What's new

PAKISTAN NAVY SHIPS: YARMOOK-CLASS CORVETTE

Akh1112

FULL MEMBER
Nov 21, 2019
722
3
792
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
IMO the Exocets (and even Harpoon Block-IIs) will eventually reach the end of their respective life-cycles. I imagine the new LRMPA would come with new AShMs to replace the Exocets... Atmaca perhaps?

Id hope it would be whatever domestic AShM is in the works. Do we really need another foreigner weapon? Especially since we are actually not bad in terms of AShM development etc. IMO the Exocet life cycle was finished decades ago, the french are just now considering replacing the seeker with an active RF seeker. Do you believe this is the third iteration of this missile lol.
 

Bilal Khan (Quwa)

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 22, 2016
4,805
51
17,004
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
Id hope it would be whatever domestic AShM is in the works. Do we really need another foreigner weapon? Especially since we are actually not bad in terms of AShM development etc. IMO the Exocet life cycle was finished decades ago, the french are just now considering replacing the seeker with an active RF seeker. Do you believe this is the third iteration of this missile lol.
I agree. We should rope in Aselsan, Roketsan, etc to help with fine-tuning our own similar subsonic AShM and work with them on supersonic AShM technologies. I'd prefer do high-level R&D research across relevant areas, and then each side applies its learning on its own solutions.
 

Akh1112

FULL MEMBER
Nov 21, 2019
722
3
792
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
I agree. We should rope in Aselsan, Roketsan, etc to help with fine-tuning our own similar subsonic AShM and work with them on supersonic AShM technologies. I'd prefer do high-level R&D research across relevant areas, and then each side applies its learning on its own solutions.

Even if we dont look to AShM development, working with them on seeker tech could probably be the best thing for Pakistan, it would be beneficial for all three service branches. We should really be looking towards the future of missile tech, IIR, Dual mode guidance etc and use these to be applied in projects for each branch, i.e AShM, SAM, AAM.
 

Zarvan

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 28, 2011
49,955
81
54,694
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
So outgoing Naval Chief also gave the surprising news that we have three of these ships on order not two. Next one will be Tabook and third one called Haybat.
 

CHI RULES

FULL MEMBER
Mar 23, 2015
1,819
5
1,506
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
The PN should arm OPVs with combo of gun/missile for AD purposes and we may look for Chinese copy or Russian solution, both are quite affordable.
 

Armchair

SENIOR MEMBER
Jun 4, 2014
3,322
8
5,371
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Turkey
I always confuse the FAC-M. Thinking sometimes it is the Azmat class ships, while other times the Turkish FACs PN has.
 

YeBeWarned

BANNED
Sep 25, 2016
16,915
11
24,169
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
The PN should arm OPVs with combo of gun/missile for AD purposes and we may look for Chinese copy or Russian solution, both are quite affordable.
I am pretty sure they will, Damen OPV can easily carry 2x2 anti ship missile launchers .
 

Tank131

FULL MEMBER
Oct 7, 2015
1,049
5
2,287
Country
United States
Location
United States
From what i understand the Yarmooks will carry AShM, and a CIWS. Frankly i have not been very happy with the design of this ship from a defensive position. While it will have a 30mm main gun (probably Aselsan SMASH) and 2 quadlaunchers for AShM (8 in total) its CIWS is so terribly positioned because of ther vertical smoke stacks that it covers only the stern of the ship and part of the starboard side. The port side is nearly completely undefended. To that end, i hope they dont go with SMASH as the main gun, rather i hope they put something like AK630 as the main gun (like Type 022 FAC) which will give more port amd starboard coverage leaving only maybe 20-30 degrees of the port side undefended.

The only other option i could imagine is putting something like a navalized version of a cheetah launcher from denel or more ideally something like TOR-m2km which may be able to fit between the stacks.
 

Akh1112

FULL MEMBER
Nov 21, 2019
722
3
792
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
From what i understand the Yarmooks will carry AShM, and a CIWS. Frankly i have not been very happy with the design of this ship from a defensive position. While it will have a 30mm main gun (probably Aselsan SMASH) and 2 quadlaunchers for AShM (8 in total) its CIWS is so terribly positioned because of ther vertical smoke stacks that it covers only the stern of the ship and part of the starboard side. The port side is nearly completely undefended. To that end, i hope they dont go with SMASH as the main gun, rather i hope they put something like AK630 as the main gun (like Type 022 FAC) which will give more port amd starboard coverage leaving only maybe 20-30 degrees of the port side undefended.

The only other option i could imagine is putting something like a navalized version of a cheetah launcher from denel or more ideally something like TOR-m2km which may be able to fit between the stacks.
You turn to have the CIWS face said threat, thats usually how that works. In terms of main gun, its almost certainly the Aselsan SMASH, you can see the mount. The AK-630 is an exceptionally bad CIWS. Its manually aimed and uh, the P_hit numbers are not very reassuring.
H/PJ-12's P_hit against Mach 1 target with frontal cross section of 0.1m^2 is 80%[/QUOTE]
The same target, with an AK630, the P_hit is 20%.[/QUOTE]

Putting a SAM on them would be a pain, you need targeting systems and launchers obviously, the best solution for a boat like this is the SEARAM as it has its own radar and can operate independently of a ships CMS, of course, this is unrealistic so the next best choice is the HHQ-10.[/QUOTE]
 

Tank131

FULL MEMBER
Oct 7, 2015
1,049
5
2,287
Country
United States
Location
United States
You turn to have the CIWS face said threat, thats usually how that works. In terms of main gun, its almost certainly the Aselsan SMASH, you can see the mount. The AK-630 is an exceptionally bad CIWS. Its manually aimed and uh, the P_hit numbers are not very reassuring.
H/PJ-12's P_hit against Mach 1 target with frontal cross section of 0.1m^2 is 80%
The same target, with an AK630, the P_hit is 20%.[/QUOTE]

Putting a SAM on them would be a pain, you need targeting systems and launchers obviously, the best solution for a boat like this is the SEARAM as it has its own radar and can operate independently of a ships CMS, of course, this is unrealistic so the next best choice is the HHQ-10.[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
I get that you turn for the CIWS to target, but a ship turning when being targeted by a brahmos isn't likely to complete that turn. Hell even if it did the CIWS may not make much of a difference. As far as the Ak630 it is fully automated and controlled by fire control radar (MR-123-2) and can also utilize an EO tracker. It also can be controlled remotely. Its small size allows it to be placed in locations smaller tuan most other CIWS. As far as it being a crappy system... It operates already on the Azmats and has a higher. On what grounds are you calling it a crappy system? As far as its hit rate against supersonic missiles, i guarantee its better than SMASH which is unlikely to even be able to engage such a target.

I agree with you that the back weapons station would be better served with a PDMS. That is the point. A CIWS in that station is ineffective due to the location of the station and the design of the stacks. PN sure knows how to pick inefficient designs (Azmat and F-22p have tremendous wasted space too).
 

Akh1112

FULL MEMBER
Nov 21, 2019
722
3
792
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
The same target, with an AK630, the P_hit is 20%.
Putting a SAM on them would be a pain, you need targeting systems and launchers obviously, the best solution for a boat like this is the SEARAM as it has its own radar and can operate independently of a ships CMS, of course, this is unrealistic so the next best choice is the HHQ-10.[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
I get that you turn for the CIWS to target, but a ship turning when being targeted by a brahmos isn't likely to complete that turn. Hell even if it did the CIWS may not make much of a difference. As far as the Ak630 it is fully automated and controlled by fire control radar (MR-123-2) and can also utilize an EO tracker. It also can be controlled remotely. Its small size allows it to be placed in locations smaller tuan most other CIWS. As far as it being a crappy system... It operates already on the Azmats and has a higher. On what grounds are you calling it a crappy system? As far as its hit rate against supersonic missiles, i guarantee its better than SMASH which is unlikely to even be able to engage such a target.

I agree with you that the back weapons station would be better served with a PDMS. That is the point. A CIWS in that station is ineffective due to the location of the station and the design of the stacks. PN sure knows how to pick inefficient designs (Azmat and F-22p have tremendous wasted space too).
[/QUOTE]


SMASH isnt a CIWS system. The Yarmooks will probably make use of the Gokdeniz or Phalanx. Smash is not designed to be used in a CIWS role.
 

Tank131

FULL MEMBER
Oct 7, 2015
1,049
5
2,287
Country
United States
Location
United States
SMASH isnt a CIWS system. The Yarmooks will probably make use of the Gokdeniz or Phalanx. Smash is not designed to be used in a CIWS role.
Yeah man, i know that. Thats my point. If you have a less than ideal position for your rear facing CIWS and you have a weapon station in the front which could likely house another CIWS which can perform all the tasks of a SMASH 30mm Gun plus provide aerial coverage, then why would you not go with the CIWS. I hope that is more clear. Whether they use phalanx (most likely given Gokdeniz will be on MILGEM and the Amazon which are retiring already jave Phalanx) in the rear or not, the positioning of the CIWS station is not good, specifically because of the design of the ships vertical stacks. The ship is designednas an OPV with numerous guns and mission support equipment so that is understandable. It was never meant as a warship but a patrol craft for policing. To turn it into a warship in time of need represents a less than ideal senario which, due to its design, is even worse. It will perform the Anti ship role just fine, but PN (Much like PAF and its love of fighter only aircraft without any significant attention paid to strike roles) is fixated on anti-ship capacity that it has completely forgotten its defensive capacity for anti-air/antimissile. It younare going to use a ship primarily as an OVP and want to potentially flip it into a corvette role in times of war, why on earth would you select a design which will hamper its ability to defend itself. You are asking it to make a 180 degree turn in order to deal with weapons coming from the one side of the ship. This is a ship that isnt carrying powerful air tracking/targeting radars. By the time it sees even a subsonic missile, it will not be able to turn to fight it off with its ciws. That is why i say switch the SMASH for AK-630. IF phalanx or Gokdeniz will fit, thats fine too (but I doubt they will). We have seen ak630 in the role of a main gun on Type 022 FAC which are far smaller than Yarmooks. Plus on an OPV who will be dealing with smaller craft on the seas, the ciws is one of the most potent weapons in its arsenal (see how USN plans to deal with Irans fleet of tiny FACs). If you can get a SeaRAM or FL-3000N in the rear weapon station all the better. All of the 12.7mm stations should be equipped with Aselsan STAMP.
 

RadarGudumluMuhimmat

FULL MEMBER
Mar 21, 2019
519
0
551
Country
Turkey
Location
Turkey
Korkut / Korkut D (Gökdeniz) uses different 30 mm ammunition types and can be selected at the moment of shot. Particle ammunition (Atom) is used for air defense, but you can also use straight 30 mm bullets and support infantry. You can also use Gökdeniz on the ship to hit surface targets.

0:53 - 1:03 Seen between

 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom