Featured Concepts: 'Littoral Mission Vessels'

[SSG_Commando]

Pakistan needs 3-4 5-6K ton vessels which have credible air defence capability. These ships are good for patrolling nothing more. Our adversary has a capable navy. Make no mistake about it

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Pakistan needs 3-4 5-6K ton vessels which have credible air defence capability. These ships are good for patrolling nothing more. Our adversary has a capable navy. Make no mistake about it

These LCS/LMVs aren't meant to takeover the role of frigates/destroyers. Rather, they're an affordable way of distributing your anti-ship, anti-sub, land-attack, etc capabilities across more ships. You can have 8 large ships, but if those 1-2 of those go under repair, you lose a chunk of your capability. This wouldn't be the case with these smaller ships as there are many more available (even if 1-2 go into repair et. al).

But it's not "either/or." These are all complementary assets. We can't afford a large number of frigates with AAW at the moment, but 1 of those can go a long way giving area-wide air defence to these smaller ships. OTOH, these smaller ships let us grow our anti-ship, anti-sub and land-attack coverages cost-effectively.

 

[Tank131]

You want this, don't you?

In a way, you'd be in luck because this design is from Dearsan in Turkey.

View attachment 662754

That ship with a hull mounted sonar would be a great asset. 16 cell vls with what appears to be a ciws similar to Pantsir-M... whats not to like?

 

[Tank131]

Pakistan needs 3-4 5-6K ton vessels which have credible air defence capability. These ships are good for patrolling nothing more. Our adversary has a capable navy. Make no mistake about it

There is no denying that they are not replacements for larger vessels, but a ship with 16 cell vls (ideally one that can launch quad or at least dual packed 40-60km missiles if G-40 actually comes to fruition. And 8 point defense missiles with a CIWS in a smaller package, will add tremendous flexibility to the surface fleet.

 

[KAL-EL]

I wonder if Pakistan would like some juicy American Zumwalt ships

 

[Akh1112]

That ship with a hull mounted sonar would be a great asset. 16 cell vls with what appears to be a ciws similar to Pantsir-M... whats not to like?

The pantsir part

 

[Tank131]

The pantsir part

Why is that funny? The rendering appears to show a twin autocanon with missiles which is "similar to Pantsir-M" at the rear, above the hangar. It is a concept drawing of a ship, not my own wishlist.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Why is that funny? The rendering appears to show a twin autocanon with missiles which is "similar to Pantsir-M" at the rear, above the hangar. It is a concept drawing of a ship, not my own wishlist.

I think he means we need a cooler PDMS ... like Denel Rheinmetall Cheetah C-RAM.

You can add the VLS atop of the superstructure (it's light enough). Basically similar to Iron Dome.

 

[Akh1112]

I think he means we need a cooler PDMS ... like Denel Rheinmetall Cheetah C-RAM.

You can add the VLS atop of the superstructure (it's light enough). Basically similar to Iron Dome.

Meh, we know the shortfalls of Pantsir. Depending on the share of components with the Original Pantsir, we know how awful it is when operating outside of an IADS, its intended function.

For the Pantsir M, i had asked someone i know for what they think about its Hermes missile.:

"I think that they're trying to fix the various problems that the overspecialized-for-helicopters 57E6s had without giving up most of the design features.
For example, they've enfattened the second stage, which is good, but they're still losing lots of volume and mass to a wholly separate set of fins and the interstage
For Hermes-K, I'm also not sure if it's really intended as an air defense missile in the first place? It seems to be marketed mostly as a anti tank missile with a secondary anti-helicopter (only) role, which is broadly consistent with its outward design"

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Meh, we know the shortfalls of Pantsir. Depending on the share of components with the Original Pantsir, we know how awful it is when operating outside of an IADS, its intended function.

For the Pantsir M, i had asked someone i know for what they think about its Hermes missile.:

"I think that they're trying to fix the various problems that the overspecialized-for-helicopters 57E6s had without giving up most of the design features.
For example, they've enfattened the second stage, which is good, but they're still losing lots of volume and mass to a wholly separate set of fins and the interstage
For Hermes-K, I'm also not sure if it's really intended as an air defense missile in the first place? It seems to be marketed mostly as a anti tank missile with a secondary anti-helicopter (only) role, which is broadly consistent with its outward design"

I think the PN would be content with a modern CIWS cannon. Be it the MILGEM-J or the 054A/P, the PN -- both times -- turned down the PDMS option. Granted, the RAM was a probable no-go due to ITAR (but I was told by Diehl at IDEAS that the German Gov't approved it for sale to Pak, and would deal with the US for us). But the FL-3000N? Simply, I do not think the PN is 100% convinced of PDMS versus a modern CIWS.

 

[Akh1112]

I think the PN would be content with a modern CIWS cannon. Be it the MILGEM-J or the 054A/P, the PN -- both times -- turned down the PDMS option. Granted, the RAM was a probable no-go due to ITAR (but I was told by Diehl at IDEAS that the German Gov't approved it for sale to Pak, and would deal with the US for us). But the FL-3000N? Simply, I do not think the PN is 100% convinced of PDMS versus a modern CIWS.

Yeah, that makes sense, just the whole Pantsir-M, its a pretty meh system based off of what we have.

 

[The Eagle]

The last FAC-M Azmat class was an indigenous production along with some in-house built equipment, so can I assume something on the same line of efforts with 800 to 1000 ton for LMV and a couple with specialized role though another couple with versatile input in battlefield.

 

[Tank131]

I think the PN would be content with a modern CIWS cannon. Be it the MILGEM-J or the 054A/P, the PN -- both times -- turned down the PDMS option. Granted, the RAM was a probable no-go due to ITAR (but I was told by Diehl at IDEAS that the German Gov't approved it for sale to Pak, and would deal with the US for us). But the FL-3000N? Simply, I do not think the PN is 100% convinced of PDMS versus a modern CIWS.

Yeah, that makes sense, just the whole Pantsir-M, its a pretty meh system based off of what we have.

While pantsir certainly has hits problems, the system also represents where PN should go in terms of theory. There is a rational to move towards PDMS as part of your ship defense. The entire point is to create a multi-tiered approach to your air defense so as to have redundancy for what are essentially expensive and high valued targets which, for a service the size of PN, each ship represents a strategically important part of the mission. If all you stick to is short to medium range missiles and possibly ciws then they are leaving gaps in the defense,especially since we dont have any legitimate performance idea about HQ-16 or any other Chinese SAM (in that they could also be paper tiger like the russian systems). The more opportunities you give yourself to intercept an incoming missile the better. Systems like Pantsir-M, SeaRam, and

With respect to the cheetah gives you a 6km range for asymmetric threats sonwith respect to supersonic missiles it should be as good as FL-3000N range wise, but for some reason i trust the denel/rheinmetall system more. Tye only issue is I'm not sure if it is available yet in the naval theater. I really would love to see Pakistan acquire it along with Mangoose III to form its own Iron Dome on the LOC.

 

[khanmubashir]

I think PN now has too many types of corvettes/frigates/FACs. Do the above represent capabilities that a mdified AZMAT or Yarmook cannot deliver? I think PN now needs a very big focus on Subs and MPA. Let the surface grow naturally with the types we have on order and order more. Also as terror related issues and smuggling piracy subside we will need to focus less on sub-conventional threat and more on Indian Navy

Yes it's better to upgrade older shops then buying new ones more cost effective and quick
Perhaps self build more of older design with improvements instead of buying new unproven ones

Btw

Saw a USA defence video last night which said defence studies evaluation found that $ for $ building large number of smaller ships can deliver 1.4 X the total fire power Vs small number of large ships for same price

 

[niaz]

Small fast attack crafts/corvettes of around 1000 DTW or less is, in my opinion, only good for ‘Policeman’ duty close to the shore region, say within about 100 miles or so. Primarily because while their attack /anti-sub weaponry could be deadly, there is not enough room for the self-defense weapon systems. Such warships would therefore be easy prey for the hostile aircraft or frigate size warships.

One would think that in addition to having superior speed & maneuverability, ship to ship missiles & anti-sub weaponry; an effective warship also needs decoy launchers, anti-aircraft missiles system, and a point defense system. The ship should also have space for a flight deck & a hanger capable of supporting at least a small size helicopter such as Fennec or Alouette and should be capable of staying at sea for a minimum of 2 to 3 weeks without refueling.

All this adds to the size as well the cost but then naval warfare has always an expensive business and it is a waste of manpower and resources to have a warship that can be easily eliminated.

Therefore IMHO, the selection of Ada class Turkish corvettes is a very good choice. One may call these warships ‘Corvettes’ but the vessels are as capable as most modern frigates. It would be stretching to call Ada class warship as ‘Blue Water’ capable but for the littoral defense, these are excellent. I would go for 4 more of the same if funds could be found.