What's new

PAKISTAN NAVY SIGNS ORDER FOR TWENTY INDIGENOUS GUN BOATS - Oct 2022 .

Tank131

FULL MEMBER
Oct 7, 2015
1,214
5
2,650
Country
United States
Location
United States
I really dislike these, infact, i think we should have bought more MRTP33, at 39 meters, these things are woefully underarmed, pirates are carrying RPGs etc nowadays, at gun ranges these become easy targets, at the very least we should have seen some form of SSM, whether it be hellfires, brimstone, some chinese one or heck, even a anti ship missile loadout, MRTP33 has capacity for 5 tons of anti ship missiles. We are poor, we need equiptment that can do many things and not be specialized, these ships had potential, i really wish theyd have slapped some form of anti-ship weaponry onboard. Just imagine 20, reasonably mobile little ships armed with 4 harpoons each, nightmare. This is what the MRTP33 does so well though, its so mobile its a hard target, carries proper weaponry and can do counter-piracy stuff. Domestic design is good, but if we have the opportunity for better, we should take it. PN designers should have taken the azmat and evolved that, filling this gap with locally produced and modified MRTP33, those ships are lethal man. At the very least someone needs to take initiative and get some sort of 8-10km ranged ATGM onboard to protect the vessels from pirates etc.
Agreenthat MRTP Wwould have been verry valuable if acquired in numbers. The issue was the harpoon itself. The US refused to allow its integration for PN vessels. ATMACA may solve this issue but i think that just started deliveries for Turkish navy this year.
I don't like this concept of gunboats. For smugglers, yes good boats but we are facing India. India will not send gunboats to attack Karachi.
Well, what do you propose to use against smugglers, narcos, and pirates which also operate in Pakistans waters? You want to use corvettes and frigates for that job? These ships are meant to offload large surface ships from doing the anti-piracy, anti-narcotics and anti-smuggling jobs. They are NOT meant to engage indian naval vessels. They may have been better served if handed to PMSA (which is who should be taking a far more active role in these operations. But that is a branch of the Navy so may still be getting these in the end.
Should have opted for for larger powerfully destroyers to get some sort of advantage on indian aircraft carriers
Still have to provide policing and security for Pakistani waters. These help to do that without tying up your larger surface ships.

You know that our MRTP33 are only armed with a board gun.



Our MRTP-33 don’t carry any missile.
It has the ability to carry missiles, but for Pakistan, it wasnt allowed by the US to be integrated for Pakistan.
 

arslank03

FULL MEMBER
Feb 5, 2022
280
0
450
Country
United Kingdom
Location
Australia
Agreenthat MRTP Wwould have been verry valuable if acquired in numbers. The issue was the harpoon itself. The US refused to allow its integration for PN vessels. ATMACA may solve this issue but i think that just started deliveries for Turkish navy this year.

Well, what do you propose to use against smugglers, narcos, and pirates which also operate in Pakistans waters? You want to use corvettes and frigates for that job? These ships are meant to offload large surface ships from doing the anti-piracy, anti-narcotics and anti-smuggling jobs. They are NOT meant to engage indian naval vessels. They may have been better served if handed to PMSA (which is who should be taking a far more active role in these operations. But that is a branch of the Navy so may still be getting these in the end.

Still have to provide policing and security for Pakistani waters. These help to do that without tying up your larger surface ships.


It has the ability to carry missiles, but for Pakistan, it wasnt allowed by the US to be integrated for Pakistan.

still not sure about that considering PN is equipping yarmook with phalanx and harpoon. I think the actual reason is actually cost/supply side
 

Tank131

FULL MEMBER
Oct 7, 2015
1,214
5
2,650
Country
United States
Location
United States
still not sure about that considering PN is equipping yarmook with phalanx and harpoon. I think the actual reason is actually cost/supply side
I think this was less about punishing Pakistan and more about punishing Turkey. With respect to Yarmook and Phalanx, that is a defensive system and they already owned that weapons system and was transferred from Tariq class. I haven't heard about harpoon getting equipped on Yarmook but to be fair i haven't heard which AShM will be equipped on them
 

Tipu7

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Aug 8, 2014
5,179
97
13,862
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
PN is equipping damen opv with harpoons.


A fully loaded MRTP33 can accelerate to 45kts in 45s, 47+ kts top speed with the same load depending on sea state.
Practical experience of Pakistan Navy suggests otherwise.
The decision to acquire more MRTP-33 was scrapped due to performance grounds.
 

imranyounus

FULL MEMBER
Jan 10, 2010
188
0
144
small ships like MRTP 33 with short range ASM are more suitable for close proximity action.

Turkey is mostly surrounded by shallow water and shared sea with hostile countries and such systems are useful.
But for Pakistan with open waters and Indian territory being far away it may not be suitable
 

sparten

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 11, 2006
2,112
-1
1,645
We'll see MRTP-33-type FAC(M)s too.

The good thing about these gunboats (and Damen OPVs) is that they totally solve the peacetime requirements. Now, the PN doesn't need to mix the sea policing or anti-piracy requirements into its A2/AD assets. For the latter, the PN can finally focus on offensive firepower, speed, and stealth while forgetting about the need for range, endurance, higher sea states, etc.

To me, the fact that the PN is investing in this many patrol boats and OPVs tells me that it wants to bifurcate the peacetime and wartime roles very clearly. In other words, there should be no scenario where the B-Class, J-Class, or future FAC(M) have to do any low-intensity, asymmetrical work. There will be enough other ships (like OPV 1800, OPV 2400, the gunboats, etc) for those jobs.

The MRTP-33 is likely the starting point, e.g., composite superstructure, water jets, etc.
Bifurcate the coastal defence role and the deep ocean operations role.

I suspect the OPV will be used as a squadron flagship for these vessel. Let’s say 5 boats in a squadron commanded by a Flag Captain onboard an OPV. Operating within 500 miles of the coast.
 

Pakistan Ka Beta

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 7, 2019
3,081
8
7,570
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
tbh at the rate the PN's going, I think we'll see them start an original submarine project (e.g., with Turkey) a lot sooner than later.
The boat is meant for patrolling and policing duties. It will be engaging asymmetric threats which do not necessarily require missile systems and can be neutralized with stabilized automated 25mm gun. Missiles and relevant sensors add weight which undermines the mobility and range of boat.
If all 20 boats will be commissioned, it will be very valuable addition in PN.
What will this be used for and my question applies to all gunboats as well??
When is length ever measured in tons?

peace time policing in near shore areas in sea, or in more simple terms it will be involved in anti-piracy & anti-smuggling operations.
The economic benefit of these can be immense in terms of curbed smuggling and securing our coastline.
 

Zarvan

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 28, 2011
53,706
87
63,413
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Agree 💯 instead we should use bigtships and use bigg 💵💵💵💰💰💰 for anti piracy or leave piracy open so gawadar etc does great 👍👍
Are you that naive or what. PMSA duty is to encounter Piracy and other crimes on sea. Navy focus should be big wars


The weapon system placed on this boat should be placed on these ships.
 
Last edited:

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


Top Bottom