and how can assume that US system is better, because you live in USA, ESSM/RAM are based on AIM-7 sparrow air to air missiles of 60s/70s with only upgraded electronics, CAMM is based on ASRAAM from 90s, and ASTER-15 is totally new missiles with latest electronics, you're not technical neutral guy to guess which system are best and which are not


Everybody knows USA has best tech throughout world, and ESSM has completely new rocket motor, warhead, electronics, etc and basically only shares airframe. Britain has nowhere near the same level of money to spend on R&D for defense products and many more companies, and manpower for R&D.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> Everybody knows USA has best tech throughout world, and ESSM has completely new rocket motor, warhead, electronics, etc and basically only shares airframe. Britain has nowhere near the same level of money to spend on R&D for defense products and many more companies, and manpower for R&D.


ok whatever you think but you're not a expert on this, and mostly EU developing through joint projects, so money and manpower aren't problems for R&D for EU


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> ok whatever you think but you're not a expert on this, and mostly EU developing through joint projects, so money and manpower aren't problems for R&D for EU


You aren't an expert either, and think of old military concepts. I'm 16 years old and I know I'm much smarter than you were at my age m8.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> You aren't an expert either, and think of old military concepts. I'm 16 years old and I know I'm much smarter than you were at my age m8.


ok mr self proclaim expert, so you're a teenager with no basic knowledge of defense/ strategies/tactic, can you tell me what is the difference between high by pass ratio engine and low by pass engine mr self proclaims teenager expert


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> ok mr self proclaim expert, so you're a teenager with no basic knowledge of defense/ strategies/tactic, can you tell me what is the difference between high by pass ratio engine and low by pass engine mr self proclaims teenager expert


That topic is not solely defense, therefore I will not answer it although I have studied aircraft it is not my main focus. I need something solely used in defense and I will answer it without using Google on God.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> That topic is not solely defense, therefore I will not answer it although I have studied aircraft it is not my main focus. I need something solely used in defense and I will answer it without using Google on God.


but concepts and theories to put medeium range SAMs on fast attack crafts are really ridiculous, and with current circumstances there is a least chance PN will get ESSM/RAM from USA


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> but concepts and theories to put medeium range SAMs on fast attack crafts are really ridiculous, and with current circumstances there is a least chance PN will get ESSM/RAM from USA


That doesn't make sense, PN has been operating Oliver Hazard Perry frigates for a while and they haven't been sanctioned yet. I'm sure US would allow missiles to PN. Give me 5 reasons why mounting medium range SAMs on FAC is ridiculous? Even Bilal Khan upvoted my answer which leads me to think he agrees with me.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> That doesn't make sense, PN has been operating Oliver Hazard Perry frigates for a while and they haven't been sanctioned yet. I'm sure US would allow missiles to PN. Give me 5 reasons why mounting medium range SAMs on FAC is ridiculous? Even Bilal Khan upvoted my answer which leads me to think he agrees with me.


 USA currently tends toward India and in congress have strong lobby of India, you don't know what is the current relations between USA and pakistan 

Main thing is tactics is different from large ships for FAC, and only few medium range SAM FAC can carries after that what would happened to your beloved FAC equipped with medium range SAMs


----------



## Philip the Arab

seven0seven said:


> USA currently tends toward India and in congress have strong lobby of India, you don't know what is the current relations between USA and pakistan
> 
> Main thing is tactics is different from large ships for FAC, and only few medium range SAM FAC can carries after that what would happened to your beloved FAC equipped with medium range SAMs


Resupplies...?


----------



## Ultima Thule

Philip the Arab said:


> Resupplies...?


and in sea how it be possible and if its possible its take hours if not days to resupplies and in between your beloved FAC will be history


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Your FACs -- or sub-1,000-ton ships in general -- shouldn't be the main anti-air warfare (AAW) or even anti-ship warfare (AShW) asset. Rather, they're a low-cost means of delivering anti-ship missiles (or in the PNS Himmat's case, land-attack cruise missiles).

So, if you fit those FACs with medium-range SAMs, you should look at them as supporting assets, like filling blind spots. But definitely not your central naval assets. 

However, adding VL-SAMs to a FAC is still costly. It'd be an extra $20-30 m to the cost, and that cost is the same whether it's on a FAC or a 2,000+ ton ship like the Jinnah-class. It's a luxury we can't afford (in that we have to put that money on more urgent areas, like LRMPAs).

Europe's into inserting VLS to FACs, but Turkey decided (for its FAC-55 design) to just install a pedestal SAM (RAM) for self-defence purposes only. I think the PN will likely go this route.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## syed_yusuf

it seems between now and 2022/23 PN will induct 10 ships of 2000+ ton, not a bad progress.


----------



## cabatli_53

*Defence Turkey: PNS Moawin (AOE-39), a 17,000-ton class marine tanker built within the scope of the Pakistan Navy’s Fleet Replenishment Ship Project, the first export of STM on the basis of military ships and the largest export of our country in a single lot at that time, was launched on August 19, 2016 at Karachi Shipyard & Engineering Works and was put into service on October 16, 2018. What would you like to tell us about the experience gained from this project, where STM has been the Main Contractor and what type of feedback have you received from the end user regarding the ship during the previous year?*

_*Murat İKİNCİ:*_ PNS Moawin has been actively used in the Pakistan Navy since its entry to service and has accomplished many tasks and exercises. It successfully performed its duties in the international exercise AMAN-2019, which was organized by the Pakistani Naval Forces with the participation of senior government representatives. During this exercise and following Pakistan National Exercises, senior guests and press members followed the naval phase of the exercise at PNS Moawin.

During the course of the exercises the ship attended and underwent activities such as the replenishment of fuel, water, food, medicine, etc. to the other navy vessels. It was also observed that the ship was able to cruise smoothly even under harsh sea and wind conditions and that it was able to perform helicopter operations successfully thanks to its helicopter deck and hangar, and also provided medical support to other navy units through its medical facilities.

As expressed by Pakistani President Arif ALVI during the launching ceremony and the press statements in the media, the PNS Moawin is a modern and state of the art technology combat support ship. It is a ship capable of assuming many tasks in peacetime as well as emergencies and times of crisis. The commissioning of the ship into the inventory will provide the Pakistani Naval Forces superior flexibility in long-term operations. If required, the ship will also be performed in humanitarian operations as well.

STM has gained substantial experience in the establishment and maintenance of high-level cooperation with the Ministry of Defence Production, Naval Forces and military shipyards of a friendly and allied country, as well as in military shipbuilding, equipping, commissioning and testing activities. One of the most important gains in this project was the creation and development of a common working culture in all processes from the determination of ship configuration to the date of commissioning. This experience is positively reflected toward prospective projects.

*Defence Turkey: STM recently signed a contract with the Pakistani Ministry of Defence Production on June 22, 2016, surpassing French DCNS Shipyard, Naval Group, the submarine manufacturer, in an international tender opened for the Mid-Life Update (MLU) of Khalid Class Submarines ‘Agosta 90B’. During this period, three contract amendments were signed in June 2017, February 2018 and March 2019 for the provision of two submarines and important subsystems from Turkish companies. Could you please inform us on the current status of the project, activities performed so far and the important milestones of the project in the upcoming period?*

*Murat İKİNCİ: *As the main contractor, we are in the phase of Assembly and Integration on the first ship, disassembly of system devices because of unavailable space on the second ship and the preparation of the location for the assembly. By the end of 2019, we plan to complete the installation and integration activities of the systems supplied within the scope of Mid-Life Update in the PNS/M HAMZA submarine, the first submarine of the Project, and to finalize the Setting to Work (STW) tests. We aim to deliver the first submarine of the project PNS/M HAMZA to the Pakistan Navy at the end of December 2020, after the completion of Harbor Acceptance Tests (HAT) in the first quarter of 2020, followed by the Sea Acceptance Tests (SAT).

Simultaneously with the first submarine activities, we plan to complete the Factory Acceptance Tests (FAT) of the systems belonging to PNS/M KHALID which is the second submarine within 2020, to perform the Assembly and Integration activities and to finalize the Preparations for Set to Work (STW) tests by the end of 2020. Our main goal is to deliver PNS/M KHALID to the Pakistani Navy in December 2021, one year after the delivery of the first submarine PNS/M HAMZA.

*Defence Turkey: The MLU of the first submarine, which started in 2018, was planned to be delivered within September 2020 or the first quarter of 2021, and the MLU of the second submarine PNS/M Saad (S-138) was scheduled to start in 2019. Could you please provide information about the modernization and improvement work to be carried out on submarines, the products to be procured from Turkish Defence Industry companies, especially from Aselsan and Havelsan, and the estimated labor / man x hours for each submarine?*

_*Murat İKİNCİ:*_ Our main goal for the French originated KHALID class submarines, which are the most popular underwater platform of the Pakistan Navy, is to incorporate the cutting-edge technology products which are indispensable in terms of both effective duty execution and deterrence in a modern submarine. STM, following the completion of our efforts on activity analysis and customer requirements for such platforms, we will provide the Integrated Underwater Command Control System (ESKKS) and Sonar Suite and Sonar Subsystems that work in integration with it, the Submarine Information Distribution System, Underwater/Torpedo Fire Control System, Attack and Navigation Periscopes, ESM, Navigation Radar, Static Converters, Steering Control System, Ship Self-Noise Measurement System, Submarine Rescue Buoy and Digital Bridge Information Console with a 45 bar strength, and in addition to these systems we provide the Auxiliary Cooling Water System to cool the ESKKS, Torpedo Counter Measure System and Electronic Map Display and Information System.

The integrated Underwater Command Control System (ESKKS) and Submarine Information Distribution System are supplied by Havelsan, the ESM, Torpedo Counter Measure System and Navigation Radar System are supplied by Aselsan and the Auxiliary Cooling Water System by Bronswerk, Turkey. STM provides the Submarine Rescue Buoy, 45 bar resistant Digital Bridge Information Console, Electronic Map Display and Information system in addition to all materials for all structural/technical design, analysis, documentation and installation. We can express with pride that we have involved dozens of Turkish defence industry companies in this ecosystem considering the cables for installation, pipes, valves, flanges, panels, consumables, etc. 

In addition to the aforementioned supplies, we are working together with Poyraz3M Ltd for activities within the scope of Integrated Logistics Support (ILS). In addition, for the first time in the world in a modernization project in the field of “Diving Safety”, which is vital for the submarine platform, we cooperate and procure services from the IACCS member DNV GL for the control of all the modifications made in the resistant boats and waterproofing bulkheads, control of certifications for all materials and the workmanship towards such parts and finally for the provision of “Diving Safety Certification” for the submarines.

For each submarine, an average of 930-man x months is estimated within the scope of the MLU. This figure does not contain the man x month values of our Subcontractors and the Pakistan Military Shipyard that provide labor activities. We proudly state that the number of companies or countries that can undertake a submarine MLU project on such a scale is countable on just one hand.

Defence Turkey: STM is also involved in the Pakistani Navy’s Miniature Submarine Program that includes 3 Cosmos MG110 (SX756 / W) mini submarines which were purchased in the 1980s and are currently in the inventory. At the signing ceremony held on February 8, 2019, you presented the scale model of the new design mini submarine to the officials of the Pakistani Ministry of Defence Production. What would you like to say about this Project?

Murat İKİNCİ: The first project prepared by STM in line with the needs of the Pakistan Naval Forces was submitted in 2017. Within this framework, efforts on the design of small-sized submarines capable of addressing a wider market are continuing within the scheduled plan.

*Defence Turkey: During the AMAN 2019 Multinational Naval Exercise held in February 2019, Pakistani Navy officials were very pleased with STM and its activities. According to the information we obtained, the Pakistan Naval Forces plan to meet the needs for the MoShip Submarine Rescue Mother Ship if the necessary budget allocation is made. In addition, the feasibility study of Gwadar Port was carried out by STM. Could you please inform us about the projects that STM is currently interested in and about the activities conducted in Pakistan?*

_*Murat İKİNCİ:*_ As you mentioned, the Pakistan Navy brought to the agenda the need for the MoShip Submarine Rescue Ship and they are making efforts to meet such a need depending on the proposals that will be in line with their budgets. STM continues to search for alternative solutions for this request, and we will submit our study that includes alternative solutions for the Pakistan Navy in the near future. As mentioned before, the MLU of the Agosta-90 Submarines in the Pakistan Navy inventory is currently being carried out in Pakistan under the main contractorship of STM. In addition, Ormara Naval Harbor (ONH) Hydrodynamic studies and the port approach and in-port design are being carried out within the scope of our existing contract. STM is carrying on feasibility studies for the Submarine Maintenance Shipyard design to be located at Ormara Naval Harbor and Gwadar and Gwatar forward naval bases. 

*Defence Turkey: Has STM assumed any task/role in the Pakistan Naval Forces MiLGEM Corvette Project (later named the Jinnah Class by the Pakistan Naval Forces), the contract of which was signed on July 5, 2018 and was effective on March 11, 2019? Has there been any negotiation or cooperation with ASFAT? The construction of the first ship was planned to begin in September 2019.*

*Murat İKİNCİ: *As I mentioned in the beginning of the interview, the export of the MiLGEM project, in which we take place in every phase from the outset, has been our target toward which we have been making great efforts as STM from the beginning and we continued these activities under the management and support of the Presidency of Defence Industries.

STM’s first contact with the Pakistan Naval Forces was at the IDEAS/Karachi Fair in 2006. The Pakistan Naval Forces expressed their desire to participate in the design and prototype construction of the Turkish Naval Forces MiLGEM Corvette, and as a result of the ongoing negotiations since 2015, detailed studies have been initiated with a focus on the Pakistan MiLGEM “Jinnah” Class Corvette Project.

During this process, with the close support and contribution of our Naval Forces, the Pakistani delegation was invited to Turkey to examine the MiLGEM Class ships.

As a result of the ongoing efforts, the MiLGEM “Ada” Class Corvette was chosen as the platform thanks to our solutions and engineering recommendations, and a Letter of Intent was signed by the Defence Ministers of both countries at IDEF’ 17 for the construction of MiLGEM corvettes in Karachi. The ongoing supply model was decided upon to be transformed into the model of direct purchase from Turkey and in the contract phase it was ensured to be a single Country and Ship as Turkey-MiLGEM.

Throughout this process, our main goal, as STM, has been to provide support for the sustainable development of technology and our defence industry through the national knowhow that gained via the MiLGEM Project, in addition to the export of the platforms that emerged during the MiLGEM Project.

As it is known, the contract for the supply of MiLGEM Class ships that will be constructed together by two allied countries and are to be acquired by the Pakistan Navy was signed with ASFAT. What is important is not the party of the contract; the important thing is that Turkey has obtained this project and the MiLGEM Corvette will be put into service of our friendly and allied country. We, as an organization with the greatest engineering experience in MiLGEM, are always ready to give our utmost support.

As STM, our efforts in shaping the Pakistan corvette project (the construction and delivery of which will be realized by ASFAT) as MiLGEM and obtaining it for our country will continue to bring forth benefits also to the navies of other countries.

https://www.defenceturkey.com/en/co...ojects-with-the-turkish-defence-industry-3635

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Rafi

PN is working according to a development plan, after the current programmes are well advanced. The follow up will include (if finances and economy are sufficiently strong to allow).

1. 6-8 new frigates (either newer type 054 or next gen PLAN).

2. Jet powered LRMPA to gradually replace P3.

3. Drone aircraft that can perform MP and ASW.

4. A type 071 or similar vessel 1 or 2.

5. A further 4 or 6 Jinnah Corvette/light frigate.

6. A further order of submarines after Hangor program is completed.

7. Coastal sub/special forces program.

8. Further expansion of Pak Marines.

9. Dedicated small number of fighter aircraft.

10. 4 - 6 destroyer vessels with 052 DDG most likely purchased. With talks between Chinese and Pakistani officials already taken place.

11. Development of SSBN and SSN and have a true 2nd and 3rd strike capability.

12. Long Range SLBM and SLCM.

This is very ambitious and any number of things could halt or stop these programs (finances being the most likely). But all the services and especially the Navy are thinking forward.

Reactions: Like Like:
33


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

Rafi said:


> PN is working according to a development plan, after the current programmes are well advanced. The follow up will include (if finances and economy are sufficiently strong to allow).
> 
> 1. 6-8 new frigates (either newer type 054 or next gen PLAN).
> 
> 2. Jet powered LRMPA to gradually replace P3.
> 
> 3. Drone aircraft that can perform MP and ASW.
> 
> 4. A type 071 or similar vessel 1 or 2.
> 
> 5. A further 4 or 6 Jinnah Corvette/light frigate.
> 
> 6. A further order of submarines after Hangor program is completed.
> 
> 7. Coastal sub/special forces program.
> 
> 8. Further expansion of Pak Marines.
> 
> 9. Dedicated small number of fighter aircraft.
> 
> 10. 4 - 6 destroyer vessels with 052 DDG most likely purchased. With talks between Chinese and Pakistani officials already taken place.
> 
> 11. Development of SSBN and SSN and have a true 2nd and 3rd strike capability.
> 
> 12. Long Range SLBM and SLCM.
> 
> This is very ambitious and any number of things could halt or stop these programs (finances being the most likely). But all the services and especially the Navy are thinking forward.


2 LRMPA. What are the planes which can replace P3Cs considering thier capabilities?
6. Would they include Type 041s?
10. Love it. Hope they go forward with it

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> 6. Would they include Type 041s?


There is no so-called Type 041.


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

LKJ86 said:


> There is no so-called Type 041.


So what other SSKs China has to offer other than Yuan and Hangor?


----------



## LKJ86

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> So what other SSKs China has to offer other than Yuan and Hangor?


No ideas.


----------



## Rafi

Mangus Ortus Novem said:


> We need dedicated *satelites *to cover our EEZ at sea... and for naval operations in *AfroPak Ocean*.



We already have high access to friendly systems, and also further LIDAR, and SAR and optical SATS are planned.

Forgot to add, expect more missile craft and Damen Corvettes and smaller Patrol craft.

Also plans for more logistics and tanker ships.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

Rafi said:


> PN is working according to a development plan, after the current programmes are well advanced. The follow up will include (if finances and economy are sufficiently strong to allow).
> 
> 1. 6-8 new frigates (either newer type 054 or next gen PLAN).
> 
> 2. Jet powered LRMPA to gradually replace P3.
> 
> 3. Drone aircraft that can perform MP and ASW.
> 
> 4. A type 071 or similar vessel 1 or 2.
> 
> 5. A further 4 or 6 Jinnah Corvette/light frigate.
> 
> 6. A further order of submarines after Hangor program is completed.
> 
> 7. Coastal sub/special forces program.
> 
> 8. Further expansion of Pak Marines.
> 
> 9. Dedicated small number of fighter aircraft.
> 
> 10. 4 - 6 destroyer vessels with 052 DDG most likely purchased. With talks between Chinese and Pakistani officials already taken place.
> 
> 11. Development of SSBN and SSN and have a true 2nd and 3rd strike capability.
> 
> 12. Long Range SLBM and SLCM.
> 
> This is very ambitious and any number of things could halt or stop these programs (finances being the most likely). But all the services and especially the Navy are thinking forward.


PN should go for Saab swordfish or Kawasaki P1


----------



## Rafi

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> PN should go for Saab swordfish or Kawasaki P1



Maybe the German option with a commercial jet airliner option is favourite, ie think ATR with but on a new bigger jet aircraft with MAD.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## CHACHA"G"

Rafi said:


> PN is working according to a development plan, after the current programmes are well advanced. The follow up will include (if finances and economy are sufficiently strong to allow).
> 
> 1. 6-8 new frigates (either newer type 054 or next gen PLAN).
> 
> 2. Jet powered LRMPA to gradually replace P3.
> 
> 3. Drone aircraft that can perform MP and ASW.
> 
> 4. A type 071 or similar vessel 1 or 2.
> 
> 5. A further 4 or 6 Jinnah Corvette/light frigate.
> 
> 6. A further order of submarines after Hangor program is completed.
> 
> 7. Coastal sub/special forces program.
> 
> 8. Further expansion of Pak Marines.
> 
> 9. Dedicated small number of fighter aircraft.
> 
> 10. 4 - 6 destroyer vessels with 052 DDG most likely purchased. With talks between Chinese and Pakistani officials already taken place.
> 
> 11. Development of SSBN and SSN and have a true 2nd and 3rd strike capability.
> 
> 12. Long Range SLBM and SLCM.
> 
> This is very ambitious and any number of things could halt or stop these programs (finances being the most likely). But all the services and especially the Navy are thinking forward.


@Rafi , Bhai troll tu nahi kerrahay app? …….. I am having feelings , jasay app humarai tang kench raahay hain 
on serious note:

Very logical if we look at our current numbers and required numbers , My guess we pay see 2nd order of Type-54 around 2025.
Again very important and possible , we have to replace P3s , I wont be surprised if Navy is already searching. My guess is they will join PN before 2025.
PN already bought drones ,Naval chief visited one such Unite few days back, I am sure after looking at there utility and other "Benefits" Navy will go for more.
No idea very ambitious , but if PN want world recognition as Big Naval Force then may be , Pakistan Marines also need such Ships.
Agree 4 coverts and that tech transfer doesn't make sense , My guess is around 2030 we will see 4 to 6 more Jinnah Class Coverts.
Pakistan is/was looking for western Sub , as per different forums PN need 14+ SSKs , 8 + 3 = 11 , so we will definitely see one new SSK sub order , Maybe from Germany , Turkey or Italy , Time is very hard to guess but I will go 2030 .
This thing is already in MODP books.
One of *Most Important ,* 50K to 75K+ will be ideal number with proper EQM.
Need of the hour , options are very limited , lets see what future brings(unfold).
After getting 4 Type-54 and 4 Jinnah class coverts around 2025 will be the ideal time , before next order of Frigates and Coverts. This purchase will be real air defence in Seas.
I, Wish and Pray for this ,,,, May be around 2035 or after .
Connected with 11 , I, wish for them too , We pay see visible development around 2035 or after.
*Most important is Navy on road of modernization , we cannot (we don't have too) match endia in numbers , but 8 to 10 Jinnah Class coverts , 8 to 10 Frigates (Type-54) and 4+ Type-52D destroyers and 14+ SSKs will be great power for PN (still way less then endian fleet). We have 10+ years and 4 type 54 and 4 Jinnah are already on order. *

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Last starfighter

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> PN should go for Saab swordfish or Kawasaki P1


Swordfish not available. However all systems are available of the shelf so PN can configure it's own


----------



## waz

Rafi said:


> PN is working according to a development plan, after the current programmes are well advanced. The follow up will include (if finances and economy are sufficiently strong to allow).
> 
> 1. 6-8 new frigates (either newer type 054 or next gen PLAN).
> 
> 2. Jet powered LRMPA to gradually replace P3.
> 
> 3. Drone aircraft that can perform MP and ASW.
> 
> 4. A type 071 or similar vessel 1 or 2.
> 
> 5. A further 4 or 6 Jinnah Corvette/light frigate.
> 
> 6. A further order of submarines after Hangor program is completed.
> 
> 7. Coastal sub/special forces program.
> 
> 8. Further expansion of Pak Marines.
> 
> 9. Dedicated small number of fighter aircraft.
> 
> 10. 4 - 6 destroyer vessels with 052 DDG most likely purchased. With talks between Chinese and Pakistani officials already taken place.
> 
> 11. Development of SSBN and SSN and have a true 2nd and 3rd strike capability.
> 
> 12. Long Range SLBM and SLCM.
> 
> This is very ambitious and any number of things could halt or stop these programs (finances being the most likely). But all the services and especially the Navy are thinking forward.



Good steps, I think the most logical thing is to build the surface fleet with a follow on for the four 054A’s, with four more such ships.
The Jinnah class extension makes sense as well, more ships.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ziaulislam

Rafi said:


> PN is working according to a development plan, after the current programmes are well advanced. The follow up will include (if finances and economy are sufficiently strong to allow).
> 
> 1. 6-8 new frigates (either newer type 054 or next gen PLAN).
> 
> 2. Jet powered LRMPA to gradually replace P3.
> 
> 3. Drone aircraft that can perform MP and ASW.
> 
> 4. A type 071 or similar vessel 1 or 2.
> 
> 5. A further 4 or 6 Jinnah Corvette/light frigate.
> 
> 6. A further order of submarines after Hangor program is completed.
> 
> 7. Coastal sub/special forces program.
> 
> 8. Further expansion of Pak Marines.
> 
> 9. Dedicated small number of fighter aircraft.
> 
> 10. 4 - 6 destroyer vessels with 052 DDG most likely purchased. With talks between Chinese and Pakistani officials already taken place.
> 
> 11. Development of SSBN and SSN and have a true 2nd and 3rd strike capability.
> 
> 12. Long Range SLBM and SLCM.
> 
> This is very ambitious and any number of things could halt or stop these programs (finances being the most likely). But all the services and especially the Navy are thinking forward.



apart from making sure to continue and build upon the jinnah class by ordering atleast 4 more to be built at home, most will not happen due to constraints
no.3,7,12 is happening already 
no.11 SLCM will be the triad


----------



## Itachi

With all these new toys, the PN will finally become a offensive force. 

Especially if PAF/PN work on VTOL aircraft/drones that can use the Amphibious Assault Ships and then use them as tankers/refuellers to fuel surrounding aircrafts like JF-17's, F-16's & any other aircraft.....thus creating a moving base in the middle of the ocean off the coast of Western (maybe Eastern?) India; 200-400 km+ off so as to keep some distance where we can attack them punitively but they can't do any major damage to the AAS and the surrounding flotilla. 


The Wasp & American class AAS are better than Type 071 imo.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America-class_amphibious_assault_ship
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasp-class_amphibious_assault_ship

Each can carry 1.5k+ troops, have better armament & can carry 5-10+ aircrafts/helis.....whereas the Type 071 only carries 600-800 troops & 4 helis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_071_amphibious_transport_dock

Even the Chinese are moving onto the Type 075; 2nd in displacement to the American AAS/LHD's.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_075_landing_helicopter_dock

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dreamer.

Rafi said:


> PN is working according to a development plan, after the current programmes are well advanced. The follow up will include (if finances and economy are sufficiently strong to allow).
> 
> 1. 6-8 new frigates (either newer type 054 or next gen PLAN).
> 
> 2. Jet powered LRMPA to gradually replace P3.
> 
> 3. Drone aircraft that can perform MP and ASW.
> 
> 4. A type 071 or similar vessel 1 or 2.
> 
> 5. A further 4 or 6 Jinnah Corvette/light frigate.
> 
> 6. A further order of submarines after Hangor program is completed.
> 
> 7. Coastal sub/special forces program.
> 
> 8. Further expansion of Pak Marines.
> 
> 9. Dedicated small number of fighter aircraft.
> 
> 10. 4 - 6 destroyer vessels with 052 DDG most likely purchased. With talks between Chinese and Pakistani officials already taken place.
> 
> 11. Development of SSBN and SSN and have a true 2nd and 3rd strike capability.
> 
> 12. Long Range SLBM and SLCM.
> 
> This is very ambitious and any number of things could halt or stop these programs (finances being the most likely). But all the services and especially the Navy are thinking forward.


You mean all this in our lifetime? Or is your definition of "future plan" just a bit more loose? 

Ok, let's watch this thread for the next 25 years.


----------



## New World

@Rafi whistleblower for Navy.
@Khafee whistleblower for Airforce.
who is whistleblower for Army?



Itachi said:


> With all these new toys, the PN will finally become a offensive force.
> 
> Especially if PAF/PN work on VTOL aircraft/drones that can use the Amphibious Assault Ships and then use them as tankers/refuellers to fuel surrounding aircrafts like JF-17's, F-16's & any other aircraft.....thus creating a moving base in the middle of the ocean off the coast of Western (maybe Eastern?) India; 200-400 km+ off so as to keep some distance where we can attack them punitively but they can't do any major damage to the AAS and the surrounding flotilla.
> 
> 
> The Wasp & American class AAS are better than Type 071 imo.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America-class_amphibious_assault_ship
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasp-class_amphibious_assault_ship
> 
> Each can carry 1.5k+ troops, have better armament & can carry 5-10+ aircrafts/helis.....whereas the Type 071 only carries 600-800 troops & 4 helis.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_071_amphibious_transport_dock
> 
> Even the Chinese are moving onto the Type 075; 2nd in displacement to the American AAS/LHD's.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_075_landing_helicopter_dock



Kakaji, USA stopped our sanctioned OHP frigates and you want them to sell us LHD, and single LHD costs nearly 3 billion dollars.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakhtoon yum

Pakistan needs a strong navy to protect its upcoming merchant fleet.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

IMO...due to the nature of Pak funding, expect the outcomes to be way more modest...

The publicly known roadmap by 2030 is:

4 054A/P
4 MILGEM
4 F-22P
2 + 2 Corvettes

Let's say the corvettes are littoral seas only, if you look at the 12 frigates, you'll see that you can have 1 054A/P with 2 F-22P or 2 MILGEM in each flotilla.

If you split them into two squadrons, it'd be 2 054 A/P each. It almost seems as though you can add 2 larger frigates or destroyers, one for each squadron, so it'd be 1 DDG, 2 054A/P, and 4 F-22P or MILGEM for each squadron.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## YeBeWarned

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> IMO...due to the nature of Pak funding, expect the outcomes to be way more modest...
> 
> The publicly known roadmap by 2030 is:
> 
> 4 054A/P
> 4 MILGEM
> 4 F-22P
> 2 + 2 Corvettes
> 
> Let's say the corvettes are littoral seas only, if you look at the 12 frigates, you'll see that you can have 1 054A/P with 2 F-22P or 2 MILGEM in each flotilla.
> 
> If you split them into two squadrons, it'd be 2 054 A/P each. It almost seems as though you can add 2 larger frigates or destroyers, one for each squadron, so it'd be 1 DDG, 2 054A/P, and 4 F-22P or MILGEM for each squadron.



if PN is due to get all their type 54A's by 2021/2022 than by the end of decade only 4 will be a criminal negligence , if PN has no plans to go with DDG's pre-2030 than at least increase the amount of type 54 and Jinnah class frigate to 8 . 

4 Type 54A standard version 
4 Type 54A+ upgraded (SAM , Radar , ASW ,SONAR)
4 Jinnah class frigates Standard versions 
4 Upgraded Jinnah class with input from Turkey TF-2000 program with similar capabilities 

we need to settle with Azmat class design and put at least 2-4 in production . FAC will play a crucial role in upcoming conflicts .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Itachi

New World said:


> Kakaji, USA stopped our sanctioned OHP frigates and you want them to sell us LHD, and single LHD costs nearly 3 billion dollars.



Beta ji, where did I say to buy anything from the US???

I was quoting the OP who said that we'll acquire a Type 71 or similar vessel. I just said to not buy the Type 71 types of vessel but the bigger AAS/LHD ones. Costs can be driven down if you're working on your own vessels or acquire them from China. 

Ap please apni English comprehension par tawajoh karain.


----------



## S.Y.A

This, if true, made my day. But finances are still a BIG issue.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ahmet Pasha

Will PN keep Marines postured only for creek or make it into a real expeditionary force like their namesake USMC??


Rafi said:


> PN is working according to a development plan, after the current programmes are well advanced. The follow up will include (if finances and economy are sufficiently strong to allow).
> 
> 1. 6-8 new frigates (either newer type 054 or next gen PLAN).
> 
> 2. Jet powered LRMPA to gradually replace P3.
> 
> 3. Drone aircraft that can perform MP and ASW.
> 
> 4. A type 071 or similar vessel 1 or 2.
> 
> 5. A further 4 or 6 Jinnah Corvette/light frigate.
> 
> 6. A further order of submarines after Hangor program is completed.
> 
> 7. Coastal sub/special forces program.
> 
> 8. Further expansion of Pak Marines.
> 
> 9. Dedicated small number of fighter aircraft.
> 
> 10. 4 - 6 destroyer vessels with 052 DDG most likely purchased. With talks between Chinese and Pakistani officials already taken place.
> 
> 11. Development of SSBN and SSN and have a true 2nd and 3rd strike capability.
> 
> 12. Long Range SLBM and SLCM.
> 
> This is very ambitious and any number of things could halt or stop these programs (finances being the most likely). But all the services and especially the Navy are thinking forward.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## khanasifm

Rafi said:


> PN is working according to a development plan, after the current programmes are well advanced. The follow up will include (if finances and economy are sufficiently strong to allow).
> 
> 1. 6-8 new frigates (either newer type 054 or next gen PLAN).
> 
> 2. Jet powered LRMPA to gradually replace P3.
> 
> 3. Drone aircraft that can perform MP and ASW.
> 
> 4. A type 071 or similar vessel 1 or 2.
> 
> 5. A further 4 or 6 Jinnah Corvette/light frigate.
> 
> 6. A further order of submarines after Hangor program is completed.
> 
> 7. Coastal sub/special forces program.
> 
> 8. Further expansion of Pak Marines.
> 
> 9. Dedicated small number of fighter aircraft.
> 
> 10. 4 - 6 destroyer vessels with 052 DDG most likely purchased. With talks between Chinese and Pakistani officials already taken place.
> 
> 11. Development of SSBN and SSN and have a true 2nd and 3rd strike capability.
> 
> 12. Long Range SLBM and SLCM.
> 
> This is very ambitious and any number of things could halt or stop these programs (finances being the most likely). But all the services and especially the Navy are thinking forward.



What is the basis of this claim
And thread ?


----------



## Aamir Hussain

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> IMO...due to the nature of Pak funding, expect the outcomes to be way more modest...
> 
> The publicly known roadmap by 2030 is:
> 
> 4 054A/P
> 4 MILGEM
> 4 F-22P
> 2 + 2 Corvettes
> 
> Let's say the corvettes are littoral seas only, if you look at the 12 frigates, you'll see that you can have 1 054A/P with 2 F-22P or 2 MILGEM in each flotilla.
> 
> If you split them into two squadrons, it'd be 2 054 A/P each. It almost seems as though you can add 2 larger frigates or destroyers, one for each squadron, so it'd be 1 DDG, 2 054A/P, and 4 F-22P or MILGEM for each squadron.



Ideally, we need to have three surface flotillas. As I have mentioned in one of my other posts, One flotilla, will be required to patrol the approaches to KHI (the most equipped) , the other Gawadar and straits of Hormuz, and the third one to interdict enemy cargo traffic coming up from Gulf of Aden or keeping an eye on the Omani Ports. The fourth will take over the wild card role or the fire brigade role so to speak. 

That is why i feel we will have atleast one more fleet replenishment ship in the force.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## FuturePAF

Which Fighters are we considering. Are the Chinese allowed to sell the J-11/J-16 Internationally, per the terms of their agreement with the Russians?

Due to the long distance over the sea and the risk of losing an aircraft if an engine flames out, should we only consider twin engine jets, or is the WS-10 engine to the level satisfactory it is being used without major incident, such as the J-10C in the PLANAF?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> IMO...due to the nature of Pak funding, expect the outcomes to be way more modest...
> 
> The publicly known roadmap by 2030 is:
> 
> 4 054A/P
> 4 MILGEM
> 4 F-22P
> 2 + 2 Corvettes
> 
> Let's say the corvettes are littoral seas only, if you look at the 12 frigates, you'll see that you can have 1 054A/P with 2 F-22P or 2 MILGEM in each flotilla.
> 
> If you split them into two squadrons, it'd be 2 054 A/P each. It almost seems as though you can add 2 larger frigates or destroyers, one for each squadron, so it'd be 1 DDG, 2 054A/P, and 4 F-22P or MILGEM for each squadron.


What about 11 subs? How will they be splitted?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ARMalik

PN really needs an upgrade to its Naval fighter jets. A dedicated arm of around 30 x J-15 supported by JF-17 and Mirages would be fantastic.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## FuturePAF

ARMalik said:


> PN really needs an upgrade to its Naval fighter jets. A dedicated arm of around 30 x J-15 supported by JF-17 and Mirages would be fantastic.


But can China legally export the J-15?
If the Ws-10 engine is reliable enough, would it be better to get 40-50 J-10s for the price of 30 J-15s?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ARMalik

FuturePAF said:


> But can China legally export the J-15?
> If the Ws-10 engine is reliable enough, would it be better to get 40-50 J-10s for the price of 30 J-15s?



My opinion is that there is nothing stopping China from exporting anything to Pakistan. But Pakistan needs to really speed up its decision making mechanism.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Zarvan

Rafi said:


> PN is working according to a development plan, after the current programmes are well advanced. The follow up will include (if finances and economy are sufficiently strong to allow).
> 
> 1. 6-8 new frigates (either newer type 054 or next gen PLAN).
> 
> 2. Jet powered LRMPA to gradually replace P3.
> 
> 3. Drone aircraft that can perform MP and ASW.
> 
> 4. A type 071 or similar vessel 1 or 2.
> 
> 5. A further 4 or 6 Jinnah Corvette/light frigate.
> 
> 6. A further order of submarines after Hangor program is completed.
> 
> 7. Coastal sub/special forces program.
> 
> 8. Further expansion of Pak Marines.
> 
> 9. Dedicated small number of fighter aircraft.
> 
> 10. 4 - 6 destroyer vessels with 052 DDG most likely purchased. With talks between Chinese and Pakistani officials already taken place.
> 
> 11. Development of SSBN and SSN and have a true 2nd and 3rd strike capability.
> 
> 12. Long Range SLBM and SLCM.
> 
> This is very ambitious and any number of things could halt or stop these programs (finances being the most likely). But all the services and especially the Navy are thinking forward.



These things will take time but all points will be done. They are inevitable and hopefully economy improves at much faster rate so we can have these things as soon as possible



Rafi said:


> PN is working according to a development plan, after the current programmes are well advanced. The follow up will include (if finances and economy are sufficiently strong to allow).
> 
> 1. 6-8 new frigates (either newer type 054 or next gen PLAN).
> 
> 2. Jet powered LRMPA to gradually replace P3.
> 
> 3. Drone aircraft that can perform MP and ASW.
> 
> 4. A type 071 or similar vessel 1 or 2.
> 
> 5. A further 4 or 6 Jinnah Corvette/light frigate.
> 
> 6. A further order of submarines after Hangor program is completed.
> 
> 7. Coastal sub/special forces program.
> 
> 8. Further expansion of Pak Marines.
> 
> 9. Dedicated small number of fighter aircraft.
> 
> 10. 4 - 6 destroyer vessels with 052 DDG most likely purchased. With talks between Chinese and Pakistani officials already taken place.
> 
> 11. Development of SSBN and SSN and have a true 2nd and 3rd strike capability.
> 
> 12. Long Range SLBM and SLCM.
> 
> This is very ambitious and any number of things could halt or stop these programs (finances being the most likely). But all the services and especially the Navy are thinking forward.



For number 6 if not nuclear submarines than I hope they consider these ones from Russia


----------



## LKJ86

ARMalik said:


> PN really needs an upgrade to its Naval fighter jets. A dedicated arm of around 30 x J-15 supported by JF-17 and Mirages would be fantastic.


Why J-15 if no carriers?


----------



## New World

Itachi said:


> Beta ji, where did I say to buy anything from the US???



Kakaji, you were only referring to American LHD.



Itachi said:


> Ap please apni English comprehension par tawajoh karain.



work is in progress.


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Pakistan need to get out of the dedicated navy airfore concept unless we operate a Aircraft carrier

The Navy Fleet should have enough SAM missiles to build a massive network of anti-air Umbrella , need big hitting Destroyer ships

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## New World

LKJ86 said:


> Why J-15 if no carriers?



J-15 will be our Tomcat.


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

New World said:


> J-15 will be our Tomcat.


Why not J 16?


----------



## New World

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Why not J 16?



its PAF/PN joins.


----------



## MIRauf

Just as Tomcat, J-15 is designed for Carrier. Shah should have opted for F-15 to provide cover for their planned F-16s, he just got sold on Phoenix AAM and cool swept wing design ( nightmare to maintain for small airforce. )

if PN / PAF has money $ to throw around then bless you, go for J-15, else go for J-16.

PS: Neither J-15/J-16 are for export, but we can still discuss them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Itachi

New World said:


> Kakaji, you were only referring to American LHD.



I was saying that the American AAS/LHD are better than Type 071....which we shouldn't go for since it holds lesser number of troops, lesser air support and lesser armament.

Please tell me where I used the word "buy" in the post below. 

I even said that the Chinese are working on the Type 75, which should be the goal for PN, not the Type 71. It doesn't have to be exactly a Type 75 but in this case, bigger displacement means more stuff can be put inside it (troops, air support, vehicles etc) and on it (air support; helis, jets, drone tankers) etc etc.



Itachi said:


> With all these new toys, the PN will finally become a offensive force.
> 
> Especially if PAF/PN work on VTOL aircraft/drones that can use the Amphibious Assault Ships and then use them as tankers/refuellers to fuel surrounding aircrafts like JF-17's, F-16's & any other aircraft.....thus creating a moving base in the middle of the ocean off the coast of Western (maybe Eastern?) India; 200-400 km+ off so as to keep some distance where we can attack them punitively but they can't do any major damage to the AAS and the surrounding flotilla.
> 
> 
> The Wasp & American class AAS are better than Type 071 imo.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America-class_amphibious_assault_ship
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasp-class_amphibious_assault_ship
> 
> Each can carry 1.5k+ troops, have better armament & can carry 5-10+ aircrafts/helis.....whereas the Type 071 only carries 600-800 troops & 4 helis.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_071_amphibious_transport_dock
> 
> Even the Chinese are moving onto the Type 075; 2nd in displacement to the American AAS/LHD's.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_075_landing_helicopter_dock


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Aamir Hussain said:


> Ideally, we need to have three surface flotillas. As I have mentioned in one of my other posts, One flotilla, will be required to patrol the approaches to KHI (the most equipped) , the other Gawadar and straits of Hormuz, and the third one to interdict enemy cargo traffic coming up from Gulf of Aden or keeping an eye on the Omani Ports. The fourth will take over the wild card role or the fire brigade role so to speak.
> 
> That is why i feel we will have atleast one more fleet replenishment ship in the force.


Yep, but I think they'll probably post FACs for Gwadar (there was a requirement in 2016 for 4~6 new ones specifically for Gwadar). They might even consider corvettes, but I don't think they'll dedicate a frigate force currently as most of the trade still flows through Karachi. 

Overall, the PN is on track for two frigate squadrons, and I think each one could potentially get a destroyer or 5,500+ ton frigate with long-range anti-air warfare (AAW). In other words, there's still a scope for 2 big ships before 2030, but I don't think much else.



Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> What about 11 subs? How will they be splitted?


It's the silent service, so we'll never know, nor should we

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Rafi

Another thing the range of SLCM Babur is/has been improved, nuff said.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## bananarepublic

How will be the localization of such an extensive and ambitious modernization plan... Or are we going to by 80% of the shelf?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

bananarepublic said:


> How will be the localization of such an extensive and ambitious modernization plan... Or are we going to by 80% of the shelf?


Based on the current procurement roadmap, it's practically all off-the-shelf (besides select subsystems and weapons). But the nature of ships is that you can 'localize' design and manufacturing, but will still end up importing most of the subsystems and inputs (steel, engines, electronics, etc). Unless Pakistan invests in manufacturing those core inputs indigenously, most of these projects will involve a significant proportion of imports. 

But if we can get at least a bit deeper down the chain, e.g., integration, ship design, ability to choose inputs from any supplier, and much more, we can reduce the overall cost quite a bit without compromising quality. It won't be indigenous, but not as much as a strain on our foreign currency than buying straight from an OEM.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## deep_blue

New World said:


> @Rafi whistleblower for Navy.
> @Khafee whistleblower for Airforce.
> who is whistleblower for Army?
> .


Peer e tareeqat,aali hazrat janab e mohtram Zarvan sahib

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## bananarepublic

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Based on the current procurement roadmap, it's practically all off-the-shelf (besides select subsystems and weapons). But the nature of ships is that you can 'localize' design and manufacturing, but will still end up importing most of the subsystems and inputs (steel, engines, electronics, etc). Unless Pakistan invests in manufacturing those core inputs indigenously, most of these projects will involve a significant proportion of imports.
> 
> But if we can get at least a bit deeper down the chain, e.g., integration, ship design, ability to choose inputs from any supplier, and much more, we can reduce the overall cost quite a bit without compromising quality. It won't be indigenous, but not as much as a strain on our foreign currency than buying straight from an OEM.



I would love to see Pakistan start from hull construction a bit similar to how Indian navy has progressed in its procurement efforts..
Maybe our future procurement is gonna be linked to the new gwadar shipyard 2025+
..
But the current procurement plan seems very interesting in terms of finance and PNs traditional role as the neglected branch of the armed forces


----------



## WarKa DaNG

There are too much Goodies for PN


----------



## Gryphon

Need ASBM.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

Gryphon said:


> Need ASBM.


Why? ASBMs are better than ASCMs? 
@Bilal Khan (Quwa) @Bilal Khan 777 @Dazzler


----------



## ARMalik

LKJ86 said:


> Why J-15 if no carriers?



J-15 doesn't need a Carrier to fly. In fact, it was heavily modified to be used on Carriers. It has AESA, good serivce range, can carry a bucket load of weapons, and hence will give PN/PAF the ability to strike IN much deeper. The other option is of course J-16.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

ARMalik said:


> J-15 doesn't need a Carrier to fly. In fact, it was heavily modified to be used on Carriers. It has AESA, good serivce range, can carry a bucket load of weapons, and hence will give PN/PAF the ability to strike IN much deeper. The other option is of course J-16.


Take a simple example, if possible, what would Pakistan choose: F-35A, or F-35C?


----------



## Dazzler

ARMalik said:


> J-15 doesn't need a Carrier to fly.



It does, as it is based on SU-33, which itself was carrier specific.


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Why? ASBMs are better than ASCMs?
> @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @Bilal Khan 777 @Dazzler



Different weapons for different theaters / CONOPS / threat levels and Doctrines. An apple and orange comparison.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ARMalik

LKJ86 said:


> Take a simple example, if possible, what would Pakistan choose: F-35A, or F-35C?



The whole assumption that somehow J-15 is like F-35C is not correct. J-15 has a whole history of modifications to become a Carrier based jet.



Dazzler said:


> It does, as it is based on SU-33, which itself was carrier specific.



I respectfully disagree to the extent that J-15 can only operate from a Carrier.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CHACHA"G"

Aamir Hussain said:


> Ideally, we need to have three surface flotillas. As I have mentioned in one of my other posts, One flotilla, will be required to patrol the approaches to KHI (the most equipped) , the other Gawadar and straits of Hormuz, and the third one to interdict enemy cargo traffic coming up from Gulf of Aden or keeping an eye on the Omani Ports. The fourth will take over the wild card role or the fire brigade role so to speak.
> 
> That is why i feel we will have atleast one more fleet replenishment ship in the force.


Most likely what you said will become reality(my guess) , In 2025 PN will have 4 Type-54 frigates and 4 Type-22P (total target of frigates 12) so we may see 4 to 8 more of them , my guess is 4 more type 54(around 2030) and 4 FT-2000 from Turkey again around 2030 (so 8 Type 54 and 4 TF-2000 total 12) . 
And in 2025 we may also see first order of 2 Type 52-Ds.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Aamir Hussain

Well right now as I see it, the independent flotilla will be centered around a single Type 54 frigate with 1 each of Milgem & F22P rounding off the group with a Fleet Replenishment Ship in tow. 

The Eastern most group will have a need for more AA cover in the shape of 2 x Type 54 Frigates instead of one, 2 Milgems instead of 1 Milgem & 1 F22P. 

Western most group might have Land based Air Cover with LRMP with 2 F22P's and 2 x Damen Corvettes, but properly fitted out for AShM & ASW duties rounded off with Azmat FAC's. 

The Southern most group seems weak to me with 1 Type 54, 1 x Milgem & 1 x F22P with a Fleet Replenishment Ship. This group will certainly lack Air cover and will have to patrol independent of land based fighters. Ideally i would have liked to see another type 54 be part of this group and another Milgem instead of the F22P

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

LKJ86 said:


> Take a simple example, if possible, what would Pakistan choose: F-35A, or F-35C?


tbh, both.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

I think Pakistan will increase Type 54 order to 6 Ships also of Jinah Class (MILGEM) to 6. And I also think Pakistan may not keep F-22 and sell them to Algeria and than focus on getting some new heavy Frigate from either Russia or France or SIGMA or some where else. Type 52 D will come for sure.


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Zarvan said:


> I think Pakistan will increase Type 54 order to 6 Ships also of Jinah Class (MILGEM) to 6. And I also think Pakistan may not keep F-22 and sell them to Algeria and than focus on getting some new heavy Frigate from either Russia or France or SIGMA or some where else. Type 52 D will come for sure.


The PN will probably keep the F-22Ps until at least 2040, but they may look to construct additional Jinnah-class frigates (to replace the F-22Ps) through the 2030s. However, I don't think we'll see more than 12 frigates in the 2,000-4,000 ton class. Most of the damage the PN can inflict on the PN will come from submarines, so it doesn't make sense to invest too much in surface ships (besides low-cost corvettes and fast attack crafts). 

The only real scope for additional surface warships might be 2 ships in the 5,000+ ton range, but armed with long-range anti-air warfare (AAW) and land-attack capabilities. These can serve as flagships to each squadron (which can have 2 054A/P and 4 F-22P and/or MILGEM).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Zarvan

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> The PN will probably keep the F-22Ps until at least 2040, but they may look to construct additional Jinnah-class frigates (to replace the F-22Ps) through the 2030s. However, I don't think we'll see more than 12 frigates in the 2,000-4,000 ton class. Most of the damage the PN can inflict on the PN will come from submarines, so it doesn't make sense to invest too much in surface ships (besides low-cost corvettes and fast attack crafts).
> 
> The only real scope for additional surface warships might be 2 ships in the 5,000+ ton range, but armed with long-range anti-air warfare (AAW) and land-attack capabilities. These can serve as flagships to each squadron (which can have 2 054A/P and 4 F-22P and/or MILGEM).


In surface ships the difference is way to high and I two years ago talked to some Naval guy and few others even than the minimum number they gave of Frigates which they would like to have or let say main surface ships was 20. So the things Rafi has mentioned at least for surface ships I see them happening.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## FuturePAF

Rafi said:


> Maybe the German option with a commercial jet airliner option is favourite, ie think ATR with but on a new bigger jet aircraft with MAD.



what about putting either the German or the Swedish options on the Airbus A220. It’s a flexible design that currently comes in A220-100 and A220-300 variants, with an A220-500 model planned (6000 km max range). We can buy them to rebuild PIA as a more efficient airline serving domestic, medium haul and even routes as far away as Britain with this design (the 500 variant), and by sharing it across our navy and Air Force; it can serve as the future platform for a tanker, AWACS, and MPA.


----------



## Gryphon

PN's future plans (in the short-to-medium term) should include:

*Surface Fleet:*

Acquisition of 4 × heavy frigates with long-range AD capability (like Admiral Gorshkov-class) to serve as group command ships.

MLU of F-22P Zulfiquar-class frigates to incorporate 16-cell VLS and sensor/radar enhancements.

Acquisition of two additional 2300t Damen corvettes (total= 4), equip with ASuW, ASW and PDMS/CIWS capability.

Acquisition of 6 × FAC's (like FAC-55).

Arming MRTP-33 Zarrar-class FAC's with SSM's.

Acquisition of 3 × MCMV's.

Acquisition of two additional replenishment oilers (like PNS Moawin).
*Submarine fleet:*

Development & deployment of long-range SLCM for Khalid-class and Hangor-class submarines.

Development of SLBM (if Hangor-class comes with VLS).

Acquisition of 3 × mini-submarines.
*Aircraft fleet:*

Conversion of two additional ATR-72's to RAS 72 Sea Eagle MPA*.*

Acquisition of multi-mission helicopters (like AW101).
*Coast based defences:*

Acquisition of modern coastal radars - replacement of Argos 73.

Deployment of mobile Harbah and supersonic SSM batteries. Development & deployment of ASBMs with NSFC.

Indigenous development of medium-range SAM system, deployment alongside coastal SSM batteries, ports & shipyards, bases / installations, other VA/VPs.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## ARMalik

I know there is talk of retiring the Type-21 Frigates. But if with minimal modifications if these Frigates can be utilised for another 10 years that would be great for the PN since PN needs good Frigates in good "numbers".


----------



## khanasifm

ARMalik said:


> I know there is talk of retiring the Type-21 Frigates. But if with minimal modifications if these Frigates can be utilised for another 10 years that would be great for the PN since PN needs good Frigates in good "numbers".



One is slotted to go to pmsa after mod per one of modp report few years back not sure of the idea is dropped , others may end up as spare source

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Gryphon said:


> PN's future plans (in the short-to-medium term) should include:
> 
> *Surface Fleet:*
> 
> Acquisition of 4 × heavy frigates with long-range AD capability (like Admiral Gorshkov-class) to serve as group command ships.
> 
> MLU of F-22P Zulfiquar-class frigates to incorporate 16-cell VLS and sensor/radar enhancements.
> 
> Acquisition of two additional 2300t Damen corvettes (total= 4), equip with ASuW, ASW and PDMS/CIWS capability.
> 
> Acquisition of 6 × FAC's (like FAC-55).
> 
> Arming MRTP-33 Zarrar-class FAC's with SSM's.
> 
> Acquisition of 3 × MCMV's.
> 
> Acquisition of two additional replenishment oilers (like PNS Moawin).
> *Submarine fleet:*
> 
> Development & deployment of long-range SLCM for Khalid-class and Hangor-class submarines.
> 
> Development of SLBM (if Hangor-class comes with VLS).
> 
> Acquisition of 3 × mini-submarines.
> *Aircraft fleet:*
> 
> Conversion of two additional ATR-72's to RAS 72 Sea Eagle MPA*.*
> 
> Acquisition of multi-mission helicopters (like AW101).
> *Coast based defences:*
> 
> Acquisition of modern coastal radars - replacement of Argos 73.
> 
> Deployment of mobile Harbah and supersonic SSM batteries. Development & deployment of ASBMs with NSFC.
> 
> Indigenous development of medium-range SAM system, deployment alongside coastal SSM batteries, ports & shipyards, bases / installations, other VA/VPs.


I wish we could customize the 054A/P with the Result. As it stands, the only difference between it and MILGEM/MLU-ed F-22Ps are more VLS cells and maybe OTHR 

Otherwise, should look to add 2 frigates in the 5,000+ ton class with long-range AAW.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> I wish we could customize the 054A/P with the Result. As it stands, the only difference between it and MILGEM/MLU-ed F-22Ps are more VLS cells and maybe OTHR
> 
> Otherwise, should look to add 2 frigates in the 5,000+ ton class with long-range AAW.


What about Damen ones?


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> What about Damen ones?


Not sure what AAW they're getting, probably CIWS.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PakFactor

https://www.dailysabah.com/defense/...e-to-become-global-player-in-underwater-sonar

Development of a launcher system to launch ZOKA acoustic decoy and jammers from outside the hull of submarines is now complete. The system is being integrated into eight submarine platforms in inventory under the contract. ZARGANA is being sent abroad to be integrated into submarines in the Pakistan Navy's inventory.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## monitor

In post 2020 plan PN must have a road map to induct some heavy warship like Type 52D or Turkish coming TF-2000 Class AAW Frigate .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gryphon

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> I wish we could customize the 054A/P with the Result. As it stands, the only difference between it and MILGEM/MLU-ed F-22Ps are more VLS cells and maybe OTHR
> 
> Otherwise, should look to add 2 frigates in the 5,000+ ton class with long-range AAW.



I am hoping for 4× heavy frigates customized / designed by PN/MTC/KS&EW using the ToT gained through the now US$ 1.5 billion Jinnah-class frigate program.

They should aim for maximum indigenous content to reduce foreign dependency by using own ship design, CMS, SSMs, VLS, medium-to-long range SAMs, torpedoes, etc. And, invest in local manufacturing of ship-grade steel.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

Gryphon said:


> I am hoping for 4× heavy frigates customized / designed by PN/MTC/KS&EW using the ToT gained through the now US$ 1.5 billion Jinnah-class frigate program.
> 
> They should aim for maximum indigenous content to reduce foreign dependency by using own ship design, CMS, SSMs, VLS, medium-to-long range SAMs, torpedoes, etc. And, invest in local manufacturing of ship-grade steel.


What are the so-called heavy frigates in the world now?


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Gryphon said:


> I am hoping for 4× heavy frigates customized / designed by PN/MTC/KS&EW using the ToT gained through the now US$ 1.5 billion Jinnah-class frigate program.
> 
> They should aim for maximum indigenous content to reduce foreign dependency by using own ship design, CMS, SSMs, VLS, medium-to-long range SAMs, torpedoes, etc. And, invest in local manufacturing of ship-grade steel.


Agreed. If they bought the design rights, they should have bought expertise to design a 5,000+ ship using those fundamentals (much like Turkey did with the MILGEM Ada in designing the I Class and TF-2000). However, if this is the goal, then MTC better have started on the work already.

@Gryphon We should aim to design something in the size of the Type 31e's Arrowhead 140:

_Displacing around 5,700 tons and measuring 456 feet in length, the new platform is much larger than both the light frigate originally envisioned and the aging Type 23s it will replace in service._

https://news.usni.org/2019/09/23/arrowhead-wins-cost-battle-in-u-k-type-31-frigate-competition​

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gryphon

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Agreed. If they bought the design rights, they should have bought expertise to design a 5,000+ ship using those fundamentals (much like Turkey did with the MILGEM Ada in designing the I Class and TF-2000). However, if this is the goal, then MTC better have started on the work already.
> 
> @Gryphon We should aim to design something in the size of the Type 31e's Arrowhead 140:
> 
> _Displacing around 5,700 tons and measuring 456 feet in length, the new platform is much larger than both the light frigate originally envisioned and the aging Type 23s it will replace in service._
> 
> https://news.usni.org/2019/09/23/arrowhead-wins-cost-battle-in-u-k-type-31-frigate-competition​



Yes, in the 5000-6000 ton range. I am optimistic as development of indigenous SAM and supersonic SSM for PN is ongoing, as reported by Defense News and MoDP respectively.

If indigenous content in MTC-designed ships hits close to 50% in terms of FE value, it will a real achievement for the local defense industry. In this regard, PN will need to:

Invest in ship-grade steel manufacturing, or push the govt. to invite FDI into this sector.

Major elements in the weapons suite incl. SSMs, SAMs and torpedoes all locally sourced.
Upto US$ 550 million was spent on -84L Harpoon Block II purchases in the last decade, which came with strings attached.



LKJ86 said:


> What are the so-called heavy frigates in the world now?



The term is still used, for ships smaller than destroyers.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## LKJ86

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> @Gryphon We should aim to design something in the size of the Type 31e's Arrowhead 140:
> 
> _Displacing around 5,700 tons and measuring 456 feet in length, the new platform is much larger than both the light frigate originally envisioned and the aging Type 23s it will replace in service._
> 
> https://news.usni.org/2019/09/23/arrowhead-wins-cost-battle-in-u-k-type-31-frigate-competition​


"Key features include a vertical launch system with 24 Sea Ceptor anti-air missiles, Bofors 57mm Mk 110 gun (already in U.S. Navy service), two Bofors 40mm Mk 4 guns (instead of the widely-expected Phalanx close-in-weapon system), four boat bays, a flight deck and hanger for a Merlin helicopter or two Wildcats, and a mission space beneath for four 20ft containers."


----------



## Zarvan

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1195606481892237312

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

MTC is no more designing ships. Admiral Abbassi has done a great feat by setting up the First Pakistani Naval Design House, called NRDI, Naval Research & Design Institute, and have put together the brains of Pakistan Navy to absorb ToT programs and centralize future ship and submarine design. This, in time, will provide great benefits to PN and once fully supported by the Industry and Private Sector, will make Pakistan a Naval Ship and Submarine exporter, God Willing.

Reactions: Like Like:
23


----------



## Gryphon

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> MTC is no more designing ships. Admiral Abbassi has done a great feat by setting up the First Pakistani Naval Design House, called NRDI, Naval Research & Design Institute, and have put together the brains of Pakistan Navy to absorb ToT programs and centralize future ship and submarine design. This, in time, will provide great benefits to PN and once fully supported by the Industry and Private Sector, will make Pakistan a Naval Ship and Submarine exporter, God Willing.



Following the footsteps of PAF, i.e., the AvDI.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Zarvan

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> MTC is no more designing ships. Admiral Abbassi has done a great feat by setting up the First Pakistani Naval Design House, called NRDI, Naval Research & Design Institute, and have put together the brains of Pakistan Navy to absorb ToT programs and centralize future ship and submarine design. This, in time, will provide great benefits to PN and once fully supported by the Industry and Private Sector, will make Pakistan a Naval Ship and Submarine exporter, God Willing.


It could get further help by producing more and more ships in Pakistan. Every Ship and Submarine deal should be with TOT and some of them produced in Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

Zarvan said:


> It could get further help by producing more and more ships in Pakistan. Every Ship and Submarine deal should be with TOT and some of them produced in Pakistan.


In fact, Pakistan can learn the lessons of Indian navy.

India prefers ToT and "Make in India". But in reality, India basically builds the hull, and then assembles key units from Israel, USA, France, Russia, and so on.

Without your own industry, ToT is meaningless.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Zarvan

LKJ86 said:


> In fact, Pakistan can learn the lessons of Indian navy.
> 
> India prefers ToT and "Make in India". But in reality, India basically builds the hull, and then assembles key units from Israel, USA, France, Russia, and so on.
> 
> Without your own industry, ToT is meaningless.


TOT will help us build our industry. We are already producing Missile and big patrol boats and even oil tanker in Pakistan.


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Zarvan said:


> It could get further help by producing more and more ships in Pakistan. Every Ship and Submarine deal should be with TOT and some of them produced in Pakistan.



Already is the case. Karachi Shipyard is fully booked for next 10 years, and two more Shipyards are being considered for the country.



LKJ86 said:


> In fact, Pakistan can learn the lessons of Indian navy.
> 
> India prefers ToT and "Make in India". But in reality, India basically builds the hull, and then assembles key units from Israel, USA, France, Russia, and so on.
> 
> Without your own industry, ToT is meaningless.



Indian Scale and Model is still not practical for us.



Zarvan said:


> TOT will help us build our industry. We are already producing Missile and big patrol boats and even oil tanker in Pakistan.



ToT, combined with indigenization, deletion, and promotion of local industry for defence production is slowing coming around.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## TsAr

LKJ86 said:


> In fact, Pakistan can learn the lessons of Indian navy.
> 
> India prefers ToT and "Make in India". But in reality, India basically builds the hull, and then assembles key units from Israel, USA, France, Russia, and so on.
> 
> Without your own industry, ToT is meaningless.


Correct my friend.....We got TOT for the Agosta's but did not have the industrial base....


----------



## MastanKhan

LKJ86 said:


> In fact, Pakistan can learn the lessons of Indian navy.India prefers ToT and "Make in India". But in reality, India basically builds the hull, and then assembles key units from Israel, USA, France, Russia, and so on.Without your own industry, ToT is meaningless.



Hi,

When you get TOT---you do not need to manufacture the item just because you know how to---.

It is the KNOWLEDGE that you are after---. That knowledge takes your understanding of the machine---operating the machine and fixing and upgrading that machine to a totally different level---.

TOT teaches you how the machine is made in a certain manner and why it is made in the manner---.

Now my process of thinking is at a higher plateau---. So when I go visit my chinese brother and place an order of Type 39---my chinese brother is listening very keenly to what I am saying---so where did our TOT knowledge go---!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> When you get TOT---you do not need to manufacture the item just because you know how to---.
> 
> It is the KNOWLEDGE that you are after---. That knowledge takes your understanding of the machine---operating the machine and fixing and upgrading that machine to a totally different level---.
> 
> TOT teaches you how the machine is made in a certain manner and why it is made in the manner---.
> 
> Now my process of thinking is at a higher plateau---. So when I go visit my chinese brother and place an order of Type 39---my chinese brother is listening very keenly to what I am saying---so where did our TOT knowledge go---!!!



With all Due Respect son, your argument is of a a defeatist that are common from your era in PAF. Knowledge is lost due to rotation and retirement in military. Knowledge is retained and refreshed only when you are industrializing, manufacturing, and exploring. Otherwise, there should be no TOTs and only Technical Attachments to get your thinkings to a higher plateau.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## MastanKhan

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> With all Due Respect son, your argument is of a a defeatist that are common from your era in PAF. Knowledge is lost due to rotation and retirement in military. Knowledge is retained and refreshed only when you are industrializing, manufacturing, and exploring. Otherwise, there should be no TOTs and only Technical Attachments to get your thinkings to a higher plateau.



So---if we cannot use it---then according to you---we don't need to learn TOT because we will forget about it---.

From where did you learn that strange phenomenon---.

I guess they never told you in pakistan while you were working there that " knowledge is power "


----------



## Suff Shikan

Zarvan said:


> These things will take time but all points will be done. They are inevitable and hopefully economy improves at much faster rate so we can have these things as soon as possible
> 
> 
> 
> For number 6 if not nuclear submarines than I hope they consider these ones from Russia


Not Possible


----------



## Zarvan

Suff Shikan said:


> Not Possible


The things we have order now even that looked impossible until few years ago. Type 54 and JINAH in all likelihood will be 6 each as final order. Type 52 D is under negotiations and I am more than sure one big Frigate will be also considered. 20 Major Naval ships is the minimum number Pak Navy had in mind for sometime now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Suff Shikan

Zarvan said:


> The things we have order now even that looked impossible until few years ago. Type 54 and JINAH in all likelihood will be 6 each as final order. Type 52 D is under negotiations and I am more than sure one big Frigate will be also considered. 20 Major Naval ships is the minimum number Pak Navy had in mind for sometime now.


From Russia, its not Possible... and neither should we consider it. Procuring Weapons from US, Russia or Europe is becoming complex due to lobbying. Only friends in need shouls be considered to avoid any loss. I have heard Sweish Saab has denied us LRMPA Global Eye due to Indian pressure.


----------



## Zarvan

Suff Shikan said:


> From Russia, its not Possible... and neither should we consider it. Procuring Weapons from US, Russia or Europe is becoming complex due to lobbying. Only friends in need shouls be considered to avoid any loss. I have heard Sweish Saab has denied us LRMPA Global Eye due to Indian pressure.


Russia we are buying MI 35 we already bought Anti Tank weapons. We most likely have bought AK 103. And I am more than sure that PANTSIR is also coming soon. So if not big Frigates than small corvettes which can fire their 2000 KM Klub Missile is highly possible.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

MastanKhan said:


> So---if we cannot use it---then according to you---we don't need to learn TOT because we will forget about it---.
> 
> From where did you learn that strange phenomenon---.
> 
> I guess they never told you in pakistan while you were working there that " knowledge is power "



For a moment i took you seriously. Then you demonstrate that you are not worth the time.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MastanKhan

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> For a moment i took you seriously. Then you demonstrate that you are not worth the time.



No problem. Thank you. 

when i was going thru my automotive engineering degree here in the US, i learnt different from my instructors—-that was some 30 + years ago.

creating / building something is a life changing experience.

once you learn it, you never go back.

as i have no experience of working in Pakistan, i cannot relate to what your stand is on the issue.

so i will stick with what i learnt and you stick with your ways.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kabotar

LKJ86 said:


> What are the so-called heavy frigates in the world now?



Damen has omega.


----------



## LKJ86

Kabotar said:


> Damen has omega.


Maybe @Bilal Khan (Quwa) would be interested in its number of VLS units.


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

MastanKhan said:


> No problem. Thank you. Since when did you become a standard of acceptance---.
> 
> when i was going thru my automotive engineering degree here in the US, i learnt different from my instructors—-that was some 30 + years ago.
> 
> creating / building something is a life changing experience.
> 
> once you learn it, you never go back.
> 
> as i have no experience of working in Pakistan, i cannot relate to what your stand is on the issue.
> 
> so i will stick with what i learnt and you stick with your ways.



I have never been of any standard, nor any standard of acceptance. People like you ensure that I dont come back here. Good luck to you and your ability to fault Pakistan in everything.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Zarvan

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> I have never been of any standard, nor any standard of acceptance. People like you ensure that I dont come back here. Good luck to you and your ability to fault Pakistan in everything.


Just ignore him you are a great member and we learn a lot from you

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## araz

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> I have never been of any standard, nor any standard of acceptance. People like you ensure that I dont come back here. Good luck to you and your ability to fault Pakistan in everything.


Now you know why it is better to have certain people on your ignore list. It keeps your blood pressure normal and your life smooth. Click the name of the poster in the left column of the post, press ignore and see how calm your life becomes.
Kind regards
A

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## StormBreaker

araz said:


> Now you know why it is better to have certain people on your ignore list. It keeps your blood pressure normal and your life smooth. Click the name of the poster in the left column of the post, press ignore and see how calm your life becomes.
> Kind regards
> A


OMG thank you, a life saver, since pdf is flooded with kids, i can as well use this button to make it feel better...
Thanks & Regards


----------



## MastanKhan

Zarvan said:


> The things we have order now even that looked impossible until few years ago. Type 54 and JINAH in all likelihood will be 6 each as final order. Type 52 D is under negotiations and I am more than sure one big Frigate will be also considered. 20 Major Naval ships is the minimum number Pak Navy had in mind for sometime now.




They were not impossible we just did not know how to ask for them.

even though they were the need of the hour, both china and pakistan got caught sleeping at the helm.

pakistan more so.

remember i wrote about this scenario some 5- 6 years ago

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tank131

The issue of 052D is multifactorial. A few years ago they were a definite no m9stly because without proper frigates to support them they could becoming big targets/sitting ducks for the IN, especially when we look at the cost and PN likely only being able to afford 2 of them. Now you have 4 Jinnah class on the way and 4 Type 054A/P, you have enough support to adequately protect a destroyer like 052D.

With that said, you also have to factor in not only the cost of the vessel, but also its operational costs. Including manning it. If we look back about 15 years, the US had offered the Spruance Class USS Fletcher to PN free of charge, as a hot transfer. The 8000t vessel was equipped with an 8 cell Sea sparrow launcher (likely removed) space for 8 harpoon canisters, an 8 cell ASROC launcher (which likely would have been removed), a 21 cell RAM launcher, and a whopping 61 cell Mk-41 VLS. You could have requested SM-2 to equip it and it would gave been overwhelmingly the most powerful ship in PN/IN theater at tye time, except PN turned it down because they could not even afford its operating cost for 1 year, in no small part than it takes 334 people to man the ship. Now the type 052D will likely have far lower operating costs and certainly takes fewer people to operate it at ~280, and it being only in the 7000t range, but it will still be a significant cost. And a single 052D wont move any needles. You would need multiple such ships (at least 3-4) to make any real threat to IN in an offensive posture.

I think PN should focus right now on a multiprong strategy instead of 052D.

1. Really learn the warship building trade by utilizing the full capacity of the intellectual property you bought from Turkey regarding the MILGEM. Learn it modify it if necessary and build more. 

Part of this includes investing in an infrastructure tgat allows you to build a ship from scratch in house which Pakistan cannot do given it has no capacity at this stage to make ship- grade steel.

2. Focus on developing weaponry in house. Some of this is already being done with reports of a hypersonic AShM under development (likely a modified C-302 or cx-1), but more importantly development of a system of SAMs with multiple layers of defense starting with long range (150km+, ideally 200km+) with high altitude and ballistic intercept capabilities. This would be a very long term project id a solution cannot be acquired off the shelf (like hq-9 and its varients). The second (and in my opinion the more immediately crucial is a medium ranged quad packed sam. Something in the 50-70km range. This can be in conjunction with Turkey or china, but would allow Pakistan to install it on any ship of Pakistans choosing. CAMM-ER would be ideal but for the last segment of this to come true, some type on in house solution is needed. The last is a PDMS with an (ideally) 10-20km range for supersonic missile. You could even use Anza Mk3 as a starting point and develop from there.

3. Jointly develope larger warships with friendly nations (ideally Turkey) so as to cut costs amd share the burden (much like the french and Italian did with the Horizon class).

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## MastanKhan

araz said:


> Now you know why it is better to have certain people on your ignore list. It keeps your blood pressure normal and your life smooth. Click the name of the poster in the left column of the post, press ignore and see how calm your life becomes.
> Kind regards
> A



Cowards seek the easy way out---live in an illusion and believe that if they shut their eyes---the problem does not exist---.

You may enjoy your Ostrich mode---.

So---in order to keep your blood pressure down---you would rather listen to the lies spread by the Paf and won't participate in making things better for pakistan's defenses---by listening to the truth---.

Isn't that a tragedy of pakistan---that its well versed have closed their ears---.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MastanKhan

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> With all Due Respect son, your argument is of a a defeatist that are common from your era in PAF. Knowledge is lost due to rotation and retirement in military. Knowledge is retained and refreshed only when you are industrializing, manufacturing, and exploring. Otherwise, there should be no TOTs and only Technical Attachments to get your thinkings to a higher plateau.



Hi,

I had not written for a couple of months so I was a little bit rusty in my answer---.

Mister---do you have any clue to what you wrote---.

Do you have any clue what engineering is and how it works---. Do you have any clue how 3rd world nations of the world are begging to understand TOT and get TOT for any project that is being worked on for them---.

I have an engineering background---I have microbiology and bio chemistry and human physiology background---I have graduate level english literature background as well---and I can tell you one thing---for a learning mind TOT is a blessing sent by God---even if you may never get to use it---.

The truth is that once you get involved being a part of technology where technology is being transferred---your life would never be the same---even if you may chose to forget it---which you will never be able to---.

You may get rusty---but knowledge learnt is never wasted---.

For a military officer---supposedly with a rank of air vice marshall---your mindset and understanding or lack of understanding about the subject of TOT is absolutely shocking.

My uncle learnt TOT of nuc reactors from UK and USA in the 60's ( he was one of many pakistani nuclear physicists who learnt that )---he never thought that in the 70's he would be transferring that technology to pakistan to build a nuc weapon---that he would start by teaching future pakistanis nuclear physicists at the Reactor school at Nylore at that time in the 70's by TOT ie transferring the technology that he learnt from abroad---.

You disgust me sir by making that comment---. Knowledge is power and that makes us think and act different---and you come here and shamelessly discredit those navy engineers and army engineers who were a part of a project with TOT and insult them and degrade them that they forgot---.

No they did not forget that---that knowledge broadened their vision and expanded their horizons---just because their departments never got any back up orders---it was not their fault---.

You are getting old air marshall---you have lost it



And @araz ---man don't cut your nose to spite your face---. You should have at least read in depth what this man was saying.

But if you were waiting to support someone who was having a go at me---oh well---what can I say.



Zarvan said:


> Just ignore him you are a great member and we learn a lot from you



Oh look at the little pup---has grown some fangs and grown some courage---. Posting stolen articles and news feeds from one source or another---you think you become somebody---.

@masterchief_mirza is that more like the old one---?????

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Gryphon

Gents, No need resorting to personal insults. Everyone has an interpretation of ToT according to their experience / inexperience and that's fine.

So, disengage & move on...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Tank131

In my observation its convenient for some to bash @MastanKhan without reading what he is saying. We don't always agree on things, but the point of view that the the transfer of any level of knowledge that you dont currently possess in you home industry is a positive is the most sane position. How you and your countrymen use the knowledge is up to you. If you let it just sit there and rust and the retire, of course it may be a waste, but in my experience that is never the situation. Whether you learb the science behind the development of a product or the supply chain techniques used to manage projects and development/build products, there is always knowledge to be had. That knowledge is usually passed down to junior engineers, technicians, and students/interns who those individuals work with after the project's completion or even in their retirement when some go on to teach. National/industry involvement in such endeavors is always positive. I think that is the crux of his point and it is a difficult thing to dispute.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MastanKhan

Gryphon said:


> Gents, No need resorting to personal insults. Everyone has an interpretation of ToT according to their experience / inexperience and that's fine.
> 
> So, disengage & move on...



Hi,

Thank you---would have been nice if you had posted your comments a couple of days earlier at those guys who started it rather than me---.


----------



## Pakistan Ka Beta

Thanks to ALLAH ( GOD) . Good news is majority of these Procurements are from friendly n allied countries like China and Turkey not US , UK so IA these will join PN Soon .


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

Tank131 said:


> The issue of 052D is multifactorial. A few years ago they were a definite no m9stly because without proper frigates to support them they could becoming big targets/sitting ducks for the IN, especially when we look at the cost and PN likely only being able to afford 2 of them. Now you have 4 Jinnah class on the way and 4 Type 054A/P, you have enough support to adequately protect a destroyer like 052D.
> 
> With that said, you also have to factor in not only the cost of the vessel, but also its operational costs. Including manning it. If we look back about 15 years, the US had offered the Spruance Class USS Fletcher to PN free of charge, as a hot transfer. The 8000t vessel was equipped with an 8 cell Sea sparrow launcher (likely removed) space for 8 harpoon canisters, an 8 cell ASROC launcher (which likely would have been removed), a 21 cell RAM launcher, and a whopping 61 cell Mk-41 VLS. You could have requested SM-2 to equip it and it would gave been overwhelmingly the most powerful ship in PN/IN theater at tye time, except PN turned it down because they could not even afford its operating cost for 1 year, in no small part than it takes 334 people to man the ship. Now the type 052D will likely have far lower operating costs and certainly takes fewer people to operate it at ~280, and it being only in the 7000t range, but it will still be a significant cost. And a single 052D wont move any needles. You would need multiple such ships (at least 3-4) to make any real threat to IN in an offensive posture.
> 
> I think PN should focus right now on a multiprong strategy instead of 052D.
> 
> 1. Really learn the warship building trade by utilizing the full capacity of the intellectual property you bought from Turkey regarding the MILGEM. Learn it modify it if necessary and build more.
> 
> Part of this includes investing in an infrastructure tgat allows you to build a ship from scratch in house which Pakistan cannot do given it has no capacity at this stage to make ship- grade steel.
> 
> 2. Focus on developing weaponry in house. Some of this is already being done with reports of a hypersonic AShM under development (likely a modified C-302 or cx-1), but more importantly development of a system of SAMs with multiple layers of defense starting with long range (150km+, ideally 200km+) with high altitude and ballistic intercept capabilities. This would be a very long term project id a solution cannot be acquired off the shelf (like hq-9 and its varients). The second (and in my opinion the more immediately crucial is a medium ranged quad packed sam. Something in the 50-70km range. This can be in conjunction with Turkey or china, but would allow Pakistan to install it on any ship of Pakistans choosing. CAMM-ER would be ideal but for the last segment of this to come true, some type on in house solution is needed. The last is a PDMS with an (ideally) 10-20km range for supersonic missile. You could even use Anza Mk3 as a starting point and develop from there.
> 
> 3. Jointly develope larger warships with friendly nations (ideally Turkey) so as to cut costs amd share the burden (much like the french and Italian did with the Horizon class).


Do we have ships to protect Type 054A/P?


----------



## Pakistan Ka Beta

Zarvan said:


> Russia we are buying MI 35 we already bought Anti Tank weapons. We most likely have bought AK 103. And I am more than sure that PANTSIR is also coming soon. So if not big Frigates than small corvettes which can fire their 2000 KM Klub Missile is highly possible.


Brother any Confirmation / News of Pantsir that we ordered it ? even from Sources ? Indian media reported it n here on PD as well . Thanks .


----------



## HRK

Here at this stage I would like members to search about the issues of _*Knowledge Loss and Knowledge Retention*_ in Industrial and Corporate world its REAL and a RISK which cost $ and time to the organisations

for the start they can also read this paper: (click here)

In most simple and understandable manner getting TOT even complete TOT related to manufacturing is not a silver bullet, countries or organisations must have strategies to retain that knowledge either by continuation of the program or new research based on the knowledge gain ....

In this context most relevant examples in our case are

1- Agosta Submarine program in which we get some degree of TOT but due to lack of further orders for submarine by PN we lost the knowledge acquired and now in terms of Submarine manufacturing we are standing again at the same position where we were before the Agosta submarine TOT

2- On the other hand what we see in JF-17 program is the continues progress even for new technologies due to limited local R&D, involvement of Academia and support of PAF in terms of firm orders for JF-17 and support of Government in terms of finance because of all of these JF-17 as program is a success not just in the developing and delivering the intended product but to GAIN and RETAIN the knowledge and also enhance it further .....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tank131

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Do we have ships to protect Type 054A/P?



They have the ability to defend themselves. The HQ-16 is a reasonable SAM and while certainly the 052D is far more capable as an air defense ship, the fact that you have 1 or 2 destroyers our there alone makes them a target for saturation attacks. The presence of the Jinnahs and 054As creates additional layers of protection. Ideally the F-22P will undergo MLU and also be made able to assist in air defense. But the idea is to create multiple levels of protection in battle groups/flotilla. 

I would imagine the 054s will work in conjunction with other ships (as flotilla level defense) along with a Jinnah , F-22P and possibly 1-2 submarines. Between Jinnah, Type 054A and F-22p you will have at least 48 medium range missiles 8 short range missiles and 5 CIWS to defend the flotilla from attack. I would hope the 054A come with HQ-16B with 70km range and that the jinnah somehow get access to CAMM-ER (allows for quadpacked 70-100km missiles which would increas the medium range numbers to 96 missiles).

Now if you had 052D by itself which has 64 vls cells for HQ-9, CW-5 ASROCs, and AShM/LACM. That ship can better defend itself for sure, but without small support vessels (like Jinnah, 054A/P and F-22P, it is a target). With their help, it is a formidable beast.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Do we have ships to protect Type 054A/P?


why do you they have not, and btw they will come with HQ-16b SAMs with a range of 70 km, they have self defense capability in fact they have area defense capability, to defend itself and other ships of PN as well


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

seven0seven said:


> why do you they have not, and btw they will come with HQ-16b SAMs with a range of 70 km, they have self defense capability in fact they have area defense capability, to defend itself and other ships of PN as well


Well Type 52Ds have better.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Well Type 52Ds have better.


yes you're right but it is expensive toy, and Navy moving step by step in right direction, when our economy improves within few years i am pretty sure we will get Type 52Ds, 3-4 would be nice forPN


----------



## Cool_Soldier

Let the Type 54 A to join PN. Then next step would be 52 D destroyers to come in


----------



## TheDarkKnight

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> I have never been of any standard, nor any standard of acceptance. People like you ensure that I dont come back here. Good luck to you and your ability to fault Pakistan in everything.


Please ignore members like him. I greatly appreciate your contributions. There are also many silent readers out there who benefit from your posts, so don't be dis-hearted by a few detractors.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## khanasifm

Chinese Tight pack launcher doubling ssm on ships

F22p launcher spacing can go to 12 or may be 16 ssm

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Manidabest

is it enough for our navy ??? almost... but we should join Turkey in developing TF2000 and acquire atleast 2 of them

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

khanasifm said:


> View attachment 593597
> 
> 
> View attachment 593598
> 
> 
> Chinese Tight pack launcher doubling ssm on ships
> 
> F22p launcher spacing can go to 12 or may be 16 ssm


There is no enough space on F22 for 16 SSMs. However, putting so much AsM assets on platform is also wrong. This is suitable for Russian/Chinese Saturation doctrine, where two or four missiles are fired on each target in ripple fire to overwhelm the defenses. Our Navy follows the wester Precision doctrine, where one missile one target is the norm, or there is coordinated attack between various assets towards a unitary target to overwhelm its medium and terminal defenses.

In hind sight, I would recommend that Navy consider installing indigenous anti-ship cum land attack missiles on its platforms, giving us more flexibility at sea for regional interdiction, defence and dominance.

Reactions: Like Like:
19


----------



## khanasifm

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> There is no enough space on F22 for 16 SSMs. However, putting so much AsM assets on platform is also wrong. This is suitable for Russian/Chinese Saturation doctrine, where two or four missiles are fired on each target in ripple fire to overwhelm the defenses. Our Navy follows the wester Precision doctrine, where one missile one target is the norm, or there is coordinated attack between various assets towards a unitary target to overwhelm its medium and terminal defenses.
> 
> In hind sight, I would recommend that Navy consider installing indigenous anti-ship cum land attack missiles on its platforms, giving us more flexibility at sea for regional interdiction, defence and dominance.



Usn/America review of type 041/39 sub stated 6 torpedo tubes are not enough to launch saturated attack as two tubes will have torpedos as standby against counter attack by enemy sub/ship and only 4 tubes can be used to launch attack which is not enough to attack today’s ship defenses 

Any way I am not navy background but I was surprised as 039/041 has six while agosta 90 has only 4


----------



## Cornered Tiger

khanasifm said:


> Usn/America review of type 041/39 sub stated 6 torpedo tubes are not enough to launch saturated attack as two tubes will have torpedos as standby against counter attack by enemy sub/ship and only 4 tubes can be used to launch attack which is not enough to attack today’s ship defenses
> 
> Any way I am not navy background but I was surprised as 039/041 has six while agosta 90 has only 4



Most other modern Subs also have 6 torpedo tubes. Agosta 90B are not structurally new platforms, Its 80's design I guess.


----------



## LKJ86

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> However, putting so much AsM assets on platform is also wrong. This is suitable for Russian/Chinese Saturation doctrine, where two or four missiles are fired on each target in ripple fire to overwhelm the defenses. Our Navy follows the wester Precision doctrine, where one missile one target is the norm, or there is coordinated attack between various assets towards a unitary target to overwhelm its medium and terminal defenses.


Isn't it quite normal to warships needing strong anti-ship capability, but without strong air support and VLS for AShMs?

And what are so-called Russian/Chinese Saturation doctrine and west Precision doctrine? Do you think PN can do what USN does? Does PN also have aircraft carrier strike groups?

USA









Russia









China


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

LKJ86 said:


> Isn't it quite normal to warships needing strong anti-ship capability, but without strong air support and VLS for AShMs?
> 
> And what are so-called Russian/Chinese Saturation doctrine and west Precision doctrine? Do you think PN can do what USN does? Does PN also have aircraft carrier strike groups?
> 
> USA
> View attachment 594977
> 
> View attachment 594978
> 
> 
> Russia
> View attachment 594979
> 
> View attachment 594980
> 
> 
> China
> View attachment 594981
> 
> View attachment 594982


I think the point was in the context of small ships (less than 2,000 ton displacement, shorter than 90 m in length). So, such ships -- e.g., fast attack crafts, corvettes, etc -- should have a specialized role, not be overloaded with too many subsystems.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> I think the point was in the context of small ships (less than 2,000 ton displacement, shorter than 90 m in length). So, such ships -- e.g., fast attack crafts, corvettes, etc -- should have a specialized role, not be overloaded with too many subsystems.


Everything is just based on the challenges you face.
USN has aircraft carrier strike groups, and what dos PN have?


----------



## Zarvan

LKJ86 said:


> Isn't it quite normal to warships needing strong anti-ship capability, but without strong air support and VLS for AShMs?
> 
> And what are so-called Russian/Chinese Saturation doctrine and west Precision doctrine? Do you think PN can do what USN does? Does PN also have aircraft carrier strike groups?
> 
> USA
> View attachment 594977
> 
> View attachment 594978
> 
> 
> Russia
> View attachment 594979
> 
> View attachment 594980
> 
> 
> China
> View attachment 594981
> 
> View attachment 594982


In my opinion Pakistan has wrong policy. In my opinion Pakistan should have Frigates and Destroyers which have those VLS which can carry and fire long range cruise missiles to hit targets on land as well as ships

@Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tank131

LKJ86 said:


> Everything is just based on the challenges you face.
> USN has aircraft carrier strike groups, and what dos PN have?


There is a different approach with different navies amd different ships I suppose. For a navy like USN which operates multiple CBG and 67 Arleigh Burk destroyers (with 10 more 10 more ordered) and 22 Ticonderoga class cruisers means that some of the smaller ships like LCS dont need as robust of air defense. That being said, even they were critizised for being too lightly armed. That is why they are being actively equipped with better warfighting modules. For example the Saudis bought 12 Freedom class lcs which will have standard warfighting setup instead of the modular and interchangeable layout of the USN ships. It will have a 16 cells vls for either 16 SM-2 or 64 ESSM, or morell likely 8 and 32 layout. Even the standard LCS has 21 cell RAM mk 2 which is a 22km range weapon which is better than anything PN currently fields.

For a navy like PN and country like Pakistan who cannot afford to put out such robust ships as arleigh buk or Ticonderoga or Type 052D or Type 055, it needs more multirole ships like the Freedom class the Saudis will acquire. Some thing that is a jack of all trades, even if it is not a master of anything. Especially in an area where PN and Pakistan as a whole is lacking, amd that is air defense. The ships need to operate amd survive in groups and independently. As such they should have am adequate Antiship capacity and a good antisub capability. But they need to have a viable antiair function. To that end, the ability to defend themselves is vital at this point. Medium to long range weapons, preferably quad packable. The ideal system for PN would be CAMM-ER which can be quad packed and likely has a range of at least 70-80km if not 100km. Even its officially stated range of 45km+ is far better than anything currently available when considering theHQ-16b has 70km range but is single packed. With that being said the standard CAMM has a listed range of 25km+ but according to Janes has beens successfully tested out to 60km. If that is the case, i should think the ER version can reach at least 60km if not much further as stated. Pakistan could field them on MILGEM (64 missiles) if they can make a deal with Italy (Pakistan was said to be one of the countries interested in it). If that works well, then PN could theoretically in a few years years refitnTpye 054A with new radar (perhaps an integrated mast like CAFRAD) ANDexchange the weapons for HARBAH amd CAMM-ER.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LKJ86

Tank131 said:


> Even its officially stated range of 45km+ is far better than anything currently available when considering theHQ-16b has 70km range but is single packed. With that being said the standard CAMM has a listed range of 25km+ but according to Janes has beens successfully tested out to 60km. If that is the case, i should think the ER version can reach at least 60km if not much further as stated.


The range is not everything.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Itachi

LKJ86 said:


> The range is not everything.



Range matters, the further out the target is intercepted and neutralized, the better.

After range, it's the velocity of the interceptors (missiles) that matter....higher the velocity, more the chances it can intercept faster targets.

Supersonic interceptors intercept supersonic missiles, and in some cases, can also intercept hypersonic missiles.

Hypersonic missiles can intercept hypersonic missiles, for example, the Buk-M3 is stated to have a Mach 8.8 speed (well within the hypersonic range).


----------



## Tank131

LKJ86 said:


> The range is not everything.


You are right, range is not everything. But when fighting off a missile with the speed and dimension/mass of Brahmos, speed range and kinetic force are 90%. The other issue is number of interceptors. See if a missile has a range of engagement at say 70km the ship can the engage the target at a further distance and put more missiles between the attacking missile and itself... ie it has more chances to take it out. Add to that that if that longer range missile is quad packed you have 4x the weapons at your disposal to bring it Brahmos down. Lets say all you have is 8 FM-90/HQ-7A missiles. You have 8 shots to bring down brahmos at a range of 12km for supersonic weapons. If you cant bring it down or you run out of missiles because 2-3 brahmos were likely launched at you, you are left to rely on you CIWS. At a short gun range the debris from the missile is likely to significantly damage the ship given the speed it is going even if you can destroy the missile at all. So yeah, if given the option i would take the range and more importantly the numbers of something like CAMM-ER over even HQ-16B even if CAMM-er ends up with 45km range, the number of weapons that can be brought to bear is of the utmost importance. That is why 12 ASTER 15s were replaced by 48 Sea Ceptor (CAMM) on the Daring class destroyers.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LKJ86

Tank131 said:


> You are right, range is not everything. But when fighting off a missile with the speed and dimension/mass of Brahmos, speed range and kinetic force are 90%. The other issue is number of interceptors. See if a missile has a range of engagement at say 70km the ship can the engage the target at a further distance and put more missiles between the attacking missile and itself... ie it has more chances to take it out. Add to that that if that longer range missile is quad packed you have 4x the weapons at your disposal to bring it Brahmos down. Lets say all you have is 8 FM-90/HQ-7A missiles. You have 8 shots to bring down brahmos at a range of 12km for supersonic weapons. If you cant bring it down or you run out of missiles because 2-3 brahmos were likely launched at you, you are left to rely on you CIWS. At a short gun range the debris from the missile is likely to significantly damage the ship given the speed it is going even if you can destroy the missile at all. So yeah, if given the option i would take the range and more importantly the numbers of something like CAMM-ER over even HQ-16B even if CAMM-er ends up with 45km range, the number of weapons that can be brought to bear is of the utmost importance. That is why 12 ASTER 15s were replaced by 48 Sea Ceptor (CAMM) on the Daring class destroyers.


Take S-400 and HQ-9 for example. Many people think that the range of S-400 is much longer than HQ-9.

But according to the same Russian standard, the range of latest HQ-9 is basically the same as that of S-400.

And China never thinks that the range of latest HQ-9 should be claimed to be 400km.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tank131

LKJ86 said:


> Take S-400 and HQ-9 for example. Many people think that the range of S-400 is much longer than HQ-9.
> 
> But according to the same Russian standard, the range of latest HQ-9 is basically the same as that of S-400.
> 
> And China never thinks that the range of latest HQ-9 should be claimed to be 400km.


Again my friend you are talking the weapons of Super Powers and slightly different utility than the SAMs that can be fit on the PN ships.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

LKJ86 said:


> Everything is just based on the challenges you face.
> USN has aircraft carrier strike groups, and what dos PN have?



There is always a tradeoff between challenges, opportunities, and resources. We are not compared to USN. I don't expect you to understand military history of doctrine theories, and posting pictures does not really contribute to education of people on a forum. BR

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## niaz

We need to define ‘TOT” or transfer of Technology. I understand from many posts in this forum over the years that most members of this forum consider TOT to mean the “cradle-to-grave” production model. That is, once you get TOT, you can make the complete item including the structure, engine/propulsion mechanism, electrical connections, communication & management systems, avionics, armament etc. This is a complete misconception. Even the local manufacture under license does not always include the capability of manufacturing of all the systems.

The development of all the value chains requires technical expertise plus a supplicated and advanced manufacturing base that goes beyond the capacity of most countries. Even a country like China has to rely on RD-93 engines from Russia for the JF-17. And China’s modern J-10 fighter uses the Russian built ‘Lyulka-Saturn 31FN engine.

We have been making Al Khalid Tank for decades, but still we need to import the engine & propulsion system from Ukraine. We assembled Augusta 90B submarine in Pakistan, can we make an ‘Air impendent propulsion system’? Even for the mid-life upgrades, we had to turn to Turkey.

TOT is just another term for the exchange of information, materials, or intellectual property rights between and among government, academic, or industry laboratories to facilitate further research and commercialization. Therefore to consider that by acquiring TOT, Pakistan would be able to independently manufacture a sophisticated weapon system is a fool's dream.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## MastanKhan

niaz said:


> We need to define ‘TOT” or transfer of Technology. I understand from many posts in this forum over the years that most members of this forum consider TOT to mean the “cradle-to-grave” production model. That is, once you get TOT, you can make the complete item including the structure, engine/propulsion mechanism, electrical connections, communication & management systems, avionics, armament etc. This is a complete misconception. Even the local manufacture under license does not always include the capability of manufacturing of all the systems.
> 
> The development of all the value chains requires technical expertise plus a supplicated and advanced manufacturing base that goes beyond the capacity of most countries. Even a country like China has to rely on RD-93 engines from Russia for the JF-17. And China’s modern J-10 fighter uses the Russian built ‘Lyulka-Saturn 31FN engine.
> 
> We have been making Al Khalid Tank for decades, but still we need to import the engine & propulsion system from Ukraine. We assembled Augusta 90B submarine in Pakistan, can we make an ‘Air impendent propulsion system’? Even for the mid-life upgrades, we had to turn to Turkey.
> 
> TOT is just another term for the exchange of information, materials, or intellectual property rights between and among government, academic, or industry laboratories to facilitate further research and commercialization. Therefore to consider that by acquiring TOT, Pakistan would be able to independently manufacture a sophisticated weapon system is a fool's dream.



Hi,

Thank you for your post---. TOT is not a magic wand that once it is given---you become capable and able to utilize it.

Here is what TOT does from an engineering perspective in a way---.

Think that the original manufacturer is on a Level A capability of a machine you are getting with TOT---.

You basic engineering level is somewhere between C & D---. Once you go thru the building process of the machine in question---depening on your original capabilities and abilities would take you to a C+---C++ levels---.

As R AVM Latif mentioned that when the Paf engineers went to china for JF17---their mental levels & capabilities were on the level of a complete overhaul of the aircraft---and not design and manufacture---. Seeing that problem---they were sent to chinese universities to be taught the design engineering processes and training---.

In a similar manner---the TOT has given the engineer a vision of what is or what maybe on the other side of the VEIL but not the ability to just build it outright---.

Some engineers were given all the blue prints and all the help---but still could not come up with the required output results even after decades of hard work.

To the young and old pakistanis---TOT is like a pill of Viagra---it will give you a temporary feel of euphoria and momentarily make you feel like someone that you are not---so please don't be carried away---.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

LKJ86 said:


> Take S-400 and HQ-9 for example. Many people think that the range of S-400 is much longer than HQ-9.
> 
> But according to the same Russian standard, the range of latest HQ-9 is basically the same as that of S-400.
> 
> And China never thinks that the range of latest HQ-9 should be claimed to be 400km.


What is the latest version of HQ 9?


----------



## LKJ86

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> posting pictures does not really contribute to education of people on a forum.


I just show you the real world, not the one in your imagination.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

LKJ86 said:


> I just show you the real world, not the one in your imagination.



with over 60 years of military experience, you call my statements imagination?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## MastanKhan

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> with over 60 years of military experience, you call my statements imagination? .



Hi,

I cant stop laughing---. A general stays a general---retired or not---hehehehehe---. Love it---.



Tank131 said:


> You are right, range is not everything. But when fighting off a missile with the speed and dimension/mass of Brahmos, speed range and kinetic force are 90%. The other issue is number of interceptors. See if a missile has a range of engagement at say 70km the ship can the engage the target at a further distance and put more missiles between the attacking missile and itself... ie it has more chances to take it out. Add to that that if that longer range missile is quad packed you have 4x the weapons at your disposal to bring it Brahmos down. Lets say all you have is 8 FM-90/HQ-7A missiles. You have 8 shots to bring down brahmos at a range of 12km for supersonic weapons. If you cant bring it down or you run out of missiles because 2-3 brahmos were likely launched at you, you are left to rely on you CIWS. At a short gun range the debris from the missile is likely to significantly damage the ship given the speed it is going even if you can destroy the missile at all. So yeah, if given the option i would take the range and more importantly the numbers of something like CAMM-ER over even HQ-16B even if CAMM-er ends up with 45km range, the number of weapons that can be brought to bear is of the utmost importance. That is why 12 ASTER 15s were replaced by 48 Sea Ceptor (CAMM) on the Daring class destroyers.




Hi,

The debris from the missile is going to do more damage than the missile hit to the ship---.

The rocket fuel from the blown up missile would hit the ship in a massive splatter and nothing worst than rocket fuel on fire---. Bye Bye ship---.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Zarvan

I really hope we still can get a major change in Type 54 which we would get divide 32 VLS in two category. 16 for Air Defence and 16 for long Range Cruise Missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

Zarvan said:


> I really hope we still can get a major change in Type 54 which we would get divide 32 VLS in two category. 16 for Air Defence and 16 for long Range Cruise Missiles


How much is the max capacity of that ship?


----------



## khanasifm

Zarvan said:


> I really hope we still can get a major change in Type 54 which we would get divide 32 VLS in two category. 16 for Air Defence and 16 for long Range Cruise Missiles



Currently it can carry Sams as well as Asroc but I am sure it’s possible or already an option

https://www.janes.com/images/assets/911/72911/Undersea_dragon_Chinese_ASW_capabilities_advance.pdf


----------



## Armchair

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> There is no enough space on F22 for 16 SSMs. However, putting so much AsM assets on platform is also wrong. This is suitable for Russian/Chinese Saturation doctrine, where two or four missiles are fired on each target in ripple fire to overwhelm the defenses. Our Navy follows the wester Precision doctrine, where one missile one target is the norm, or there is coordinated attack between various assets towards a unitary target to overwhelm its medium and terminal defenses.
> 
> In hind sight, I would recommend that Navy consider installing indigenous anti-ship cum land attack missiles on its platforms, giving us more flexibility at sea for regional interdiction, defence and dominance.



Dear Sir, 

It is always a pleasure to read your posts and learn from them. I am just wondering if following the western doctrine is going to be effective for us. I understand we have a 100 year colonial legacy and our boys, specially those that end up in top posts, are still trained in Sandhurst and the US.

However, I would argue that our doctrine must be unique to us and our condition. If we look at the JF17, it is a weapon system outside contemporary Western doctrine. And that is precisely what makes it so much better, while the LCA is closer to western doctrine yet is a tiny white elephant. 

If we follow this western doctrine of precision over "quantity has a quality all its own", the latter being the Soviet doctrine, we shortsell our future.
This is because with this doctrine we will forever end up with a small fleet with high tech equipment, which means this will be largely imported. 
And guess where it will be imported from?
The West. The same place those undercover atheist Sandhurst grads with sudden Swiss balances got their doctrine from. 

The second issue I have is that ideology is getting in the way of clear thinking. A bunch of PN ships with a barely average air defense, surface attack and anti sub weaponry will not be able to block An IN blockade. 
This seems to be the white elephant in the room. We don't have a fleet of container ships and tankers and no commercial vessel would take this risk. Even if we did have those, they would be easy pickings for the IN. 

Our best bet always was to think asymmetrically and find ways to make the INs life miserable and impose a penalty and a counter blockade. 

In contemporary times this can best be done in a number of ways, one which we discussed before (and you broadly agreed with this idea) is to use UUVs. Launched from our ports, the UUVs would be cheap one way kamikazi subs that will go to designated Indian ports and cause mahem.
It wouldn't matter if the enemy sank a few. 
Another idea would be to invest in strike aircraft armed with AShMs. Ones with greater legs than the jf17s.
And there are so many more options. 
Yet a lot of these options may not fit the doctrine we have yet they may be effective ideas.
Look how you yourself showed interest in the idea we discussed of a small submarine. 
I wanted one which would be indigenous and be able to launch the UUVs discussed above. You wanted a more sophisticated SWAT from Italy. 
The PN agreed with you, everything went forward and then of course the funds were not there. 
Had we gone with what I was proposing today every single Indian West coast port would be under threat from teaming UUVs that cost a dime a dozen.
Just a thought.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Armchair said:


> Dear Sir,
> 
> It is always a pleasure to read your posts and learn from them. I am just wondering if following the western doctrine is going to be effective for us. I understand we have a 100 year colonial legacy and our boys, specially those that end up in top posts, are still trained in Sandhurst and the US.
> 
> However, I would argue that our doctrine must be unique to us and our condition. If we look at the JF17, it is a weapon system outside contemporary Western doctrine. And that is precisely what makes it so much better, while the LCA is closer to western doctrine yet is a tiny white elephant.
> 
> If we follow this western doctrine of precision over "quantity has a quality all its own", the latter being the Soviet doctrine, we shortsell our future.
> This is because with this doctrine we will forever end up with a small fleet with high tech equipment, which means this will be largely imported.
> And guess where it will be imported from?
> The West. The same place those undercover atheist Sandhurst grads with sudden Swiss balances got their doctrine from.
> 
> The second issue I have is that ideology is getting in the way of clear thinking. A bunch of PN ships with a barely average air defense, surface attack and anti sub weaponry will not be able to block An IN blockade.
> This seems to be the white elephant in the room. We don't have a fleet of container ships and tankers and no commercial vessel would take this risk. Even if we did have those, they would be easy pickings for the IN.
> 
> Our best bet always was to think asymmetrically and find ways to make the INs life miserable and impose a penalty and a counter blockade.
> 
> In contemporary times this can best be done in a number of ways, one which we discussed before (and you broadly agreed with this idea) is to use UUVs. Launched from our ports, the UUVs would be cheap one way kamikazi subs that will go to designated Indian ports and cause mahem.
> It wouldn't matter if the enemy sank a few.
> Another idea would be to invest in strike aircraft armed with AShMs. Ones with greater legs than the jf17s.
> And there are so many more options.
> Yet a lot of these options may not fit the doctrine we have yet they may be effective ideas.
> Look how you yourself showed interest in the idea we discussed of a small submarine.
> I wanted one which would be indigenous and be able to launch the UUVs discussed above. You wanted a more sophisticated SWAT from Italy.
> The PN agreed with you, everything went forward and then of course the funds were not there.
> Had we gone with what I was proposing today every single Indian West coast port would be under threat from teaming UUVs that cost a dime a dozen.
> Just a thought.


One other idea worth considering is working with Turkey to develop a trimmed-down version of the FAC-55. Basically, retain the speed and AShM load (switch to supersonic-cruising AShM), but remove the electronics, radar, etc and have them operate passively using off-board sensors (e.g., AEW&C, other ships, etc). Likewise, develop an ASW variant armed with torpedoes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tank131

Why not use something very basic that is already utilized by PN and that is underwater platforms that the PN used to test Babur 3. Construct a few a various spots in EEZ designed to be controlled from land, ship, and/or air and equipped with Missiles and torpedos. Littered around the EEZ they will make a dangerous web when linked to surface, air and sub assets in the A2/AD setting

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IblinI

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> I think the point was in the context of small ships (less than 2,000 ton displacement, shorter than 90 m in length). So, such ships -- e.g., fast attack crafts, corvettes, etc -- should have a specialized role, not be overloaded with too many subsystems.


Bro, this is exactly what our navy is doing right now, just take a look at Type 056, Type 054A as an example, even some Chinese military fans complained about the lack of fire power on the Type 056 and Type 054A when they compared them with Russian convertte.
I can't say the same for Russian though as they are currently only building converrte and frigate so armed them to the teeth seems to be the only option.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tank131

YuChen said:


> Bro, this is exactly what our navy is doing right now, just take a look at Type 056, Type 054A as an example, even some Chinese military fans complained about the lack of fire power on the Type 056 and Type 054A when they compared them with Russian convertte.
> I can't say the same for Russian though as they are currently only building converrte and frigate so armed them to the teeth seems to be the only option.


The issue is the weaponry. That is why i have been saying the quad packed medium range missile is so important. They are force multipliers because they enable better defense while freeing up space for more offensive weapons. If you look at the Gremyashchiy class 2500t corvette they are brimming with firepower. They carry 8 Kalibr LACM/AShM in VLS upfront and they have two 8 celk vls in the back for Redut (naval redut is th 9m96e with 60km range and is quad packable which means they could theoretically carry up to 64 Medium range missiles) and they still have 2 AK-630 CIWS. That is all thanks to the quad packablity of the SAM. I think thr Type 054 could be a similar beast with evem more firepower but the right weaponry isnt available. Having a quad packed medium range SAM (maybe based on DK-10) would enable you to free up 16 VLS cells up front (while still having 64 medium ranged SAMs). While already carrying 6-8 AShM/LACM in the current location, you could get an additional weapons such as long range SAMs, ASROCs, or more ASHM/LACM in those vls. Personally i would put 10 long range SAM like Hq-9 and then 6 AROC while maintaining 8 AShM/LACM in the middle of the ship as currently structured.

-6-8 Harba
-10 HQ-9 if PN could get them
- 6 CY-5 Asroc
- 64 quad packed medium ranged SAM
- torpedos
- 2 Type 1130 CIWS (with addition of 6 HQ-10 each (total 12 missiles).

That is a good volume of firepower fkr a 4000t ship.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MM_Haider

https://dailytimes.com.pk/541148/co...an-navy-promoted-to-the-rank-of-rear-admiral/ 

it looks like Zafar Abbasi is hell bent to bring his clan "Abbasi" dudes to top .. such nepotism will ruin Navy.. someone please stop it before it is too late...


----------



## LKJ86

Tank131 said:


> -10 HQ-9 if PN could get them


I think you had missed the huge Type 346A AESA radars for HHQ-9.








YuChen said:


> Bro, this is exactly what our navy is doing right now, just take a look at Type 056, Type 054A as an example, even some Chinese military fans complained about the lack of fire power on the Type 056 and Type 054A when they compared them with Russian convertte.
> I can't say the same for Russian though as they are currently only building converrte and frigate so armed them to the teeth seems to be the only option.


China would have a huge number of Type 055 DDG and Type 052D DDG, but what does Russia have?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ahmet Pasha

LHDs with VTOL fighters and helos.
Along with an expeditionary marine force.


----------



## xyxmt

aziqbal said:


> As far back as I can remember the navy has not had such a procurement bonanza for decades if ever, so heres a list
> 
> 4 x MILGEM 2,300 ton corvettes steel for first unit cut 29th Sep 2019 with 54 month delivery time for first unit so around Spring 2024
> 
> 4 x Type 054AP 4,000+ ton frigates steel for second unit cut 20th Dec 2018 and all 4 due to be handed over by 2021
> 
> 8 x S20 2,800 ton SSK due between 2021-2028
> 
> 2 x OPV 2,300 ton from Damen first launched in May 2019 both due to be handed over in 2020
> 
> 3,000 Ton Oceanographic vessel launched in Dec 2018 by China due to be handed over soon
> 
> thats 19 units over 55,000 tons of warships and submarines coming between 2019-2028 or 10 years with average of 2 per year
> 
> For missiles
> 
> Second strike Babur III, Coastal defence Zarb and JF17 with anti-ship missiles 2 squadrons
> 
> Good times ahead and plenty to watch



big question is, and before any Indian member asks....Paisa kahan se aye ga


----------



## Ahmet Pasha

So what will PN total strength be after 2023???


----------



## Haris Ali2140

xyxmt said:


> big question is, and before any Indian member asks....Paisa kahan se aye ga


These procurements have passed that stage.


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

aziqbal said:


> 2 x OPV 2,300 ton from Damen first launched in May 2019 both due to be handed over in 2020


Types of weapons on them?



Tank131 said:


> The issue is the weaponry. That is why i have been saying the quad packed medium range missile is so important. They are force multipliers because they enable better defense while freeing up space for more offensive weapons. If you look at the Gremyashchiy class 2500t corvette they are brimming with firepower. They carry 8 Kalibr LACM/AShM in VLS upfront and they have two 8 celk vls in the back for Redut (naval redut is th 9m96e with 60km range and is quad packable which means they could theoretically carry up to 64 Medium range missiles) and they still have 2 AK-630 CIWS. That is all thanks to the quad packablity of the SAM. I think thr Type 054 could be a similar beast with evem more firepower but the right weaponry isnt available. Having a quad packed medium range SAM (maybe based on DK-10) would enable you to free up 16 VLS cells up front (while still having 64 medium ranged SAMs). While already carrying 6-8 AShM/LACM in the current location, you could get an additional weapons such as long range SAMs, ASROCs, or more ASHM/LACM in those vls. Personally i would put 10 long range SAM like Hq-9 and then 6 AROC while maintaining 8 AShM/LACM in the middle of the ship as currently structured.
> 
> -6-8 Harba
> -10 HQ-9 if PN could get them
> - 6 CY-5 Asroc
> - 64 quad packed medium ranged SAM
> - torpedos
> - 2 Type 1130 CIWS (with addition of 6 HQ-10 each (total 12 missiles).
> 
> That is a good volume of firepower fkr a 4000t ship.


U need to get Destroyers then. Destroyers are mainly for Air Defence


----------



## SD 10

Ahmet Pasha said:


> LHDs with VTOL fighters and helos.
> Along with an expeditionary marine force.


not needed.


----------



## Ahmet Pasha

Until the Indians/Goras do it then all top brass will be rushing to do same and begging US Congres, LM Boeing, Bell, Sikorsky etc. What a joke.


SD 10 said:


> not needed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tank131

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Types of weapons on them?
> 
> 
> U need to get Destroyers then. Destroyers are mainly for Air Defence


That is definitely true but the issue is cost benefits. For a destroyer like 052D to be effective, it needs to have effective picket ships (frigates with adequate medium to long range sams). Otherwise it will be easier to overwhelm the destroyers defenses. The cost of the 052D is ~$550-600M per ship which is fairly reasonable for its capabilities, but previously PN didn't have the requisite ships to help protect it. I think though with the defense budget where it is i would try to make an air defense frigate out if the type 054A. It can be equipped with far surprerior radars and Hq-9s if there was a quad packed medium range missile to back them up (16 HQ-9 and 32-64 quad packed medium SAMs).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

Tank131 said:


> it needs to have effective picket ships (frigates with adequate medium to long range sams)


India has 11 destroyers and just 14 frigates


----------



## Ultima Thule

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> India has 11 destroyers and just 14 frigates


He is right we need area defense naval ship at long ranges like type 52D


----------



## CHI RULES

seven0seven said:


> He is right we need area defense naval ship at long ranges like type 52D


Pakistan should have whole package including Typ 54 P and corvettes with medium range SAMs along with on or two heavy destroyers in medium to long term. So far China do not have VLS system for small ships which can accommodate HQ9 missile. 
May be Pak with help of Turkey or China should start it's own SAM program both for land and Sea at least in short to medium category.


----------



## LKJ86

CHI RULES said:


> So far China do not have VLS system for small ships which can accommodate HQ9 missile.


Why do you only consider the HHQ-9 missile, and forget the radar system and others that it needs?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

CHI RULES said:


> Pakistan should have whole package including Typ 54 P and corvettes with medium range SAMs along with on or two heavy destroyers in medium to long term. So far China do not have VLS system for small ships which can accommodate HQ9 missile.
> May be Pak with help of Turkey or China should start it's own SAM program both for land and Sea at least in short to medium category.


VLS system coming on type 54 P aka type 54 a HHQ16 with VLS system on type 54 P


----------



## LKJ86

seven0seven said:


> VLS system coming on type 54 P aka type 54 a HHQ16 with VLS system on type 54 P


There is no HHQ-16, but HQ-16.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## CHI RULES

LKJ86 said:


> Why do you only consider the HHQ-9 missile, and forget the radar system and others that it needs?


Sir every aspect is interconnected. Please comment on Radar why the radar of Type54 cannot handle HQ9 missile.


----------



## khanasifm

LKJ86 said:


> There is no HHQ-16, but HQ-16.



Hhq-16 is naval variant 


http://www.military-today.com/missiles/hq16.htm


----------



## LKJ86

khanasifm said:


> Hhq-16 is naval variant
> 
> 
> http://www.military-today.com/missiles/hq16.htm


No.
HQ-16 and HQ-16C are ship-based variants, while HQ-16A and HQ-16B are land-based variants.



CHI RULES said:


> Sir every aspect is interconnected. Please comment on Radar why the radar of Type54 cannot handle HQ9 missile.


Would you choose JF-17 BLK I/II to launch PL-15?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CHI RULES

LKJ86 said:


> No.
> HQ-16 and HQ-16C are ship-based variants, while HQ-16A and HQ-16B are land-based variants.
> 
> 
> Would you choose JF-17 BLK I/II to launch PL-15?



There are rumors that Blk-II are armed with PL-15. Can't comment on that, however if not installed it has to be related to the weight issues of missile and limited radar capabilities of block-II.
however I believe that up coming radar on Type 54 P should be able to track Arial targets up to 200 KM. Then why it can't handle HQ9 export version I believe has max range up to 200KM or less with Active Radar Homing.
Please elaborate for ordinary people like me.


----------



## Tank131

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> India has 11 destroyers and just 14 frigates



To be honest India, much like Pakistan labels its ships with semantics rather than capabilities. India actually (capabilities wise) has 9 destroyers (Kolkata (3) Dehli (3 and Shivalik (3 but they label them as frigates)) and 14 Frigates (Rajput (4 which they label destroyers) Talwar (6-actually a heavy frigate), Brahmaputra (3), and Godavari (1)). Most of these also focus on Antiship and land attack with really only Kolkatas offering reasonable long range (100km Barak 8) air defense while the others carry either short range defense (12km Barak 1 or 15km S-125M) or medium range defese (Shtils which are essentially the same as HQ-16-40KM). Many of their more modern ships (Kolkatas, Dehlis, Shivaliks and Talwars) carry hosts of both Antiship and Air defense missiles and as such should be able to reliably operate independently and in conjunction as part of a CBG providing multi tier defense. To that end PN needs weapons that can both outrange (Harba) their AShMs and overwhelm their defenses (such as a hypersonic missile like CM-400AKG or its YJ-12 Equivalent). They also hace to have enough defensive chops to to overcome Saturation attacks from these vessels which all carry a combo of at least 16 Barhamos/Styx AShM. That means catch brahmos with enough time to take it out (the longer the range and more weapons at each ships disposale the better).

So when we talk about 052D which has 64 cells (probably 16 cells used by YJ-18, 8 cells for CY-5, AND 40 cells for Hq-9) and 24 cells FL-3000N, they would by a good margin be the most powerful ships in South Asia (Kolkata has 48cells for 32 Barak-8 and 16 Brahmos). But even with 40 missiles at 200km, the 2-4 052D wont be enough to significantly move the needle. Now add those 4 Type 054A and you start to create a multilevel defense. If the MILGEM can get 16 cells equipped with quad packed CAMM-ER (45-80KM range) for 64 missiles and you MLU the F-22Ps with new radar amd GENSIS Advent CMS and an 8-16 cells vls also armed with CAMM-ER (32-64 missiles) now you have a very potent defense. So yes, destroyers are a key part of a fleet defense but even the 052D wont be enough without effective picket ships.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

LKJ86 said:


> Would you choose JF-17 BLK I/II to launch PL-15?


Replace KLJ7 with LK601E and you are ready to go


----------



## Tipu7

Tank131 said:


> If the MILGEM can get 16 cells equipped with quad packed CAMM-ER (45-80KM range) for 64 missiles and you MLU the F-22Ps with new radar amd GENSIS Advent CMS and an 8-16 cells vls also armed with CAMM-ER (32-64 missiles)


Is it an assessment or news update? Because I have never heard about CAMM-ER becoming part of J-class or F22P-MLU.


----------



## Tank131

Tipu7 said:


> Is it an assessment or news update? Because I have never heard about CAMM-ER becoming part of J-class or F22P-MLU.


Assessment only. There are reports of Pakistan being interested in CAMM-ER once Italy announced they will pursue its development, but that is it. My suspicion is that they would choose it for MILGEM (J-class) if available because currently China is causing a little difficulty regarding equipping HQ-16 on MILGEMs.

https://www.defense-aerospace.com/a...-funding-for-camm-er-air_defense-missile.html

https://www.defenseworld.net/news/25940/Tests_of_MBDA_s_CAMM_ER_for_EMADS_System_Complete


----------



## HRK

Plans to induct UCAVs in Pakistan Navy

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SBUS-CXK

Tank131 said:


> Assessment only. There are reports of Pakistan being interested in CAMM-ER once Italy announced they will pursue its development, but that is it. My suspicion is that they would choose it for MILGEM (J-class) if available because currently China is causing a little difficulty regarding equipping HQ-16 on MILGEMs.
> 
> https://www.defense-aerospace.com/a...-funding-for-camm-er-air_defense-missile.html
> 
> https://www.defenseworld.net/news/25940/Tests_of_MBDA_s_CAMM_ER_for_EMADS_System_Complete


Why do we need to install the HQ-16 to MILGEM? and now MILGEM has VLS?

as I know. nntil now. Turkish warships still do not have any VLS. so this is not our problem.


----------



## fatman17

Tipu7 said:


> Swiftclass vessels.
> New Midget subs.
> 
> 
> Timings are correct. It's not wise to call PN MILGEMs as corvettes. Their firepower will surpass several frigates currently operational in South Asia.



Swift class not coming but working on a new project with the manufacturer of Swift Class

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Tipu7 said:


> Swiftclass vessels.
> New Midget subs.
> 
> 
> Timings are correct. It's not wise to call PN MILGEMs as corvettes. Their firepower will surpass several frigates currently operational in South Asia.





fatman17 said:


> Swift class not coming but working on a new project with the manufacturer of Swift Class


In 2016 the PN floated a tender for a OPV built to commercial standards, but configurable with AShM and other weapons. Damen Shipyards Group (DSG) and Swiftships were shortlisted, and DSG won the contract. 

The PN's "corvette" requirement stipulated 2 ships plus an option for 2 more. So, I expect we'll see a follow-on order for 2 additional Damen OPV 1900-based "corvettes" soon, and to be built in Pakistan. We might try to pull DSG into investing in Gwadar Shipyards as a part of this process (offset basically). 

That said, seeing how each of these ships probably costs $75 m per vessel, and how they can keep the 'frigates' away from 'maritime security' operations (e.g., policing, anti-piracy, HADR, CT, etc), there's a possibility of the PN getting more of these OPVs.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

The OPV platform appears decent 4 additional ships would be welcomed 3 made overseas and 1 in local yards

The multi-purpose nature of ships (Anti Narcotics ops , Rescue , Ship vs Ship battle) all make it a viable platform

The only negative aspect perhaps is the cannon which is very light

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tank131

SBUS-CXK said:


> Why do we need to install the HQ-16 to MILGEM? and now MILGEM has VLS?
> 
> as I know. nntil now. Turkish warships still do not have any VLS. so this is not our problem.



Im not sure what your question is...Are you asking why China needs to allow integration of HQ-16 into MILGEM as it is a Turkish design or are you asking how it can be installed because MILGEM doesnt have VLS?

The second part is the easiest...PN MILGEM/ADA class will actually be larger than those operated by the Turks. It will be approximately 10m larger according to some reports and will support a 16 cell VLS, so theoretically, it will be able to field HQ-16. They will be known as the Jinnah Class Frigates.

As for why China needs to allow the integration...it doesnt need to. The PN has requested China to allow it to integrate HQ-16 on Jinnah Class as it currently wants to operate HQ-16 as its standard naval missile. China can consider it or refuse it up to its own desires, no one can demand anything of China. But why China would want to allow its integration is that it further moves PN down the line as far as the HQ-16 being the standard missile for all PN ships. What is to say that if PN gets another missile for MILGEM that during an F-22P MLU, they dont choose that missile instead? Plus, there is little to no risk to allow PN to integrate the missile onto MILGEM except that Turkey is a NATO member. That however, didnt seem to be a big deal to Russia vis a vis the S400, nor was it a big deal to China when it wanted to sell Turkey the HQ-9, so I doubt it will be a big deal here. The only issue China will have is why PN didnt go to China for its ships (for example, why not more Type 054A frigate). The answer simply is this is a much smaller and less expensive ship to operate and China has nothing of a similar class unless it further develops the Type 053, for which there are some designs available, but nothing off the drawing board. For PN it is also about diversifying supply chain.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

SBUS-CXK said:


> Why do we need to install the HQ-16 to MILGEM? and now MILGEM has VLS?
> 
> as I know. nntil now. Turkish warships still do not have any VLS. so this is not our problem.


Pakistan's MILGEM is a custom version with VLS (officially confirmed). 

The frontrunner for the MILGEM/Jinnah-class' VLS is LY80.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SBUS-CXK

Tank131 said:


> Im not sure what your question is...Are you asking why China needs to allow integration of HQ-16 into MILGEM as it is a Turkish design or are you asking how it can be installed because MILGEM doesnt have VLS?
> 
> The second part is the easiest...PN MILGEM/ADA class will actually be larger than those operated by the Turks. It will be approximately 10m larger according to some reports and will support a 16 cell VLS, so theoretically, it will be able to field HQ-16. They will be known as the Jinnah Class Frigates.
> 
> As for why China needs to allow the integration...it doesnt need to. The PN has requested China to allow it to integrate HQ-16 on Jinnah Class as it currently wants to operate HQ-16 as its standard naval missile. China can consider it or refuse it up to its own desires, no one can demand anything of China. But why China would want to allow its integration is that it further moves PN down the line as far as the HQ-16 being the standard missile for all PN ships. What is to say that if PN gets another missile for MILGEM that during an F-22P MLU, they dont choose that missile instead? Plus, there is little to no risk to allow PN to integrate the missile onto MILGEM except that Turkey is a NATO member. That however, didnt seem to be a big deal to Russia vis a vis the S400, nor was it a big deal to China when it wanted to sell Turkey the HQ-9, so I doubt it will be a big deal here. The only issue China will have is why PN didnt go to China for its ships (for example, why not more Type 054A frigate). The answer simply is this is a much smaller and less expensive ship to operate and China has nothing of a similar class unless it further develops the Type 053, for which there are some designs available, but nothing off the drawing board. For PN it is also about diversifying supply chain.


*Sorry, I don't discuss politics. I only look at reality（only discuss reality）.*

my question is simple. Turkish frigate had VLS? you know HQ16 is a very mature weapon. It is generally equipped with type 054, type 052c, type 052d, and type 055. do we really need to develop VLS for small frigates?—— OK. Now China agrees to equip the HQ16 to the Turkish frigate (I strongly support it). but where is the VLS of the Turkish frigate? or is it just PPT?

We should ask Turkish friends. when can i see your VLS? or let China help Turkish frigates develop VLS?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

SBUS-CXK said:


> *Sorry, I don't discuss politics. I only look at reality（only discuss reality）.*
> 
> my question is simple. Turkish frigate had VLS? you know HQ16 is a very mature weapon. It is generally equipped with type 054, type 052c, type 052d, and type 055. do we really need to develop VLS for small frigates?—— OK. Now China agrees to equip the HQ16 to the Turkish frigate (I strongly support it). but where is the VLS of the Turkish frigate? or is it just PPT?
> 
> We should ask Turkish friends. when can i see your VLS? or let China help Turkish frigates develop VLS?


Not only we need to develop VLS but need to develop VLS which can carry Cruise Missiles even we should try have that kind of VLS on both Type 54 and MILGEM


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

We need to have 6 Destroyers armed with HHQ 9 to give Long range Air Defence to our Ships



fatman17 said:


> working on a new project with the manufacturer of Swift Class


Is it a Corvette?


----------



## SBUS-CXK

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Pakistan's MILGEM is a custom version with VLS (officially confirmed).
> 
> The frontrunner for the MILGEM/Jinnah-class' VLS is LY80.


Sorry, I searched Google and Baidu，even Bing.

Only found this (or similar).






No Turkish VLS like this.





Sorry, I just discuss reality.

@Tank131 friend. I think China is willing to install HQ16 on Turkish frigates. but......


----------



## Ultima Thule

SBUS-CXK said:


> Sorry, I searched Google and Baidu，even Bing.
> 
> Only found this (or similar).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No Turkish VLS like this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, I just discuss reality.
> 
> @Tank131 friend. I think China is willing to install HQ16 on Turkish frigates. but......


What BUT care to explain??


----------



## SBUS-CXK

seven0seven said:


> What BUT care to explain??


bro. How do I install HQ16 to a PPT?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

SBUS-CXK said:


> Sorry, I searched Google and Baidu，even Bing.
> 
> Only found this (or similar).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No Turkish VLS like this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, I just discuss reality.
> 
> @Tank131 friend. I think China is willing to install HQ16 on Turkish frigates. but......













_Within the scope of the AMAN-2019 Exercise, which was hosted by the Pakistan Navy on February 8-12, 2019, in the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean with the participation of Defence Turkey Magazine as a special guest, Pakistan Navy (PN) Commander Admiral ABBASI visited the TCG Gökçeada Frigate and announced that Jinnah Class Corvettes (Pakistan Navy classifies them as Corvettes) will be equipped with a Vertical Launching System (VLS). However, he did not share any information about the number of ships to be equipped with the VLS. *The ship image, which was shown at the PN MİLGEM Project 1st Steel Cutting Ceremony on September 29, 2019, featured two 8-cell Vertical Launching System (VLS) modules behind the main cannon *as well as an Aselsan GÖKDENİZ Close-in Weapon System (CIWS) where the RIM-116 Mk49 Lancer is located. We also learned that there would be some differences in the design of the fourth Jinnah Class Frigate. Pakistani engineers and technicians who will begin on-the-job training during the construction of the first ship are expected to acquire the necessary know-how to make changes to the ADA Class Corvette design until the construction of the fourth ship. It was also stated that the fourth vessel would be designed jointly, and it will also be the first frigate designed by Pakistan with its own means. *Due to VLS integration, the Jinnah Class will be longer and heavier than the ADA Class.*

It is considered that the propulsion system to be used in Jinnah Class Frigates, which will be shaped according to the requirements of the Pakistan Navy, will include only diesel engines and not the LM2500 gas turbine. ADA Class Corvettes can reach a maximum speed of 31 knots with their propulsion system in the Combined Diesel and Gas (CODAG) configuration, which consists of two 32MW diesel engines and a gas turbine, while the maximum cruising speed of the Jinnah Class is 26 knots. We learned that the Jinnah Class Frigates will accommodate an additional 40 personnel compared to the ADA Class, and include ablution rooms and a small mosque. Unlike the ADA Class, which can stay at sea for 10 days, the Jinnah Class Frigates will be able to stay at sea for 15 days, and the ships will be armed with Chinese C-802 guided anti-ship missiles instead of Harpoon or ATMACA missiles. The Pakistan Navy is also expected to place the Harba Anti-ship Cruise Missile in the Jinnah Class vessels in the future. As noted above, the RIM-116B (Block 1A) Rolling Airframe Missiles (RAM) and the 21-cell Mk 49 Mod 3 Guided Missile Launching System (GMLS) located on the helicopter hangar, will be replaced with 20mm Phalanx or Aselsan product 35mm GÖKDENİZ CIWS. *The ships will also be equipped with two 8-cell VLS, which can launch LY-80/HHQ-16 Medium Range Air Defence Missiles. The Jinnah Class Frigates will also incorporate several critical sub-systems of the ADA Class Corvette. *Some of those are the Havelsan ADVENT Combat Management System (CMS), Aselsan ARES-2N ESM (ships are also expected to use AREAS-2NC ECM System), HIZIR Torpedo Countermeasure System, SMART-S Mk2 3D Search Radar, YALTES product EPKİS Integrated Platform Management System, and the Meteksan Defence product the YAKAMOS Hull-Mounted Sonar System. The Jinnah Class Frigates will also be equipped with the Naval Information Exchange System (NIXS) developed by MilSoft for the Pakistan Navy and the indigenous data-link system “Link Green.” The Pakistan Navy has established a nationwide communication infrastructure called RedLine to enable communication between NIXS-equipped platforms. 
_
https://www.defenceturkey.com/en/content/a-look-at-latest-status-of-the-pn-milgem-project-3824​

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## khanasifm



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

SBUS-CXK said:


> bro. How do I install HQ16 to a PPT?


Through innovation, @Bilal Khan (Quwa) already prove that MEGLIM will have 16 HQ-16


----------



## maverick1977

What are the plans for Pakistan Marines. Its 1 Division Strength force of 15K troops. Shouldnt they be armed with Wasp Class carriers with battalion size force for amphibious landings with VTOLs/Attacks helis on deck, to open a new front lets stay in gujrat and mumbai. ?


----------



## SBUS-CXK

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> _Within the scope of the AMAN-2019 Exercise, which was hosted by the Pakistan Navy on February 8-12, 2019, in the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean with the participation of Defence Turkey Magazine as a special guest, Pakistan Navy (PN) Commander Admiral ABBASI visited the TCG Gökçeada Frigate and announced that Jinnah Class Corvettes (Pakistan Navy classifies them as Corvettes) will be equipped with a Vertical Launching System (VLS). However, he did not share any information about the number of ships to be equipped with the VLS. *The ship image, which was shown at the PN MİLGEM Project 1st Steel Cutting Ceremony on September 29, 2019, featured two 8-cell Vertical Launching System (VLS) modules behind the main cannon *as well as an Aselsan GÖKDENİZ Close-in Weapon System (CIWS) where the RIM-116 Mk49 Lancer is located. We also learned that there would be some differences in the design of the fourth Jinnah Class Frigate. Pakistani engineers and technicians who will begin on-the-job training during the construction of the first ship are expected to acquire the necessary know-how to make changes to the ADA Class Corvette design until the construction of the fourth ship. It was also stated that the fourth vessel would be designed jointly, and it will also be the first frigate designed by Pakistan with its own means. *Due to VLS integration, the Jinnah Class will be longer and heavier than the ADA Class.*
> 
> It is considered that the propulsion system to be used in Jinnah Class Frigates, which will be shaped according to the requirements of the Pakistan Navy, will include only diesel engines and not the LM2500 gas turbine. ADA Class Corvettes can reach a maximum speed of 31 knots with their propulsion system in the Combined Diesel and Gas (CODAG) configuration, which consists of two 32MW diesel engines and a gas turbine, while the maximum cruising speed of the Jinnah Class is 26 knots. We learned that the Jinnah Class Frigates will accommodate an additional 40 personnel compared to the ADA Class, and include ablution rooms and a small mosque. Unlike the ADA Class, which can stay at sea for 10 days, the Jinnah Class Frigates will be able to stay at sea for 15 days, and the ships will be armed with Chinese C-802 guided anti-ship missiles instead of Harpoon or ATMACA missiles. The Pakistan Navy is also expected to place the Harba Anti-ship Cruise Missile in the Jinnah Class vessels in the future. As noted above, the RIM-116B (Block 1A) Rolling Airframe Missiles (RAM) and the 21-cell Mk 49 Mod 3 Guided Missile Launching System (GMLS) located on the helicopter hangar, will be replaced with 20mm Phalanx or Aselsan product 35mm GÖKDENİZ CIWS. *The ships will also be equipped with two 8-cell VLS, which can launch LY-80/HHQ-16 Medium Range Air Defence Missiles. The Jinnah Class Frigates will also incorporate several critical sub-systems of the ADA Class Corvette. *Some of those are the Havelsan ADVENT Combat Management System (CMS), Aselsan ARES-2N ESM (ships are also expected to use AREAS-2NC ECM System), HIZIR Torpedo Countermeasure System, SMART-S Mk2 3D Search Radar, YALTES product EPKİS Integrated Platform Management System, and the Meteksan Defence product the YAKAMOS Hull-Mounted Sonar System. The Jinnah Class Frigates will also be equipped with the Naval Information Exchange System (NIXS) developed by MilSoft for the Pakistan Navy and the indigenous data-link system “Link Green.” The Pakistan Navy has established a nationwide communication infrastructure called RedLine to enable communication between NIXS-equipped platforms.
> _
> https://www.defenceturkey.com/en/content/a-look-at-latest-status-of-the-pn-milgem-project-3824​


bro. they cut steel plates from 2019. so when can we see the Turkish frigate VLS? When was HQ16 installed on a Turkish frigate? This should ask Turkey.

@seven0seven

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

SBUS-CXK said:


> bro. they cut steel plates from 2019. so when can we see the Turkish frigate VLS? When was HQ16 installed on a Turkish frigate? This should ask Turkey.
> 
> @seven0seven


I don't know but ask senior and professional members here like @Tank131 @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @Rashid Mahmood

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

SBUS-CXK said:


> bro. they cut steel plates from 2019. so when can we see the Turkish frigate VLS? When was HQ16 installed on a Turkish frigate? This should ask Turkey.
> 
> @seven0seven


You'll see the first ship in 2022/2023.


----------



## Tank131

SBUS-CXK said:


> *Sorry, I don't discuss politics. I only look at reality（only discuss reality）.*
> 
> my question is simple. Turkish frigate had VLS? you know HQ16 is a very mature weapon. It is generally equipped with type 054, type 052c, type 052d, and type 055. do we really need to develop VLS for small frigates?—— OK. Now China agrees to equip the HQ16 to the Turkish frigate (I strongly support it). but where is the VLS of the Turkish frigate? or is it just PPT?
> 
> We should ask Turkish friends. when can i see your VLS? or let China help Turkish frigates develop VLS?





SBUS-CXK said:


> bro. they cut steel plates from 2019. so when can we see the Turkish frigate VLS? When was HQ16 installed on a Turkish frigate? This should ask Turkey.



I think i see the issue here. Turkish variant does not have VLS and you are asking where/why is China going to fit a vls into MILGEM as Turkey currently has it. Is that accurate? 

The issue is supposedly solved. Turkey has already put out a scale model showing the ship is elongated by 10m with additional space between the main gun and bridge which has space for 2 8-cell vls. The space is already there in the modified variant being built for PN (it is essentially a modified MILGEM which puts it between ADA and MILGEM-G/MILGEM2 in size). Now whether the VLS unit itself is from China or not and whether the HQ-16 equips it is only going to be seen in the future, but the designs revealed by Turkey clearly show 2 VLS units for a total of 16 cells. 





Jinnah Class model showing 16 VLS cells up front, and Gokdeniz CIWS in rear (personally would prefer Pantsir-M or Type 1130 with 6 HQ-10). They are marked with Pakistani flags indicating. 

Vs





MILGEM/ADA class corvette with no VLS, and a 21 cell RAM launcher in the rear instead of the Gokdeniz CIWS found on the Jinnah class.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

We should order 4 more , since the ship seems to be a good fit for our needs
Why delay in a good project ?






3 Ships made overseas , would be built with nice pace and we can fix up the local yard to build 1 model for TOT

The Size and capabilities are greater then Azmat class which is a fast attack ship

Small boat launcher at back is a nice design together with housing a anti-submarine hunter helicopter

4 More ships would be an ideal fit


For us the Milgem Project / Damen ship project were done almost same time but the Damen ships are already finished

I think the Milgem project was finalized a bit , tiny bit later

Damen were pretty much a dark horse to win the bid , considering how hard they worked to get it launched so quickly


4th Azmat Shipt : Took Pakistan 3 to 3.5 years to make 1 small missile boat
2 Damen Ships : Took Damen , 1.5 years to make
4 Milgem Ships : *Need 60 Months* to complete


Cost for 1 ship is same as the amount of money paid for JUI-F Diesal , bill for Lasi annually

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cabatli_53

SBUS-CXK said:


> *Sorry, I don't discuss politics. I only look at reality（only discuss reality）.*
> 
> my question is simple. Turkish frigate had VLS? you know HQ16 is a very mature weapon. It is generally equipped with type 054, type 052c, type 052d, and type 055. do we really need to develop VLS for small frigates?—— OK. Now China agrees to equip the HQ16 to the Turkish frigate (I strongly support it). but where is the VLS of the Turkish frigate? or is it just PPT?
> 
> We should ask Turkish friends. when can i see your VLS? or let China help Turkish frigates develop VLS?




It is not help my friend but trade. Noone ask you to help for construction of VLS or missiles but to sell missiles in exchange of money. There are other alternatives If you refuse Pakistani request. Otherwise, Do not suppose any Chinese technicians will be allowed to approach the combat management system of ship while integration activities of your missiles are being carried out. 

Turkish MIDAS VLS is in trials





G-40 is being developed for the request of Navy. This naval missile will be the direct competitor of CAMM and ESSM-2. It is expected that we will see first launching in a short time. 

Cold launch
Active radar seeker (used on Gökdoğan BVR missile) + datalink
The range more than 40km
Quad-packing capability, smaller size with folded wings. 






Tübitak SAGE cold launch trials

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SBUS-CXK

cabatli_53 said:


> It is not help my friend but trade. Noone ask you to help for construction of VLS or missiles but to sell missiles in exchange of money. There are other alternatives If you refuse Pakistani request. Otherwise, Do not suppose any Chinese technicians will be allowed to approach the combat management system of ship while integration activities of your missiles are being carried out.
> 
> Turkish MIDAS VLS is in trials
> View attachment 607297
> 
> 
> G-40 is being developed for the request of Navy. This naval missile will be the direct competitor of CAMM and ESSM-2. It is expected that we will see first launching in a short time.
> 
> Cold launch
> Active radar seeker (used on Gökdoğan BVR missile) + datalink
> The range more than 40km
> Quad-packing capability, smaller size with folded wings.
> 
> View attachment 607300
> 
> 
> Tübitak SAGE cold launch trials


Turkish friend. i know you have many plans. but i am more concerned with reality. there is a maturity period for any weapon. we Chinese usually think it is at least 2-3 years. it requires many tests under complex conditions. such as China. we can build many 052D and 055 at the same time. but it still has to undergo rigorous testing before it can serve.

Making a weapon seems simple. But we need rigor and prudence. Don't talk about models and PPT.

I look forward to China-Turkey defense cooperation. well, 2022. I should be able to see China's electromagnetic catapult in type 003.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## StormBreaker

SBUS-CXK said:


> Turkish friend. i know you have many plans. but i am more concerned with reality. there is a maturity period for any weapon. we Chinese usually think it is at least 2-3 years. it requires many tests under complex conditions. such as China. we can build many 052D and 055 at the same time. but it still has to undergo rigorous testing before it can serve.
> 
> Making a weapon seems simple. But we need rigor and prudence. Don't talk about models and PPT.
> 
> I look forward to China-Turkey defense cooperation. well, 2022. I should be able to see China's electromagnetic catapult in type 003.


What is significant about 2022 ?


----------



## SBUS-CXK

StormBreaker said:


> What is significant about 2022 ?


Because in 2022. Turkey's first frigate will be delivered to Pakistan, I also hope that the HQ16 can be equipped to a Turkish frigate.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## StormBreaker

SBUS-CXK said:


> Because in 2022. Turkey's first frigate will be delivered to Pakistan, I also hope that the HQ16 can be equipped to a Turkish frigate.


Corvette*


----------



## Tank131

StormBreaker said:


> Corvette*


No, in PN it will be called a frigate. It is afterall nearly 3000t and will be far more capable than the F-22P in virtually every way.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## StormBreaker

Tank131 said:


> No, in PN it will be called a frigate. It is afterall nearly 3000t and will be far more capable than the F-22P in virtually every way.


I am drooling


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Tank131 said:


> No, in PN it will be called a frigate. It is afterall nearly 3000t and will be far more capable than the F-22P in virtually every way.


Yep. The PN is referring to the MILGEM as the Jinnah-class frigate. That said, the 4th ship is still a mystery. We now know the first 3 will have VLS, but the 4th is apparently a Pakistani design with Turkish assistance. It could be end-to-end construction without OEM-supplied material kits (so Pakistan would select suppliers itself and construct the ship with internally made documentation). So, an additional design element may come.

That said, it'd be nice if we could design a low-cost multi-mission corvette, e.g., AShW, ASW, and AAW via VLS and SR/MR-SAMs.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## StormBreaker

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Yep. The PN is referring to the MILGEM as the Jinnah-class frigate. That said, the 4th ship is still a mystery. We now know the first 3 will have VLS, but the 4th is apparently a Pakistani design with Turkish assistance. It could be end-to-end construction without OEM-supplied material kits (so Pakistan would select suppliers itself and construct the ship with internally made documentation). So, an additional design element may come.
> 
> That said, it'd be nice if we could design a low-cost multi-mission corvette, e.g., AShW, ASW, and AAW via VLS and SR/MR-SAMs.


If what you are suggesting is actually what might happen, then I won’t be surprised to see further production of the 4th ship in KSEW or Gwadar in future...


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

StormBreaker said:


> If what you are suggesting is actually what might happen, then I won’t be surprised to see further production of the 4th ship in KSEW or Gwadar in future...


The 3rd and 4th MILGEM/J-Class will be built in Pakistan, likely KSEW (since its capacity is expanding thanks to the lift/shift system its getting from Norway). 

I think Gwadar (if they actually complete it) will build commercial ships, and likely under a mix of government, private sector, etc ownership (so, we might see multiple shipyards in just Gwadar alone).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

Any plan to get Destroyers with Long Range SAMs?? Thats what we need


----------



## cabatli_53

SBUS-CXK said:


> i know you have many plans. but i am more concerned with reality. there is a maturity period for any weapon. we Chinese usually think it is at least 2-3 years. it requires many tests under complex conditions. such as China. we can build many 052D and 055 at the same time. but it still has to undergo rigorous testing before it can serve.



Indeed, I am trying to tell something that will be a reality in a short time because What I have introduced above will be integrated on I-class frigates as well. Their production is proceeding in military shipyard at present. We will see national VLS with national missiles on these ships. Turkish warships will fire not only G-40 missiles but also Hisar-A (passed serial production), Hisar-O+ (It will pass into production at the end of this year) and Siper long altitude SAM(2022-23) missile system. Turkish industry has reached a high level maturity to supply a warship from top to down. Be it striking or defensive missile systems, torpedos, sensors...etc Quality standards of our products can not be hidden since Pakistan will be the first hand user/tester of Turkish naval subsystems in many different naval platforms. Same country is operating Chinese naval platforms as well. Their feedbacks and comparison will be shared on these pages when the time came. 

I Class frigate- planned launch date for first frigate, 2021-2022.





Barbaros Class MLU upgrade - planned launch date for first frigate, 2022.





Project TF2000 - planned launch date for first destroyer, 2025-2026

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

cabatli_53 said:


> Indeed, I am trying to tell something that will be a reality in a short time because What I have introduced above will be integrated on I-class frigates as well. Their production is proceeding in military shipyard at present. We will see national VLS with national missiles on these ships. Turkish warships will fire not only G-40 missiles but also Hisar-A (passed serial production), Hisar-O+ (It will pass into production at the end of this year) and Siper long altitude SAM(2022-23) missile system. Turkish industry has reached a high level maturity to supply a warship from top to down. Be it striking or defensive missile systems, torpedos, sensors...etc Quality standards of our products can not be hidden since Pakistan will be the first hand user/tester of Turkish naval subsystems in many different naval platforms. Same country is operating Chinese naval platforms as well. Their feedbacks and comparison will be shared on these pages when the time came.
> 
> I Class frigate- planned launch date for first frigate, 2021-2022.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Barbaros Class MLU upgrade - planned launch date for first frigate, 2022.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Project TF2000 - planned launch date for first destroyer, 2025-2026
> View attachment 607399


It's interesting how DefenceTurkey is still noting how the 4th Pakistani MILGEM will be different from the first 3 (and designed in Pakistan with Turkish support). I wonder, what are the chances that the 4th MILGEM ends up becoming a variant of the I-Class... What say you @Tank131, you think we can will this into existence, like we did with VLS?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## cabatli_53

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> It's interesting how DefenceTurkey is still noting how the 4th Pakistani MILGEM will be different from the first 3 (and designed in Pakistan with Turkish support). I wonder, what are the chances that the 4th MILGEM ends up becoming a variant of the I-Class... What say you @Tank131, you think we can will this into existence, like we did with VLS?




That is what I thought when I read the defenceturkey article. I believe 4th ship of Pakistan will be more or less an I class frigate with some design changes. Design authorities do not want to take risk while a proven design is navigating on seas so 4th Jinnah class will be more or less an I class frigate with some changes to integrate some specific products developed by Pakistani industry. When I reach some insider info, I will share.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## StormBreaker

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> It's interesting how DefenceTurkey is still noting how the 4th Pakistani MILGEM will be different from the first 3 (and designed in Pakistan with Turkish support). I wonder, what are the chances that the 4th MILGEM ends up becoming a variant of the I-Class... What say you @Tank131, you think we can will this into existence, like we did with VLS?


That’s what i thought as i saw the pic


----------



## GriffinsRule

SBUS-CXK said:


> my friend. you mean... do you compare Turkish warships with Chinese warships? ? Sorry, I live in a real world.
> 
> you know. Chinese warships rarely encounter Turkish warships in the Western Pacific, Persian Gulf, Indian Ocean, Mediterranean, and English Channel... Of course, I also rarely see Turkish warships participating in international naval exercises. and I don't know what you mean by industrial integration capabilities. Similar to Kolkata-class destroyers?
> 
> friend. you just provide a PPT template. your data does not have any real-world support. my suggestion is. Build at least one warship. then test. (Type 055 completed in 2017，then 3 years testing，service in 2020) ，Turkish warships do not need testing? ?
> 
> you compare Turkish warships with Chinese warships. Your courage and confidence come from Turkey's PPT template technology? or paper data imagination?
> 
> Chinese two type 054A into the Black Sea from the Bosphorus. The Chinese Navy and the Russian Navy conduct military exercises in the Black Sea.
> 
> View attachment 607431
> View attachment 607432


I still fail to understand what your point is?


----------



## GriffinsRule

SBUS-CXK said:


> Sorry, I just mean reality. reality. Not a PPT or a model.


Okay thanks for your input. Now let us discuss the models and PPT while you live in the real world.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SBUS-CXK

GriffinsRule said:


> Okay thanks for your input. Now let us discuss the models and PPT while you live in the real world.


OK. Chinese navy and Pakistani navy joint military exercises.
















This is the real world. No PPT.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

The Turkish Milgem Program will bring great modernization to Pakistani Navy but we will have to wait for it



Sabr Ka Phal Meetha hota hai


The Chinese Frigates are World Class , already Top of Line

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tank131

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> It's interesting how DefenceTurkey is still noting how the 4th Pakistani MILGEM will be different from the first 3 (and designed in Pakistan with Turkish support). I wonder, what are the chances that the 4th MILGEM ends up becoming a variant of the I-Class... What say you @Tank131, you think we can will this into existence, like we did with VLS?


I was never more convinced about the power of dua. A larger variant based on I-class would be very interesting, and hopefully could utilize further advances in electronics that turkey is making. Additionally I have been jumping up and down about the importance of a medium range quad packed SAM from a friendly country and my friend @cabatli_53 gives me the great info about the 40km G-40 quad packed naval SAM. So i think that will be in the future for PN (iA). I am also hoping that like A90Bs, Pakistan considers turkey to modify the F-22P along a similar line the the Barbaros class frigates. Performing similar modifications like removing the FM90 for 16 cell vls and converting the lattice mast to a closed solid if not integrated mast with AESA radars (possiblely based of CAFRAD) with new CMS and up to 64 G-40 SAM equipping the ship in addition to 6-8 SSM/LACM (6harbah or other missiles including a possibility of future hypersonic missile or 8 standard SSM) and possibly adding 6 HQ-10 to the 2 CIWS (total 12 SR-SAM). These ships would be hella potent when put into a fleet with Jinnah class (especially if they are also fielding G-40 and) AND Type 054A (which hopefully could be equipped with longer range missiles for more fleet level defense). They would make one hell of a potent defense together. So start dreaming big buddy! Lolz... Now im fan boying out into the ether. Time for a break and come back to reality... But just saying, the above is possible if financials are layed out properly.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## SD 10

SBUS-CXK said:


> my friend. you mean... do you compare Turkish warships with Chinese warships? ? Sorry, I live in a real world.
> 
> you know. Chinese warships rarely encounter Turkish warships in the Western Pacific, Persian Gulf, Indian Ocean, Mediterranean, and English Channel... Of course, I also rarely see Turkish warships participating in international naval exercises. and I don't know what you mean by Turkish warship integration capabilities. Similar to Kolkata-class destroyers? and I don't know much about Turkish Industrial level.... you mean it takes 5-6 years to build a 7000 t destroyer? or it takes 3 years to build a 2000 t small frigate??
> 
> friend. you just provide a PPT template. your data does not have any real-world support. my suggestion is. Build at least one warship. then test. (Type 055 completed in 2017，then 3 years testing，service in 2020) ，Turkish warships do not need testing? ?
> 
> you compare Turkish warships with Chinese warships. Your courage and confidence come from？？ PPT model or paper data imagination?
> 
> Chinese two type 054A into the Black Sea from the Bosphorus. The Chinese Navy and the Russian Navy conduct military exercises in the Black Sea.
> 
> View attachment 607431
> View attachment 607432


Calm down. Why are you making so much noice with so little to contribute to discussion!


----------



## cabatli_53

SBUS-CXK said:


> Sorry. I can't participate in too much discussion. Because I'm a realist.
> 
> You can understand this as the confrontation between fantasy and reality. fantasy is very beautiful and very powerful. but it's best not to meet reality.




The people sometimes attribute own ignorance as fantasy of others. This situation mostly become a fact when the friends like you don’t have any idea what is being achieved in other part of the World. You know Engineering starts with design activities and the approved detail studies are shifted to production process, later trials. In this aspect, Turkish industry has achieved a great milestone by revealing many subsystems to be integrated on naval platforms. Radars are being produced with donestic GaN modules and Turkish institutes completed testing of a non-rotating radar complex in last year. The radar that is called as ÇAFRAD will be the main sensor of TF-2000 destroyer. Advent CMS will be the main fusion center of destroyer program as well but I class and Jinnah frigates will be the first platforms TN and PN will operate state of art command control system. CIWS and Laser guns developed by Turkish industry will be integrated on destroyer program but I class and Jinnah class frigates will be the first operator of Turkish CIWS. Same for Torpedo defense soft-kill and hard-kill syatems. Atmaca SSM will be the main striking naval missiles of both I class and Tf-2000 destroyer program. Hisar-A passed into serial production as low altitude surface to air missile and Naval ships will receive it. Hisar-O will follow the series as medium altitude by passing seril production in this year but G-40 missile will be compact and quad packable system so It will be the cost-effective solution of Navy so I prefered to mention it as Navy’s missile program. VL launchers called MIDAS will be integrated on I class frigates and later destroyer programs. Gezgin long range land attack missile program has a high level secrecy so noone will be allowed to share anything about it but It will also be a naval striking missile which goes beyond than 1000km. Pakistan will use Babur missiles for this role. Same for supersonic anti-ship missile program to be powered with SAGE’s ramjet engine. No need to mention compact bridge solutions, sonars (Jinnah frigate will use), communication systems, Ares family electronic attack/support systems( Jinnah frigate will use), IFF...etc. I can give many more examples like that. As you can see, From now, Turkey has commenced development/completion of strategic subsystems that destroyer program require, even if the hull production are not be commenced. To guarantee the sustainability, Turkey offer partnership to brother states. In this scenario, I think It is only person here who talk about fantasies are the same people who do not have any idea what is the meaning of reality in background.

but One thing you’re right is the speed factor. We just need to accelerate the schedule so Navy authorities opened a new ship construction facility in Izmir city. Another Turkish firm constructed and delivered a floating dock to new shipyard. It is being talked that New shipyard will accelerate the time scale of ongoing naval programs. If some platforms are not visible with your naked eyes, It is not about lack of engineering capability but loaded schedule of shipyards with ongoing programs.





I class frigate production is proceeding ! An old image

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SBUS-CXK

cabatli_53 said:


> The people sometimes attribute own ignorance as fantasy of others. This situation mostly become a fact when the friends like you don’t have any idea what is being achieved in other part of the World. You know Engineering starts with design activities and the approved detail studies are shifted to production process, later trials. In this aspect, Turkish industry has achieved a great milestone by revealing many subsystems to be integrated on naval platforms. Radars are being produced with donestic GaN modules and Turkish institutes completed testing of a non-rotating radar complex in last year. The radar that is called as ÇAFRAD will be the main sensor of TF-2000 destroyer. Advent CMS will be the main fusion center of destroyer program as well but I class and Jinnah frigates will be the first platforms TN and PN will operate state of art command control system. CIWS and Laser guns developed by Turkish industry will be integrated on destroyer program but I class and Jinnah class frigates will be the first operator of Turkish CIWS. Same for Torpedo defense soft-kill and hard-kill syatems. Atmaca SSM will be the main striking naval missiles of both I class and Tf-2000 destroyer program. Hisar-A passed into serial production as low altitude surface to air missile and Naval ships will receive it. Hisar-O will follow the series as medium altitude but G-40 missile will be compact and quad packable system so It will be the cost-effective solution of Navy so I prefered to mention it as Navy’s missile program. VL launchers called MIDAS will be integrated on I class frigates and later destroyer programs. Gezgin long range land attack missile program has a high level secrecy so noone will be allowed to share anything about it but It will also be a naval striking missile which goes beyond than 1000km. Pakistan will use Babur missiles for this role. Same for supersonic anti-ship missile program to be powered with SAGE’s ramjet engine. I can give many more examples like that. As you can see, From now, Turkey has commenced development/completion of strategic subsystems that destroyer program require, even if the hull production are not be commenced. To guarantee the sustainability, Turkey offer partnership to brother states. In this scenario, I think It is only person here who talk about fantasies are the same people who do not have any idea what is the meaning of reality in background.
> 
> but One thing you sure is the speed factor. We just need to accelerate the schedule so Navy authorities opened a new ship construction facility in Izmir city. Another Turkish firm constructed and delivered a floating dock to new shipyard. It is being talked that New shipyard will accelerate the time scale of ongoing naval programs.
> View attachment 607475
> 
> 
> I class frigate production is proceeding ! An old image
> 
> View attachment 607477


ok. very good, very good. I am an ignorant person. I don't know Turkey is so great. I apologize.——Sorry!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cabatli_53

SBUS-CXK said:


> ok. very good, very good. I am an ignorant person. I don't know Turkey is so great. I apologize.——Sorry!



I forgot to mention my friend but I class and Destroyer programs will have Piri panoramic infrared imaging IRST and Nazar doped fiber laser DIRCM systems. I believe Jinnah class will have Piri IRST but most likely, Pakistani frigate will have enough space to integrate Nazar DIRCM when the construction is completed because The development activities are proceeding. The targets detected by Piri E/O under the coordination with main 3D radar will be neutralized by Nazar laser DIRCM If Missile itself has an IIR seeker head. Ares electronic attack system will interfere the radio frequency seeker heads and links of coming missile If It has an active/semi active radar guidance. These are passive defense systems of Turkish and Pakistani frigates.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SD 10

SBUS-CXK said:


> Sorry. I can't participate in too much discussion. Because I'm a realist.
> 
> You can understand this as the confrontation between fantasy and reality. fantasy is very beautiful and very powerful. but it's best not to meet reality.


Realism doesnot rule out possibilities!


----------



## SBUS-CXK

SD 10 said:


> Realism doesnot rule out possibilities!


Ah, my mistake. I quit debate.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tank131

SBUS-CXK said:


> Sorry. I can't participate in too much discussion. Because I'm a realist.
> 
> You can understand this as the confrontation between fantasy and reality. fantasy is very beautiful and very powerful. but it's best not to meet reality.


My friend i think there is a disconnect between what people are saying and what you are interpreting. I dont thinknanyone is comparing turkish industry to China, frankly it doesnt compare because you have been doing it for a long time. Turkey just started producing. With that said you must appreciate the quality of the product they are making. So far ADAs are serving well. They are moving slowly but deliberately so as not to extend themselves. But the pieces for the ships are there. They have more time needed to prove themselves, yes, but they will prove themselves. That is the reality. It is not about competing with China. It is about them developing their industry to meet their needs and incorporating friendly nations into such projects to help share risk and maybe make a few $$. As they grow their capacity they will be a bigger and bigger player. Even Saudi Arabia was looking to buy MILGEM which says something about the product given what they have access to financially.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

cabatli_53 said:


> I forgot to mention my friend but I class and Destroyer programs will have Piri panoramic infrared imaging IRST and Nazar doped fiber laser DIRCM systems. I believe Jinnah class will have Piri IRST but most likely, Pakistani frigate will have enough space to integrate Nazar DIRCM when the construction is completed because The development activities are proceeding. The targets detected by Piri E/O under the coordination with main 3D radar will be neutralized by Nazar laser DIRCM If Missile itself has an IIR seeker head. Ares electronic attack system will interfere the radio frequency seeker heads and links of coming missile If It has an active/semi active radar guidance. These are passive defense systems of Turkish and Pakistani frigates.


What Air Defence system will Turkish Destroyer have? What will the its expected maximum range?


----------



## araz

GriffinsRule said:


> I still fail to understand what your point is?


Wasting everyone's time is what he is doing. He talks about living in reality but does not understand that both China and Turkey have followed the same methodilogies of buying licences for tech from abroad and then initiating research to develop it incrementally. If we look at the Chinese developmental cycles it has been the same and till mid to late 90s it could not design a fighter plane. The J10 has genes from Lavi and the JFT from mig 33 programme. 
The issues are the same for Turkey but they are at different points in their development cycles. But if he wants to live in his own realm of reality he should be shown that realm preferably out of this thread.
Mods can I please ask you to look at this thread.
A

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SBUS-CXK

araz said:


> Wasting everyone's time is what he is doing. He talks about living in reality but does not understand that both China and Turkey have followed the same methodilogies of buying licences for tech from abroad and then initiating research to develop it incrementally. If we look at the Chinese developmental cycles it has been the same and till mid to late 90s it could not design a fighter plane. The J10 has genes from Lavi and the JFT from mig 33 programme.
> The issues are the same for Turkey but they are at different points in their development cycles. But if he wants to live in his own realm of reality he should be shown that realm preferably out of this thread.
> Mods can I please ask you to look at this thread.
> A


friend. I don't remember how we "discussed the J-10 model" so "enthusiastically" in the 1990s.

and, I don't remember we were obsessed with some fantasy.

The J-10 comes from the J-9.


----------



## SBUS-CXK

Why do we face reality?

As a country, you should clearly understand your own strength. And learn more about the world. Then find the gap. so you have a reasonable plan, and then correct implementation.

China also had many plans in the 1960-80s. Such as Y-10 (large transport aircraft), J-9 (3th generation fighter), type 055 （yes, it is now type 055 predecessor）. but China was eventually forced to give up (or postpone) for various reasons. capital, industrial level, materials technology, engines, etc. I guess the Chinese at that time must be very distressed and sad. they really want to succeed. It's just that reality makes them despair (if I was in that era, I would cry). but their efforts and explorations are great.

As a country. when you really complete a plan. you will find how scary this gap is. think about it. when I completed the first aircraft carrier. Another person already owns 10 aircraft carriers. How long is my road....

this is reality，very scary. but we must face it. Because it keeps us awake enough. let us know how long this road is.

now you just stand at the starting point.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cabatli_53

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> What Air Defence system will Turkish Destroyer have? What will the its expected maximum range?




The longest range surface to air missile to be revealed by 2022/23 will be the “Siper” missile. Navy and Land Forces are excitedly waiting this missile and MIDAS VL launchers to be integrated on I class frigates most likely won’t be able to fire this missiles cause of dimension reasons. MIDAS on I class frigates will fit on Hisar-A, O, O+ and G-40 missiles. Further variants of MIDAS will be larger/longer which is going to fit on destroyer’s hull to fire Siper missiles. Siper will have a range around 120km and altitude of ~25km. Tübitak/Aselsan/Roketsan collaboration will reveal some details about Siper in this year.

Main early warning radar called EIRS will be delivered at the end of this year. This radar will be the main search radar of SIPER. 






Futhermore, This radar will be the biggest non-rotating radar of ÇAFRAD naval radar complex (4 EIRS on Tf-2000) to be integrated on TF-2000 destroyers. UMR is the name of naval version of EIRS radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## araz

SBUS-CXK said:


> friend. I don't remember how we "discussed the J-10 model" so "enthusiastically" in the 1990s.
> 
> and, I don't remember we were obsessed with some fantasy.
> 
> The J-10 comes from the J-9.


I know exactly where it comes from. The whole world knows barring people who have their heads dug deep into the sand. However Stop trying to act like Confucius and either let us know directly what your point is or keep calm and watch the debate. I also happen to know how technologies transform so no need to act smart with me.
Regards

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cabatli_53

SBUS-CXK said:


> As a country. when you really complete a plan. you will find how scary this gap is. think about it. when I completed the first aircraft carrier. Another person already owns 10 aircraft carriers.



The tech gap you mentioned above is something like; For exm, You have reached a level to introduce an air to air missile having a range up to 30km after revealed many different products in previous years but, a new player has appeared with carrying out advanced R&D studies to produce a similar AAM with a range of 30km and they have succeeded. This new player had revealed many different state of art missile systems before but related AAM became their first product in this field. In this situation, What is the extend of technological gap between these two state in AAM technology field ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SBUS-CXK

cabatli_53 said:


> The tech gap you mentioned above is something like; For exm, You have reached a level to introduce an air to air missile having a range up to 30km after revealed many different products in previous years but, a new player has appeared with carrying out advanced R&D studies to produce a similar AAM with a range of 30km and they have succeeded. This new player had revealed many different state of art missile systems before but related AAM became their first product in this field. In this situation, What is the extend of technological gap between these two state in AAM technology field ?


you are just comparing the gap between weapons...... in the 1991 Gulf War. the gap between T72 and M1-A1 is not large （(Battle of 73 Easting is due to geographical factors)）. But the US has AH-64, and F117, and B-52, and absolute air dominance. tell me-can T-72 win AH-64? Iraq wants the US to engage in ground war with it. but, Please - why the US should be a ground war with Iraq? if Iraq is a two-dimensional world (land and sky). US is a four-dimensional world (land, sky, ocean, and outer space). So, why the US should comply with Iraq's tactics?

Different dimensional of the world. do you think our gap is just a weapon? and you said China's air-to-air missiles. it was just one of China's export products. just for export.

what? do you talk to me about AAM? why don't we discuss ICBM, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, air-to-surface missiles, and cruise missiles...? ? shall we discuss Saudi DF-3? when do you think you can make it?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

seven0seven said:


> China was the partner of Lavi program in 80s


Are you seriously?


----------



## Ultima Thule

LKJ86 said:


> Are you seriously?


Yes i am serious, you're unofficial partner in Israeli program


----------



## LKJ86

seven0seven said:


> Yes i am serious, you're unofficial partner in Israeli program


Can you provide the sources?


----------



## cabatli_53

SBUS-CXK said:


> you are just comparing the gap between weapons...... in the 1991 Gulf War. the gap between T72 and M1-A1 is not large （(Battle of 73 Easting is due to geographical factors)）. But the US has AH-64, and F117, and B-52, and absolute air dominance. tell me-can T-72 win AH-64? Iraq wants the US to engage in ground war with it. but, Please - why the US should be a ground war with Iraq? if Iraq is a two-dimensional world (land and sky). US is a four-dimensional world (land, sky, ocean, and outer space). So, why the US should comply with Iraq's tactics?
> 
> Different dimensional of the world. do you think our gap is just a weapon? and you said China's air-to-air missiles. it was just one of China's export products. just for export.
> 
> what? do you talk to me about AAM? why don't we discuss ICBM, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, air-to-surface missiles, and cruise missiles...? ? shall we discuss Saudi DF-3? when do you think you can make it?




It seems you didn’t like my example so couldn’t find a proper response. Your real problem is that; you see yourself flying above the clouds with forming arrogant sentences, while approaching anybody out of yourself with an underestimating mindset with showing some specific examples China made great progress. When somebody introduced somerhing which make you think like “How can a country like X developing something similar to what “mighty” China has met difficulty to produce”, You need to interfere the discussion and latet converting discussion with asking “How can you compare mighty China” as if somebody quoted you or mentioned about yourself and so you start to give your opponents some tech lecture as if you have any idea what you are talking. Have you ever asked yourself Why do Turkey need an intercontinental ballistic missiles ? Just waste of money, time and resources. Turkey has envisaged a roadway to develop missiles up to 2500km range and I am sorry but You couldn’t see them until Turkish authority gave permission since they are classified programs. I know You want some pissing contest to feel better but I would rather reminding your lacking part in your logic.


----------



## LKJ86

araz said:


> The J10 has genes from Lavi


Why not mention Yugoslavia's Novi Avion, and it looks more like J-10:


----------



## LKJ86

seven0seven said:


> last LAVI were intended to used modified US aero engine


In 1983, WP-15 turbojet engine was chose for the winner between CAC' J-10 and SAC's J-13.


----------



## Ultima Thule

SBUS-CXK said:


> The new J-9 design had air intakes on the fuselage sides featuring variable inlet geometry to alter the compression mixture. It used a Chinese-designed Shenyang WS-6 turbofan engine with 12,400 kgf (27,000 lbf) afterburningthrust, and featured a Type 205 radar (with a search range of about 70 km) and four PL-4 radar-guided air-to-air missiles. The J-9 plan was discontinued in 1980, but the J-9 development enabled Chinese engineers to gain experience with the canard layout type, experience that would prove useful in the J-10 project.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-9
> 
> @seven0seven What do you think Israel wants?? WS-6? Or type 205? Or PL-4?


Oh god, stop trolling WS-6 was dead project along with J-9, they had have better radar than your Type 205 which you didn't make, and PL-4 has the same fate, did PL-4 has reliability better then AIM-7/AIM-9, you're reported for trolling and derailing the thread

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

seven0seven said:


> then you went to join LAVI project and Israeli didn't want your imaginary WS-6 technology, They had have access better/matured US engine tech


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

What a beautiful picture


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

4 Chinese Destroyers 
4 Turkey Corvettes 

Would be a tremendous addition to Pakistan's Navy


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

@SBUS_CXK

The forum rules are to not discuss airforce material on navy thread you might be new so thought would let you know

Drifting away from talking about the Navy and subject of the thread will cause negative impact


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

@seven0seven

To be honest Chinese are leading the tech world today their ship design already showcase creativity

Don't dwell on past

China are leader today in all field
a) Aerospace
b) Space Research
c) Navy


The variety of the new Navy Ships china is making is enough Proof what they can build and design from scratch

China with their ingenuity have bridged the gap between them and Russia or USA or Europe very quickly in last 15 years


Turkey while they are great planners are still fine-tuning their designs and going into production but China is already ahead having completed almost 40+ ships

In Muslim countries Turkey is without doubt #1 but to make it to global ranking their is gap between China and Turkey 

Sure Turkey will grow and achieve that same level as China but China is without doubt ahead becasue their projects have started 15-20 years ago

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Well I think the safe item to compare is the Turkey Navy Ships (Milgem) vs what China have in their arsenal to discuss what is a comparable platform


Pakistan is set to recieve 4 Milgem Ships , and it would be interesting to know , how they compare vs the 4 Type093 ships Pakistan is getting (marketed as f22p enhanced)


----------



## Tank131

Everyone here needs to cut the bullshit. This thread is about PN post 2020. I am not sure why it has become a discussion about how China develops its defense tech nor i sure why it is a discussion of China vs Turkish defense tech. These are nonsense debates and idiotic discussions. The reality is that both Chinese and Turkish vessels will be part of PN. Likely there will chinese weaponry on the Turkish vessels. Turkey has just started producing defense goods and they are so far doing an admirable job. China has beem doing it for a long time. They are also doing an admirable job. The proof is that Pakistan operates both nations equipment. I would request we move on with topics at hand.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Armchair

cabatli_53 said:


> It seems you didn’t like my example so couldn’t find a proper response. Your real problem is that; you see yourself flying above the clouds with forming arrogant sentences, while approaching anybody out of yourself with an underestimating mindset with showing some specific examples China made great progress. When somebody introduced somerhing which make you think like “How can a country like X developing something similar to what “mighty” China has met difficulty to produce”, You need to interfere the discussion and latet converting discussion with asking “How can you compare mighty China” as if somebody quoted you or mentioned about yourself and so you start to give your opponents some tech lecture as if you have any idea what you are talking. Have you ever asked yourself Why do Turkey need an intercontinental ballistic missiles ? Just waste of money, time and resources. Turkey has envisaged a roadway to develop missiles up to 2500km range and I am sorry but You couldn’t see them until Turkish authority gave permission since they are classified programs. I know You want some pissing contest to feel better but I would rather reminding your lacking part in your logic.



There is no need for such a tone and both parties need to calm down. The above post reeks of a condescending and the "flying above the clouds" mindset that it purportedly blames the other. I think this post is the one that derailed the thread to kingdom come and we all need to just move past and get back to the topic on hand - Pakistan Navy!



Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> It's interesting how DefenceTurkey is still noting how the 4th Pakistani MILGEM will be different from the first 3 (and designed in Pakistan with Turkish support). I wonder, what are the chances that the 4th MILGEM ends up becoming a variant of the I-Class... What say you @Tank131, you think we can will this into existence, like we did with VLS?



I think someone in the PN hierarchy reads PDF, or at least suspect the same. I would ideally be happy with greater localization of major subsystems, particularly SAMs. So what I hope with the 4th ship is a ship with a high level of indigenous content. 

More importantly, what I am hoping to see beyond 2020 is a new class of ships. Technology has created now the ability for even small ships to have the capability of larger ships in the past. This means that we can now shrink the capabilities of a frigate into a 1000 ton corvette. Basically on the 80-20 rule - that such a ship would have 80 percent of the capability at a significantly lower cost. 

A UAV Camcopter 1000 or similar would drastically reduce costs
The A gun has become a relic of the past as combat has changed from the past with future combat being shootouts of missiles and countering missiles. Shrinking the main gun to a CIWS would also help balance a small ship and allow a VLS in the front behind the A gun location. 
ASW has also shrunk, what 30 years ago used to take giant equipment now has shrunk by a factor of 10. Hull mounted or towed or UAV borne, ASW has changed. 
Increased automation has reduced crew by a factor of 5. 
An AESA radar has reduced the clutter, bulk and need for multiple radars to a multimode tower. 
Bringing all these things together and utilizing economies of scale, one can basically revolutionize surface warfare as we know it today. All we need is the vision and the guts to do it with.

In the 


Tank131 said:


> To be honest India, much like Pakistan labels its ships with semantics rather than capabilities. India actually (capabilities wise) has 9 destroyers (Kolkata (3) Dehli (3 and Shivalik (3 but they label them as frigates)) and 14 Frigates (Rajput (4 which they label destroyers) Talwar (6-actually a heavy frigate), Brahmaputra (3), and Godavari (1)). Most of these also focus on Antiship and land attack with really only Kolkatas offering reasonable long range (100km Barak 8) air defense while the others carry either short range defense (12km Barak 1 or 15km S-125M) or medium range defese (Shtils which are essentially the same as HQ-16-40KM). Many of their more modern ships (Kolkatas, Dehlis, Shivaliks and Talwars) carry hosts of both Antiship and Air defense missiles and as such should be able to reliably operate independently and in conjunction as part of a CBG providing multi tier defense. To that end PN needs weapons that can both outrange (Harba) their AShMs and overwhelm their defenses (such as a hypersonic missile like CM-400AKG or its YJ-12 Equivalent). They also hace to have enough defensive chops to to overcome Saturation attacks from these vessels which all carry a combo of at least 16 Barhamos/Styx AShM. That means catch brahmos with enough time to take it out (the longer the range and more weapons at each ships disposale the better).
> 
> So when we talk about 052D which has 64 cells (probably 16 cells used by YJ-18, 8 cells for CY-5, AND 40 cells for Hq-9) and 24 cells FL-3000N, they would by a good margin be the most powerful ships in South Asia (Kolkata has 48cells for 32 Barak-8 and 16 Brahmos). But even with 40 missiles at 200km, the 2-4 052D wont be enough to significantly move the needle. Now add those 4 Type 054A and you start to create a multilevel defense. If the MILGEM can get 16 cells equipped with quad packed CAMM-ER (45-80KM range) for 64 missiles and you MLU the F-22Ps with new radar amd GENSIS Advent CMS and an 8-16 cells vls also armed with CAMM-ER (32-64 missiles) now you have a very potent defense. So yes, destroyers are a key part of a fleet defense but even the 052D wont be enough without effective picket ships.



In the long term, I don't think Pakistan's strategic goals should be to match or over match India, which would not be financially wise. India being a much larger opponent will simply overmatch us symmetrically. Our solution rather lies in _doing something different. _This means using disruptive technologies, and using strategies based on technological changes that are outdating old concepts and bringing in new ways of thinking. 

Remember that the last major naval battle was essentially the Falklands and the lesson learned has been lost by most navies - the power of AShMs particularly air launched ones. 

In the greater picture of things, as missiles and ranged attack became more powerful, naval vessels shrunk in size. From the battleships, one reached the size of cruisers and destroyers, and today it it increasingly looking like that frigates, which did not even count as 1st class warships once, now are the bread and butter of naval warfare. 
If we extend this thought, we realize that we have reached a point where our aim should not be 052s or 055s alone, but solutions should be found rather in corvettes, who are essentially now taking the place of what frigates used to do (and frigates are now taking the place of what destroyers used to do). 

If there is one fatal flaw of all third world forces, they never understand the evolutionary nature of war. For them it is about finding what the 1st world is doing and trying to copy it as best they can. In the rare circumstances where the 3rd world understood this, they often came up with something brilliant. Like the Vietcong. Like the JF-17. Like the DF-21. Or even like Is with its hybrid maneuver warfare. 
Our aim should be to think outside the box and come up with such evolutionary solutions. Otherwise we will remain always 1 step behind India and 2 steps behind the West.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cabatli_53

Armchair said:


> There is no need for such a tone and both parties need to calm down. The above post reeks of a condescending and the "flying above the clouds" mindset that it purportedly blames the other. I think this post is the one that derailed the thread to kingdom come and we all need to just move past and get back to the topic on hand - Pakistan Navy!



My tone is quite normal. If there are people who feel triggered, They can calm down. I didn’t even care to answer offtopic posts of the related member during the past 3 pages. No need to pick up comments to create a perception purposely. My post is
directed to a member who drail the thread with arrogant behaviors to convert the subject into a pissing contest when a Turkish naval thing is shared related with PN. If somebody needs to judge the posts, There are Moderators and Admins who are on charge to follow the topics. If you think my post caused the actual problem here, you can simply report it to GHQ. That is not a thread that members search their own scapegoat in acc to their own logic, otherwise you will lead to drail the topic more. Furthermore, I think The people who follow this thread are also able to comprehend what was discussed without needing your lead in the previous pages.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

I think Cobalti always contributes with amazing data on Turkish items his input is always valuable however sometimes new members take the conversations in a different direction which does not helps the actual discussion on the thread's main purpose

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SBUS-CXK

Yes. In fact. This has nothing to do with Turkish friends, I accept his criticism of my own. sometimes my performance is immature and I have apologized. 

About this thread. I hope this is reality-based discussion. we all know. Pakistan faces threats from the world TOP 4 military powers. Other countries can wait these plans. but Kolkata-class and Vikramaditya in nearby waters will not wait for you.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

@SBUS-CXK
Great point which is why I have also started considering the dangerous situation in region even acquiring of 4 retired Chinese destroyers , can help Pakistan improve it's Navy in short period. The ships can be enhanced with local Ship to Ship or Ship to Land missiles

The 4x Type093 ships we are getting from China referenced as F22P+ are certainly going to add to the solidification of defences at sea

The 4x Turkish Milgem ships will add a secondary layer of defense which will still serve a very important purpose in Pakistan navy

It will take some time for Turkey to conclude development on large ships bigger then milgem and only than we can compare the countries for large ships manufacturing

The advancements in Turkish Engineering , will continue just as China has continued to research with it's own products for over 20-40 years

In due time we can say that both nations are at same level

The difference today is 

Production Rate 
Launch of completed concepts into Serial production
China has been in serial production for last 15-20 years
Turkey is just launching it's new products or close to finishing research and development


China has been mastering the art of Engineering for quite sometime and Turkey without doubt is #1 in Muslim nations

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Zarvan

Pakistan Navy needs Frigates and Destroyers which have VLS for long range Cruise Missiles. Those ships are the must for future other wise we are sitting ducks. 






French FREMM Frigate


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

Zarvan said:


> Pakistan Navy needs Frigates and Destroyers which have VLS for long range Cruise Missiles. Those ships are the must for future other wise we are sitting ducks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> French FREMM Frigate


We need ships equipped with HHQ 9B


----------



## Zarvan

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> We need ships equipped with HHQ 9B


We need Ships which can fire long range cruise missiles from VLS. Air Defence ships are waiting for a Missile to come. The ships I am talking about can unleash hell on any Indian city whether Mumbai or Hyderabad or Chennai or Goa or Bangluru.


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

Zarvan said:


> We need Ships which can fire long range cruise missiles from VLS. Air Defence ships are waiting for a Missile to come. The ships I am talking about can unleash hell on any Indian city whether Mumbai or Hyderabad or Chennai or Goa or Bangluru.


Why from VLS sir? Harbah is not a VLS but it is long range Cruise Missile and can be fired from FACs, Type 054s and Milgems


----------



## Mustang-87

@The Eagle kindly remove the useless discussion from previous pages of the thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cabatli_53

Turkey is actively marketing the Zargana system. It is known to have been exported to Indonesia for their own Type-209 submarines. And Turkey is upgrading some of Pakistan’s Agosta class submarines with the system. *These French designed boats will carry part of Pakistan’s nuclear deterrent in the form of the Babur cruise missile. *

Turkey is also developing an indigenous submarine which may use the system.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/hisutt...vy-submarine-spotted-with-new-defense-system/

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Nasr

I don't understand how we start a thread which is suppose to be purely Pakistan Navy Post 2020 Future Plans and it gets derailed by some idiots obsessed with a non-existant israeli laviio jet. Gotta be a real couch potato to be dragging into an argument, deliberately trolling on this thread. I would suggest to our Chinese friends to ignore buffoons who are essentially brain-dead, for lack of a better description.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tipu7

@HRK @waz
Fellas kindly clean up the thread. It's strictly about Pakistan Navy Modernization.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## HRK

Tipu7 said:


> @HRK @waz
> Fellas kindly clean up the thread. It's strictly about Pakistan Navy Modernization.


bhai I have no authority ....


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Considering what is happening across the border with Muslim I still suggest we grab the extra 4 Destroyer ships from China

 4 Destroyers ready and available

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tipu7

HRK said:


> bhai I have no authority ....


Hain? 
You should convey message then

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

SBUS-CXK said:


> Chinese fleet （two 054A and a large supply ship）visits Canada


This is PAk NAVY modernization thread, you can post these pics in PLAAN thread in Chinese section


----------



## SD 10

seven0seven said:


> You still struggling to aero engine tech currently and tell me where j9 had duck wing please show me like a j10 it had a double delta wings like your j7e


what is wrong with you?


----------



## The Eagle

seven0seven said:


> @waz @The Eagle please ban @SBUS-CXK from this thread he is continuously trolling and doing offtopic discussion and thanks





SBUS-CXK said:


> @waz @The Eagle If I remember correctly.... @seven0seven you first began to discuss the topic of Israel.



Now you both will have to learn to not to derail topics either by instigating or feeding trolls. Furthermore, the one with use of proxy/vpn really needs to share correct flag & current location.

Permanent thread ban is also issued and if found involved in similar violation over the Forum at any discussion; a permanent Forum Ban will be issued without any reminder to both of you. This is an open warning and a last chance to correct your act on the Forum.

Regards,



Zain_Headshot7N said:


> @The Eagle kindly remove the useless discussion from previous pages of the thread.



Didn't get the notification as sometimes inbox & notification is like swarming. Done the needful though.

Regards,

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tank131

Zarvan said:


> We need Ships which can fire long range cruise missiles from VLS. Air Defence ships are waiting for a Missile to come. The ships I am talking about can unleash hell on any Indian city whether Mumbai or Hyderabad or Chennai or Goa or Bangluru.


 With the advent of Harbah, you dont need VLS launched LACM. You need more Harbah with better and longer ranges. This enables you to have both SSM and LACM in one missile. The VLS for the time being is better served with long range SAMs. You wont bw able to get off shots at Indian mainland with your fleet sunk beneath the waves.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## fatman17

The PN supply chain is getting complex by the year / decade.

From 1948 onwards, the UK was the main supplier as the PN was carved out of the then Royal Indian Navy.
The US joined the UK from 1954 onwards as it signed a MAP (Mutual Assistance Pact) and Pakistan subsequently joined CENTO and SEATO, two military alliances to encircle Soviet Russia and Red China.

After the wars of 1965 and 1971 and imposition of sanctions by the US, Pakistan expanded its search for suppliers and France entered as a supplier in 1970.
After the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in1980, the US once again became the leading supplier of major platforms for the navy.

In the meantime the PAF was fast developing a dependable supply chain with China and the navy also followed suit albeit in a small way.

US imposed further sanctions in 1988/89 to curb Pakistan's nuclear ambitions and the defunct defense relationship with the UK was also revived to a certain extent.

PN had major suppliers at this point in France, China and the UK.

911 in 2001 saw Pakistan again in the embrace of the US and was also declared a MNNA (Major Non NATO Ally).

By 2014 with the US unsuccessfully mired in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and needed a whipping boy to blame, military aid was once again suspended until Pakistan DID MORE.

This broke the camels back and the rigid military establishment finally realized that the west and particularly the US and France were not dependable suppliers of military hardware.

Now China has become Pakistan's No.1 supplier of military hardware with Turkey and Italy also vying for the major share of Pakistan's military supply chain.

Pakistan Navy is trying to gradually upgrade its fleet. Its strategy of acquisition (European, Chinese, Turkish ships ...) shows that Pakistan does not want to "put all their eggs in one basket".... Despite this progressive modernization, the Pakistani fleet can compete with the incredible growth in its main "state enemy"...the Indian Navy.


The year 2018-20 is witnessing a major recapitalization of the PN surface and sub-surface fleet.

The retirements:

6 Tariq
(Tariq, Babur, Khaibar, Badr, Shah Jahan, Tippu Sultan). 3200/3700 tons, 117 meters (ex British type 21). Transferred by 1993/1994, now ageing ships, likely to be progressively retired through 2010’s but delayed as the US stopped supply of EDA Perry Class FFGs (to be upgraded). only a single example supplied after a US 80m$ refurbishment. The Type 21 Tariq Class will be retired once the Chinese Type 54A/P are inducted probably from 2021 onwards.

1 Alamgir
(Alamgir). 4100 tons, 138 meters (Ex 1980’s US O.H Perry FFG). Transferred by 2010, to remain in Pakistani service for at least 10/15 mores year, until mid 2020’s. To be used as a Training Ship or retired.

2 Agosta 70
(Hashmat, Hurmat). 1200/1700 tons, 67+ meters (French Agosta 70 SSK design). Commissioned by 1979/1980. upgraded in the late 90s. now in storage and to be permanently retired once the Chinese SSKs are commissioned.

3 Midget Submarine
3 MG-110
110+ tons, 27+ meters (Italian design). Commissioned by 1988+. to be retired once PN selects a newer platform, probably Italian.

2 Jalalat II
(Jalalat, Shujaat). Commissioned by 1997/1999. due for upgrade or retirement.

1 Larkana
(Larkana). first ever indigenously designed and developed fast patrol craft by Pakistan Naval Dockyard. Commissioned by 1994. due for upgrade or retirement.

1 Rajshahi
(Rajshahi). 115/140 tons, 36+ meters (1960’s British built). Commissioned by 1966, now fully obsolete ship, to be replaced by a newer Chinese built craft by early 2010’s. retired.

Status of 2 others FAC unclear (Jurrat, Quwwat)
Maybe Jurrat was a former Chinese "Hegu" or "Hoku" (a Chinese version of the Russian "Komar") FAC ?, transferred by 1981.

Maybe Quwwat was a former Chinese "Huangfen" FAC (a Chinese version of the Russian "Osa I"),? Transferred by 1984.

All the above FACs are reported to be replaced by the Azmat Class 500T FAC startiing in 2011-12.

6 Fast Attack Missiles Crafts
Up to 2 newer 500 FAC. designated AZMAT Class.
500 tons, ordered from China by late 2010, likely to be completed by 2011/2012…


1 Poolster (Fleet Tanker)
(Moawin). (ex 1960’s Dutch AO). Transferred by 1994. to be retired once the Turkish fleet tanker is commissioned.

1 Behr Paima (hydrographic survey vessel)
(Behr E Paima). Japanese built. Commissioned by 1982. to be retired as a new replacement is inducted.

New Arrivals:

8/10 Frigates
Up to 4 newer Frigates
Expected to be received by 2021++. The 3 main options considered by the Pakistanis were:

Buy 2 second-hand Chinese Type 054 Frigates (F-525/526).

Buy 3 or 4 Improved F-22P (Tentatively named “F-23P”, These may be an improved variant incorporating features of the Type 054A frigates...).

Buy 3 or 4 Chinese Type 054A Frigates (these FFG are “the state of the art” of Chinese fleet and the Chinese were reluctant to share their latest technology with another country. In the end a modified version known as Type 54A/P was agreed upon. once inducted they will be designated as F-22PII …).
Cost: US 1.2-1.5 B$

+/- 5 Submarines
From 3 to Up to 8 newer SSK’s.
Since mid 2000's, the Pakistan Navy plans to buy 3 to 8 new submarines to replace the ageing Agosta 70’s SSK. After considering many SSK designs (Hispano / French Scorpene, French Marlin SSK’s, German Type 214…).
Finally decided to purchase up to 8 Chinese SSK’s after the offer of long-term soft loans by the Chinese government worth US 4-5B$.

A new export model S20 with Chinese / French AIP systems which is a combination of the Chinese 039 Song and the 041 Yuan class submarines. delivery to start by as early as 2022-23. 4 boats to be built in china and plans for building 4 at the Karachi Dockyards are underway.

1 Fleet Tanker built with Turkish collaboration inducted recently. Moawin II.

Mid-Shore & In-Shore Patrol Boats
2 MRTP 33
(Zarrar, Karrar). Up to 6 others crafts were planned.

2 MRTP 15
(01-02). Turkish built IPV.

12 Gulf patrol Crafts.
5 patrol Crafts
(US Built). Delivered by 2010.

Small Amphibious Crafts
12 Hovercrafts
(12 Griffon) for the PN marines

on Order:

4 MILGEM OPV / Corvettes.(ADA Class)
2 OPV from DAMEN. PNS Yarmook handed over to PN recently.

New Navy Bases:
Jinnah Naval Base (JNB) at Ormara along the 1.046 KM Makran coast, touted to be the major naval submarine base.

Pasni Naval Air station for deployment of PN air assets like P3C Orion LRASW aircraft.
coming Naval Aviation.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## fatman17

NAVAL AVIATION

Aircraft:
7 P-3C Orion (Maritime Patrol). 5 remaining examples as 2 aircraft were destroyed in a brazen terrorist attack on PNS Mehran. the US refused to supply the attrition losses.

7 Fokker F27-200 Friendship. multi-role aircraft MPA/transport in the process of retirement. to be gradually replaced by ATR-42 aircraft in a similar role. 2 ATRs already inducted recently.

Hawker 850 (transport, liaison, communication). in service with plans for 3 additional examples.

2 Breguet Atlantique I (unserviceable). now retired.

13 Mirage IIIEP and 10 Mirage V PA3 with AM-39 anti-ship missiles capable. based at PAF Base Masroor. subordinated to the Navy in the Anti-Ship Role. Gradually being replaced by the newer JF17 Block II with the C802 ASM as well as the AKG400.

Helicopters 
6 Lynx Mk3 (unserviceable). came in the Type21 FFG (Tariq Class) deal. for sale.

6 Sea-King Mk 45 (ASW). a further 5 2nd-Hand examples purchased for attrition replacement and spares from the UK.

6 to 8 SA-319 Alouette III (2 SA-319B & 4 SA-316…). SAR role. now being retired.

5 Z-9EC (ASW). based with the F22P (Sword Class) FFG. plans to upgrade to the ED model delayed. a further 6-8 Z9ers planned in the ASW/SAR role once the Type 54A/P FFG are inducted.

Plans to induct single example of a LRMPA announced recently.

A new Naval Aviation Base along the Makran coast is being built.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

@waz here?


----------



## waz

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> @waz here?



Not sure have to look for it. It's a lot to go through. Try search, I may be wrong.



Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> @waz here?



Here;

This comes on the heels of a 2017 order announcement by Pakistan for two 75m Corvettes from Swiftships, with an option for two more in 2020. 

https://swiftships.com/swiftly-redefining-tomorrows-navies-today/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

waz said:


> Not sure have to look for it. It's a lot to go through. Try search, I may be wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> Here;
> 
> This comes on the heels of a 2017 order announcement by Pakistan for two 75m Corvettes from Swiftships, with an option for two more in 2020.
> 
> https://swiftships.com/swiftly-redefining-tomorrows-navies-today/


Thnx

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ahmet Pasha

So much of new acquisitions will only replace old fleet. Not necessarily add to the fleet numbers already present??

Same defensive paradigm strategy??


fatman17 said:


> The PN supply chain is getting complex by the year / decade.
> 
> From 1948 onwards, the UK was the main supplier as the PN was carved out of the then Royal Indian Navy.
> The US joined the UK from 1954 onwards as it signed a MAP (Mutual Assistance Pact) and Pakistan subsequently joined CENTO and SEATO, two military alliances to encircle Soviet Russia and Red China.
> 
> After the wars of 1965 and 1971 and imposition of sanctions by the US, Pakistan expanded its search for suppliers and France entered as a supplier in 1970.
> After the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in1980, the US once again became the leading supplier of major platforms for the navy.
> 
> In the meantime the PAF was fast developing a dependable supply chain with China and the navy also followed suit albeit in a small way.
> 
> US imposed further sanctions in 1988/89 to curb Pakistan's nuclear ambitions and the defunct defense relationship with the UK was also revived to a certain extent.
> 
> PN had major suppliers at this point in France, China and the UK.
> 
> 911 in 2001 saw Pakistan again in the embrace of the US and was also declared a MNNA (Major Non NATO Ally).
> 
> By 2014 with the US unsuccessfully mired in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and needed a whipping boy to blame, military aid was once again suspended until Pakistan DID MORE.
> 
> This broke the camels back and the rigid military establishment finally realized that the west and particularly the US and France were not dependable suppliers of military hardware.
> 
> Now China has become Pakistan's No.1 supplier of military hardware with Turkey and Italy also vying for the major share of Pakistan's military supply chain.
> 
> Pakistan Navy is trying to gradually upgrade its fleet. Its strategy of acquisition (European, Chinese, Turkish ships ...) shows that Pakistan does not want to "put all their eggs in one basket".... Despite this progressive modernization, the Pakistani fleet can compete with the incredible growth in its main "state enemy"...the Indian Navy.
> 
> 
> The year 2018-20 is witnessing a major recapitalization of the PN surface and sub-surface fleet.
> 
> The retirements:
> 
> 6 Tariq
> (Tariq, Babur, Khaibar, Badr, Shah Jahan, Tippu Sultan). 3200/3700 tons, 117 meters (ex British type 21). Transferred by 1993/1994, now ageing ships, likely to be progressively retired through 2010’s but delayed as the US stopped supply of EDA Perry Class FFGs (to be upgraded). only a single example supplied after a US 80m$ refurbishment. The Type 21 Tariq Class will be retired once the Chinese Type 54A/P are inducted probably from 2021 onwards.
> 
> 1 Alamgir
> (Alamgir). 4100 tons, 138 meters (Ex 1980’s US O.H Perry FFG). Transferred by 2010, to remain in Pakistani service for at least 10/15 mores year, until mid 2020’s. To be used as a Training Ship or retired.
> 
> 2 Agosta 70
> (Hashmat, Hurmat). 1200/1700 tons, 67+ meters (French Agosta 70 SSK design). Commissioned by 1979/1980. upgraded in the late 90s. now in storage and to be permanently retired once the Chinese SSKs are commissioned.
> 
> 3 Midget Submarine
> 3 MG-110
> 110+ tons, 27+ meters (Italian design). Commissioned by 1988+. to be retired once PN selects a newer platform, probably Italian.
> 
> 2 Jalalat II
> (Jalalat, Shujaat). Commissioned by 1997/1999. due for upgrade or retirement.
> 
> 1 Larkana
> (Larkana). first ever indigenously designed and developed fast patrol craft by Pakistan Naval Dockyard. Commissioned by 1994. due for upgrade or retirement.
> 
> 1 Rajshahi
> (Rajshahi). 115/140 tons, 36+ meters (1960’s British built). Commissioned by 1966, now fully obsolete ship, to be replaced by a newer Chinese built craft by early 2010’s. retired.
> 
> Status of 2 others FAC unclear (Jurrat, Quwwat)
> Maybe Jurrat was a former Chinese "Hegu" or "Hoku" (a Chinese version of the Russian "Komar") FAC ?, transferred by 1981.
> 
> Maybe Quwwat was a former Chinese "Huangfen" FAC (a Chinese version of the Russian "Osa I"),? Transferred by 1984.
> 
> All the above FACs are reported to be replaced by the Azmat Class 500T FAC startiing in 2011-12.
> 
> 6 Fast Attack Missiles Crafts
> Up to 2 newer 500 FAC. designated AZMAT Class.
> 500 tons, ordered from China by late 2010, likely to be completed by 2011/2012…
> 
> 
> 1 Poolster (Fleet Tanker)
> (Moawin). (ex 1960’s Dutch AO). Transferred by 1994. to be retired once the Turkish fleet tanker is commissioned.
> 
> 1 Behr Paima (hydrographic survey vessel)
> (Behr E Paima). Japanese built. Commissioned by 1982. to be retired as a new replacement is inducted.
> 
> New Arrivals:
> 
> 8/10 Frigates
> Up to 4 newer Frigates
> Expected to be received by 2021++. The 3 main options considered by the Pakistanis were:
> 
> Buy 2 second-hand Chinese Type 054 Frigates (F-525/526).
> 
> Buy 3 or 4 Improved F-22P (Tentatively named “F-23P”, These may be an improved variant incorporating features of the Type 054A frigates...).
> 
> Buy 3 or 4 Chinese Type 054A Frigates (these FFG are “the state of the art” of Chinese fleet and the Chinese were reluctant to share their latest technology with another country. In the end a modified version known as Type 54A/P was agreed upon. once inducted they will be designated as F-22PII …).
> Cost: US 1.2-1.5 B$
> 
> +/- 5 Submarines
> From 3 to Up to 8 newer SSK’s.
> Since mid 2000's, the Pakistan Navy plans to buy 3 to 8 new submarines to replace the ageing Agosta 70’s SSK. After considering many SSK designs (Hispano / French Scorpene, French Marlin SSK’s, German Type 214…).
> Finally decided to purchase up to 8 Chinese SSK’s after the offer of long-term soft loans by the Chinese government worth US 4-5B$.
> 
> A new export model S20 with Chinese / French AIP systems which is a combination of the Chinese 039 Song and the 041 Yuan class submarines. delivery to start by as early as 2022-23. 4 boats to be built in china and plans for building 4 at the Karachi Dockyards are underway.
> 
> 1 Fleet Tanker built with Turkish collaboration inducted recently. Moawin II.
> 
> Mid-Shore & In-Shore Patrol Boats
> 2 MRTP 33
> (Zarrar, Karrar). Up to 6 others crafts were planned.
> 
> 2 MRTP 15
> (01-02). Turkish built IPV.
> 
> 12 Gulf patrol Crafts.
> 5 patrol Crafts
> (US Built). Delivered by 2010.
> 
> Small Amphibious Crafts
> 12 Hovercrafts
> (12 Griffon) for the PN marines
> 
> on Order:
> 
> 4 MILGEM OPV / Corvettes.(ADA Class)
> 2 OPV from DAMEN. PNS Yarmook handed over to PN recently.
> 
> New Navy Bases:
> Jinnah Naval Base (JNB) at Ormara along the 1.046 KM Makran coast, touted to be the major naval submarine base.
> 
> Pasni Naval Air station for deployment of PN air assets like P3C Orion LRASW aircraft.
> coming Naval Aviation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TOPGUN

Ahmet Pasha said:


> So much of new acquisitions will only replace old fleet. Not necessarily add to the fleet numbers already present??
> 
> Same defensive paradigm strategy??



True to some degree but will add much more punch with modern tech and firepower !!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ziaulislam

waz said:


> Not sure have to look for it. It's a lot to go through. Try search, I may be wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> Here;
> 
> This comes on the heels of a 2017 order announcement by Pakistan for two 75m Corvettes from Swiftships, with an option for two more in 2020.
> 
> https://swiftships.com/swiftly-redefining-tomorrows-navies-today/


deal still on?


----------



## waz

ziaulislam said:


> deal still on?



Yes as far as news is concerned.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ziaulislam

waz said:


> Yes as far as news is concerned.


I will be surprised if this deal isnt leverage via CSF
Therefore it being still on is surprising 

4+4+2(2) with 2 OPV and several FAC is pretty big upgarde conisdering PN just had few frigates till recently

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## fatman17

Suspended


ziaulislam said:


> deal still on?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Affanakad0t.

I think its got suspended after those trump statements in 2018. Just like ah 1z and t129 engine


----------



## ziaulislam

fatman17 said:


> Suspended


that's what i am thinking..though this pandemic would mean everyone will get some part of the pie..who knows we might get lucky..
two things are seemingly unfolding..
1. trump wanting to leave like now..so he will do this before November
2. republicans losing alot of ground ..it seems biden might have a chance after all, this will change the situation in the white house for good or bad.. both white house and house will be controlled by same party, infact most think senate might turn as well given most of the republicans are retiring


----------



## Pakistan Ka Beta

Ahmet Pasha said:


> So much of new acquisitions will only replace old fleet. Not necessarily add to the fleet numbers already present??
> 
> Same defensive paradigm strategy??


4 type 054A/P Frigates and 2 Damen corvettes will take place of 6 Tariq Class frigates while 4 Milgem Corvettes/Light frigates and 2 more Damen corvettes ( order expected in 2020-2021 ) i.e 6 will be new acquisitions , chances of 4/6 New Fast Attack craft acquisitions are also high ( 2020-2025 ) , 2 Agosta 70s will be replaced by 8 new submarines from China i.e 6 More , LRMPA tender issued ( number will increase gradually 2020-2025 ) , not to mention modernized MPA ATR 72s , I don't know what u want , plus these will be new latest ships/MPAs not 80s or 90s technology . Babar 3 ( increase in range is expected ) , Zarb , Harbah will completely change Pakistan Navy . PMSA also got 6 new MPVs and 2 second hand from USA in 2017 . PMSA new headquartes in Keti Bander and Ormara , New Naval Air station in Turbat and Submarine Communication station in Sindh are also need to be mentioned . This will modernize Plus Increase reach of PN , PM and PMSA IA .

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## ARMalik

Pakistan Ka Beta said:


> 4 type 054A/P Frigates and 2 Damen corvettes will take place of 6 Tariq Class frigates while 4 Milgem Corvettes/Light frigates and 2 more Damen corvettes ( order expected in 2020-2021 ) i.e 6 will be new acquisitions , chances of 4/6 New Fast Attack craft acquisitions are also high ( 2020-2025 ) , 2 Agosta 70s will be replaced by 8 new submarines from China i.e 6 More , LRMPA tender issued ( number will increase gradually 2020-2025 ) , not to mention MPA ATR 72s , I don't know what u want , plus these will be new latest ships/MPAs not 80s or 90s technology . Babar 3 ( increase in range is expected ) , Zarb , Harbah will completely change Pakistan Navy . PMSA also got 6 new MPVs and 2 second hand from USA in 2017 . PMSA new headquartes in Keti Bander and Ormara . New Naval Air station in Turbat and Submarine Communication station in Sindh are also need to be mentioned . This will modernize Plus Increase reach of PN , PM and PMSA .



I believe there were 5 Tariq Class frigates in operations. The 6th one wasn't being used as a front-line vessel, even possibly decommissioned. Also, what they are going to do with the single OHP Frigate is anyone's guess.

PN BADLY NEEDS MORE SURFACE SHIPS.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## iLION12345_1

ARMalik said:


> I believe there were 5 Tariq Class frigates in operations. The 6th one wasn't being used as a front-line vessel, even possibly decommissioned. Also, what they are going to do with the single OHP Frigate is anyone's guess.
> 
> PN BADLY NEEDS MORE SURFACE SHIPS.


Yes, there were 5, 1 was decommissioned quite a while ago, right now there are only 4. Another one was decommissioned and was recently used as a target for the missile tests. If you watch the video you can see it being hit multiple times and sunk. All of those are on their way out slowly.



Ahmet Pasha said:


> So much of new acquisitions will only replace old fleet. Not necessarily add to the fleet numbers already present??
> 
> Same defensive paradigm strategy??


Not everything needs replacing. Only the 4 Tariq class need replacing right now, a lot of these will be new additions.
The Agosta 70s still have a few years left in them and even so there’s 2 of them, we’re getting 8 new subs.
The midgets have already been replaced if the images are anything to go by. 
The older fleet tanker was replaced too, so was the hydrographic vessel. 
Most of PMSAs vessels are still relatively new, so all the ones they got were new additions. Overall the navy is both modernizing and expanding.


ARMalik said:


> I believe there were 5 Tariq Class frigates in operations. The 6th one wasn't being used as a front-line vessel, even possibly decommissioned. Also, what they are going to do with the single OHP Frigate is anyone's guess.
> 
> PN BADLY NEEDS MORE SURFACE SHIPS.


The OHP was refitted before delivery, I’m sure it’ll serve for a while longer. It’s still a capable vessel. Not sure where it fits in though.


Hopefully JF-17s will be flying with the navy soon too.
What about the PNs mine warfare abilities though. I know they have 3 such ships, but they’re not that big, and are they enough? They seem to be getting a bit old too.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Falcon26

Pakistan Ka Beta said:


> 4 type 054A/P Frigates and 2 Damen corvettes will take place of 6 Tariq Class frigates while 4 Milgem Corvettes/Light frigates and 2 more Damen corvettes ( order expected in 2020-2021 ) i.e 6 will be new acquisitions , chances of 4/6 New Fast Attack craft acquisitions are also high ( 2020-2025 ) , 2 Agosta 70s will be replaced by 8 new submarines from China i.e 6 More , LRMPA tender issued ( number will increase gradually 2020-2025 ) , not to mention MPA ATR 72s , I don't know what u want , plus these will be new latest ships/MPAs not 80s or 90s technology . Babar 3 ( increase in range is expected ) , Zarb , Harbah will completely change Pakistan Navy . PMSA also got 6 new MPVs and 2 second hand from USA in 2017 . PMSA new headquartes in Keti Bander and Ormara . New Naval Air station in Turbat and Submarine Communication station in Sindh are also need to be mentioned . This will modernize Plus Increase reach of PN , PM and PMSA .



Not to mention the upcoming supersonic cruise missile for the navy. The PN will pack a serious punch.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

Pakistan should have not gone for Type 54 but instead a better version which still has 32 VLS but those are universal VLS. What I mean is that if mission requires those VLS carry and fire Cruise Missiles and if mission requires they carry Air Defence. That kind of ship in large numbers is what will give us real boost. 

@waz @fatman17

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## fatman17

Getting the type 54, a modified one at that was not a easy job as the Chinese were very reluctant to share their top of the line system even with Pakistan. The type 54AP is different from the regular type 54 in the Chinese navy.


Zarvan said:


> Pakistan should have not gone for Type 54 but instead a better version which still has 32 VLS but those are universal VLS. What I mean is that if mission requires those VLS carry and fire Cruise Missiles and if mission requires they carry Air Defence. That kind of ship in large numbers is what will give us real boost.
> 
> @waz @fatman17


----------



## LKJ86

fatman17 said:


> The type 54AP is different from the regular type 54 in the Chinese navy.


Yep, Type 054A/P is more powerful than the Type 054A in PLAN.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gryphon

Two Type 21s - PNS Badr and PNS Babur were decommissioned years back; the target in the recent exercise could be one of these two or even a third...


----------



## Zarvan

fatman17 said:


> Getting the type 54, a modified one at that was not a easy job as the Chinese were very reluctant to share their top of the line system even with Pakistan. The type 54AP is different from the regular type 54 in the Chinese navy.


Well than it would be more probable that they change our design like I said



LKJ86 said:


> Yep, Type 054A/P is more powerful than the Type 054A in PLAN.


Does China have a VLS which is a Universal one I mean if mission requires it can carry Cruise Missiles and if mission requires it Carry Air Defence ???


----------



## LKJ86

Zarvan said:


> Does China have a VLS which is a Universal one I mean if mission requires it can carry Cruise Missiles and if mission requires it Carry Air Defence ???


Yep, it is the VLS used by Type 052D and Type 055.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SD 10

fatman17 said:


> Getting the type 54, a modified one at that was not a easy job as the Chinese were very reluctant to share their top of the line system even with Pakistan. The type 54AP is different from the regular type 54 in the Chinese navy.


is type 54 ap btter than regular ones or tuned down version? Your opinion?


----------



## Zarvan

LKJ86 said:


> Yep, it is the VLS used by Type 052D and Type 055.
> View attachment 630164


Our Navy should have asked for these VLS to be placed on our Type 54, yes it would have required making changes in front section of Type 54 but it would have been worth it. @Rashid Mahmood @Path-Finder


----------



## LKJ86

SD 10 said:


> is type 54 ap btter than regular ones or tuned down version? Your opinion?


And what about PN's F-22P and PLAN's Type 053H3?


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

LKJ86 said:


> Yep, it is the VLS used by Type 052D and Type 055.
> View attachment 630164


Would China share Type 052D with us like Type 054?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Would China share Type 052D with us like Type 054?


What I know they have been discussed with China but we would not have needed them if we would have played smart and asked China to place those VLS in our Type 54 which are placed in Type 52 D and Type 55 Destroyers

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

Zarvan said:


> What I know they have been discussed with China but we would not have needed them if we would have played smart and asked China to place those VLS in our Type 54 which are placed in Type 52 D and Type 55 Destroyers


What missiles do you have for the VLS?


----------



## SD 10

LKJ86 said:


> And what about PN's F-22P and PLAN's Type 053H3?


I have no idea thats why i was asking....................


----------



## Zarvan

LKJ86 said:


> What missiles do you have for the VLS?


We can develop long range Babur for that. 1500 KM Babur can and should be developed. In mean while we can keep using them with Air Defence but option should be their. Universal VLS gives us option

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

Zarvan said:


> We can develop long range Babur for that. 1500 KM Babur can and should be developed. In mean while we can keep using them with Air Defence but option should be their. Universal VLS gives us option


What are the advantages of VLS over other? We have Babur's Anti Ship Variant Harbah


----------



## Zarvan

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> What are the advantages of VLS over other? We have Babur's Anti Ship Variant Harbah


With you having VLS you can develop a 1500 to 2000 KM range Cruise Missile and those VLS can carry them

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

Zarvan said:


> With you having VLS you can develop a 1500 to 2000 KM range Cruise Missile and those VLS can carry them


Why don't develop your own VLS according to your missiles?


----------



## khanasifm

Zarvan said:


> Well than it would be more probable that they change our design like I said
> 
> 
> Does China have a VLS which is a Universal one I mean if mission requires it can carry Cruise Missiles and if mission requires it Carry Air Defence ???


054a Vls can carry Sam and are able to carry Asroc ie anti sub rocket/missile

not sure if other type can also be carried but usually now day Vls are multi purpose


https://www.navyrecognition.com/ind...marine-rocket-asroc-emerges-out-of-china.html

Possibly f-22p may also get Vls in future

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/china-and-iran’s-newest-weapon-vertical-launch-systems-102797


----------



## Zarvan

Rafi said:


> PN is working according to a development plan, after the current programmes are well advanced. The follow up will include (if finances and economy are sufficiently strong to allow).
> 
> 1. 6-8 new frigates (either newer type 054 or next gen PLAN).
> 
> 2. Jet powered LRMPA to gradually replace P3.
> 
> 3. Drone aircraft that can perform MP and ASW.
> 
> 4. A type 071 or similar vessel 1 or 2.
> 
> 5. A further 4 or 6 Jinnah Corvette/light frigate.
> 
> 6. A further order of submarines after Hangor program is completed.
> 
> 7. Coastal sub/special forces program.
> 
> 8. Further expansion of Pak Marines.
> 
> 9. Dedicated small number of fighter aircraft.
> 
> 10. 4 - 6 destroyer vessels with 052 DDG most likely purchased. With talks between Chinese and Pakistani officials already taken place.
> 
> 11. Development of SSBN and SSN and have a true 2nd and 3rd strike capability.
> 
> 12. Long Range SLBM and SLCM.
> 
> This is very ambitious and any number of things could halt or stop these programs (finances being the most likely). But all the services and especially the Navy are thinking forward.


Yes financial issues could stop it but if these are part of Navy plans or machines they wish and want to have shows that Navy plans to have much much bigger Navy than anyone here initially thought


----------



## Rafi

Zarvan said:


> Yes financial issues could stop it but if these are part of Navy plans or machines they wish and want to have shows that Navy plans to have much much bigger Navy than anyone here initially thought



Yes it all depends on finance, we need to sort out our economy, not just for defence but also for the welfare of the people. If we could our allies and our own indigenous tech, the sky is the limit.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Zarvan

Rafi said:


> Yes it all depends on finance, we need to sort out our economy, not just for defence but also for the welfare of the people. If we could our allies and our own indigenous tech, the sky is the limit.


I am happy that at least thoughts and plans are there. This planning is important because this will ensure that the moment funds are available we would go for these things. If there was no vision than even availability of funds won't matter


----------



## aziqbal

a ship I would like to see added to the list is a submarine rescue ship 

we are getting 8 x SSK and we defiantly need a deep sea recuse vessel 

signing a contract with Turkey for a single MOSHIP would be a good idea bit like the TCG Alemdar A-582

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Awaiting for the good news arrival of new ships and submarines this year 2020


----------



## aziqbal

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Awaiting for the good news arrival of new ships and submarines this year 2020



not sure we are getting submarine this year those delivery are due to start 2022 onwards

and if we add one submarine each year 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025 from China and then add our own in 2025 ( so two units in 2025) , 2026, 2027 and 2028 this should complete the 8 x SSK

and before all of this by 2022 we should have 3 x upgraded Agosta 90B done by Turkey

so within next 8 years we will basically have 11 very formidable very modern submarines

thats allot of manpower and sailors needed

the icing on the cake of all of this would be the revelation of a LACM on the S20 submarines in the form of the Babur III


----------



## Readerdefence

aziqbal said:


> a ship I would like to see added to the list is a submarine rescue ship
> 
> we are getting 8 x SSK and we defiantly need a deep sea recuse vessel
> 
> signing a contract with Turkey for a single MOSHIP would be a good idea bit like the TCG Alemdar A-582


Hi is there anything Chinese are using as a rescue vessel & how expensive are they 
If possible to answer 
Thank you


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Well I was under assumption we will get some goods in 2020

2020 : 2 Submarines , 2 Type 054 Frigates
2021: Patience
2022 : 2 Submarines , 1 Type 054 Frigates
2023 : 2 Submarines , 1 Turkish Corvettes
2024 : 2 Submarines , 1 Type 054 Frigate
2025: 3 Turkish Corvettes

We ordered these Submarines 4 years ago


----------



## aziqbal

Readerdefence said:


> Hi is there anything Chinese are using as a rescue vessel & how expensive are they
> If possible to answer
> Thank you



Yes China has a new class of submarine recuse ships the Type 926 and they have built quite a few of them 

however they are close to 10,000 tons and too large for PN 

we need something down at 4,000 tons like the Turkish TCG Alemdar

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Niko Zhang

SD 10 said:


> is type 54 ap btter than regular ones or tuned down version? Your opinion?



054AP is a bit better than 054A. PN paid more than PLAN. And certainly PN has their own demand. However, the latest 054AP updated its anti ship fire power. Same missile as 054AP, but longer range.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Niko Zhang

Zarvan said:


> We can develop long range Babur for that. 1500 KM Babur can and should be developed. In mean while we can keep using them with Air Defence but option should be their. Universal VLS gives us option



Then u need to know the limit of Chinese latest VLS is only 850mm wide. Can Babur fit in?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Niko Zhang

Zarvan said:


> Pakistan should have not gone for Type 54 but instead a better version which still has 32 VLS but those are universal VLS. What I mean is that if mission requires those VLS carry and fire Cruise Missiles and if mission requires they carry Air Defence. That kind of ship in large numbers is what will give us real boost.
> 
> @waz @fatman17



Ah, and forgot to mention. Those universal VLS are 7m deep. Some are even 9m deep. It has to be equipped to bigger ships, which means more cost...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Niko Zhang

fatman17 said:


> Getting the type 54, a modified one at that was not a easy job as the Chinese were very reluctant to share their top of the line system even with Pakistan. The type 54AP is different from the regular type 54 in the Chinese navy.



PN really don’t need a ship like 055...Plus it’s just way toooooo expensive. Just like Russia won’t sell its 22350 to India.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

Niko Zhang said:


> Ah, and forgot to mention. Those universal VLS are 7m deep. Some are even 9m deep. It has to be equipped to bigger ships, which means more cost...


Design could have changed of front portion of our Type 54 and those could have been adjusted if leadership shows will and vision


----------



## Niko Zhang

Zarvan said:


> Design could have changed of front portion of our Type 54 and those could have been adjusted if leadership shows will and vision



u mean u prefer to have the universal VLS installed in 054AP?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tipu7

Niko Zhang said:


> 054AP is a bit better than 054A. PN paid more than PLAN. And certainly PN has their own demand. However, *the latest 054AP updated its anti ship fire power*. Same missile as 054AP, but longer range.


In what sense? Which Missile?



Zarvan said:


> Design could have changed of front portion of our Type 54 and those could have been adjusted if leadership shows will and vision


Type 54 AP VLS will house HHQ-16. The version, either A or B, is yet to be known. Probably the layout of VLS modules will provide some indication once the vessels will be launched.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

Tipu7 said:


> In what sense? Which Missile?


Maybe the export version of YJ-12, instead of YJ-83.



Tipu7 said:


> Type 54 AP VLS will house HHQ-16. The version, either A or B, is yet to be known.


There is no so-called "HHQ-16".
HQ-16A and HQ-16B are land-based versions.



Tipu7 said:


> Probably the layout of VLS modules will provide some indication once the vessels will be launched.


You also have to consider the radar systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Niko Zhang

Tipu7 said:


> In what sense? Which Missile?
> 
> 
> Type 54 AP VLS will house HHQ-16. The version, either A or B, is yet to be known. Probably the layout of VLS modules will provide some indication once the vessels will be launched.



The anti ship missile of 054AP is CM-302. It is an export version of YJ-12, shorter range. You can say YJ-12 is so far the best supersonic cruise anti ship missile. So even if the range is shorter, it’s still very powerful.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Niko Zhang

LKJ86 said:


> Maybe the export version of YJ-12, instead of YJ-83.
> 
> 
> There is no so-called "HHQ-16".
> HQ-16A and HQ-16B are land-based versions.
> 
> 
> You also have to consider the radar systems.



HQ-16A is land based. HQ-16B seems can be deployed both on the ground and on ships. The modification is mainly about the missile itself, longer range, different aerodynamic configuration, better anti-interference capability, active radar seeker.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

Niko Zhang said:


> u mean u prefer to have the universal VLS installed in 054AP?


Yes a slightly bigger Ship it would have become but worth it


----------



## Niko Zhang

Zarvan said:


> Yes a slightly bigger Ship it would have become but worth it



Well, AJK-16, the VLS on 054AP is universal. The new VLS on 052D is designed for long range SAM, anti-ballistic missile, ASBM, long range cruise missile and other expensive stuff in order to beat US. It is not realistic for PN to get them. For example, 052D is 7000t and equipped with AESA radar for the new VLS. Even Russia does not have such nice ship except Kirov.


----------



## LKJ86

Niko Zhang said:


> HQ-16A is land based. HQ-16B seems can be deployed both on the ground and on ships.


Land-based HQ-16A and HQ-16B are cold-launched, while ship-based HQ-16 is hot-launched.



Niko Zhang said:


> You can say YJ-12 is so far the best supersonic cruise anti ship missile.


PLAN prefers YJ-18.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akh1112

LKJ86 said:


> Yep, it is the VLS used by Type 052D and Type 055.
> View attachment 630164




This is wrong. The 054A/P uses the H/AJK16 whereas the 52D and 055 uses the GJB 5860-2006


----------



## LKJ86

Akh1112 said:


> This is wrong. The 054A/P uses the H/AJK16 whereas the 52D and 055 uses the GJB 5860-2006


What are you talking about?


----------



## Akh1112

LKJ86 said:


> What are you talking about?



Apologies, i just re-read your message, i had thought you said the H/AJK16 was shared among the rest of the ships too. my bad.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Niko Zhang

LKJ86 said:


> Land-based HQ-16A and HQ-16B are cold-launched, while ship-based HQ-16 is hot-launched.
> 
> 
> PLAN prefers YJ-18.



Yes, the launch approaches are different. Since the improvements are mostly about the missile itself, hq-16b is gradually introduced to Chinese army and navy. No need for big upgrades for other equipments.

YJ-18 surely gets a bit more love than YJ-12. However, it doesn’t mean it’s better than YJ-12. Plus YJ-18 is technically not quite supersonic, I don’t think it’s wrong to call YJ-12 the best supersonic cruise anti-ship missile


----------



## LKJ86

Niko Zhang said:


> Yes, the launch approaches are different. Since the improvements are mostly about the missile itself, hq-16b is gradually introduced to Chinese army and navy. No need for big upgrades for other equipments.


The land-based versions and the ship-based versions also have completely different radar systems.



Niko Zhang said:


> Plus YJ-18 is technically not quite supersonic


No, YJ-18 is subsonic-supersonic mixed, and its range is much longer than that of YJ-12.


----------



## Niko Zhang

LKJ86 said:


> The land-based versions and the ship-based versions also have completely different radar systems.
> 
> 
> No, YJ-18 is subsonic-supersonic mixed, and its range is much longer than that of YJ-12.



Yes, both, partially. HQ-16A uses AESA radar and some other differences. I’m trying to say there should be no problem for Chinese Army and Navy to use the upgraded missiles.

And yes, mixed, first subsonic then 3 Mach sprint. But if we narrow it down, among all the anti ship cruise missile that goes supersonic all the way, YJ-12 is very likely the best


----------



## Figaro

It looks like Pakistan's navy is going to become very formidable with the deliveries of the new frigates and submarines. The Indian navy first had to deal with the PLAN and now it looks like they will have to deal with the Pakistani navy as well. Let's see if there is also a corresponding Indian naval build up.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tipu7

Niko Zhang said:


> But if we narrow it down, among all the anti ship cruise missile that goes supersonic all the way, *YJ-12 is very likely the best*


It will be nice if you do a comparison with Indian Brahmos family as we rarely get credible information regarding Chinese modern weapon systems, and this YJ-12 vs Brahmos will be a hot topic in coming months...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Niko Zhang

Tipu7 said:


> It will be nice if you do a comparison with Indian Brahmos family as we rarely get credible information regarding Chinese modern weapon systems, and this YJ-12 vs Brahmos will be a hot topic in coming months...



credible information is something always hard to obtain. Doesn’t matter what kind of missile it is. Should u have questions about the details of YJ-12, I will see what I can give u.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakistan Ka Beta

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1135186229950132224

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------

