F-23P or OHP for PN

[aliaselin]

@aliaselin can you please post details of Type 54B because when I posted that Type 54B is on the horizon as per Chinese forum member on different forums people here behave like I m lying and making my own stuff.

@nomi007 please read post # 29, you will find answer of your post # 7, which you raised against my post # 3 on this forum.

Thanks.

I have talked in this thread:

Chinese Navy (PLAN) News & Discussions | Page 77

Type 054B/057~
End of 2014 begins to construct;
normal displacement of 4300~4500 ton;
new AESA radar;
integrated mast;
helicopter number 2 or more;
speed 30+ knots;
full electric propulsion

Time may be not accurate because it depends on the arrangement of the shipyard. The original source is from a member of CSIC.

 

[Mugwop]

I'd upgrade OHP's for anti-Submarine roles.

 

[Penguin]

US will not allow Chinese systems on OHPs and PN need robust air defense at their coastal & sea assets as threat from east is growing and evolving fast and PN just can't handle it even in a defensive war, they need power punch to go after IN and hit them hard in any hostility which they lack now, whereas IN can block incoming ships to Pakistan remaining in blue waters, where PN can't create potent threat to them until they have at least OHP class ships or better ships if possible with advance equipment and weapons. PN even lack advance subs in numbers.

What do you base that on? The Turks pretty much do what they what with theirs.. So do the Astralians and the Spanish and the Taiwanese.

What systems are you talking about, anyway? Afaik, there hasn't been any consideration/word/suggestions from the side of PN of putting any Chinese weapons or sensors on OHP....

ESSM even with SPY-1F/K is still very potent MR air defense if backed by RIM162s / Phalnaz 1B they can give IN run for their money even if they use their prime weapon Brahmos. The question is what China can offer? Type 54As falls similar to OHPs as they will be escorting ships of PLAN and have good air defense too, but is HQ9 Naval version and HH-16 good enough to handle the threat what IN & IAF combined pose to PN?? and how good HH-16 is when compared to ESSM?? and what EU countries can offer in MR SAM systems for PN??

We cannot tell since too little is known about HHQ16. Then again, 32 ESSM can be quad packed into a single 8-cell Mk41. That alone is an advantage (for the same VLS volume, you have 24 free cells for other weapons e.g. VL Asroc or ... )

EU can offer e.g. CAMM.

Who says PN needs a MR SAM (what is MR in this context anyway: ESSM has same range as older SM1, but ESSM is not MR by todays's standard.)

 

[Basel]

What do you base that on? The Turks pretty much do what they what with theirs.. So do the Astralians and the Spanish and the Taiwanese.
What systems are you talking about, anyway? Afaik, there hasn't been any consideration/word/suggestions from the side of PN of putting any Chinese weapons or sensors on OHP....

The problem is relations between the two countries Turks are key NATO member and not a close ally of China, further in case of new F-16s US have clearly instructed that no Chinese planes should be placed with them, which means they don't want Chinese to see what US have, even their older tech. That is the reason I said that US will not allow Chinese systems although they had allowed integration of their air to air missiles on Chinese F-6 during 71 war.

We cannot tell since too little is known about HHQ16. Then again, 32 ESSM can be quad packed into a single 8-cell Mk41. That alone is an advantage (for the same VLS volume, you have 24 free cells for other weapons e.g. VL Asroc or ... )
EU can offer e.g. CAMM.
Who says PN needs a MR SAM (what is MR in this context anyway: ESSM has same range as older SM1, but ESSM is not MR by todays's standard.)

MR (medium range), so what is new definition of MR SAM systems? the reason of mentioning ESSM is that it can handle all kind of air threat upto 50kms range including current big threat posed by supersonic Brahmos missile also it can be launched from many type of launchers, whereas SM-1s are old and can't handle all type of threats specially new sea skimming missiles. The longest range SAM of PN is FM-90 with 15kms range which is insufficient in current threat posed by IAF & IN.

http://www.raytheon.com/capabilitie...c/documents/download/rms12_essm_evolution.pdf
.
RIM-66 Standard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
.
Standard Missile - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Basel]

HAS capable RAM & Sea RAM or equivalent of these should be standardized on all PN surface vessels, specially if we cant get modern medium range SAM.

RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Can we fit ESSM & RAM on our OHPs where MK-13/22 launcher has been removed like these? if cant afford / get VLS.

Mk-29 guided missile launching system GMLS NATO Sea Sparrow RIM-7

 

[Penguin]

The problem is relations between the two countries Turks are key NATO member and not a close ally of China, further in case of new F-16s US have clearly instructed that no Chinese planes should be placed with them, which means they don't want Chinese to see what US have, even their older tech. That is the reason I said that US will not allow Chinese systems although they had allowed integration of their air to air missiles on Chinese F-6 during 71 war.

Uhm.... aircraft are far delicate more maintenance intensive than some box-launchers for AShM or a SAM launcher. I do recall Chinese SAMs being mounted on the ex-Brit Type 21s....

MR (medium range), so what is new definition of MR SAM systems? the reason of mentioning ESSM is that it can handle all kind of air threat upto 50kms range including current big threat posed by supersonic Brahmos missile also it can be launched from many type of launchers, whereas SM-1s are old and can't handle all type of threats specially new sea skimming missiles. The longest range SAM of PN is FM-90 with 15kms range which is insufficient in current threat posed by IAF & IN.

The point is not the age of the missile. Many more missiles can handle threats up to 50km today than in the days of SM1. Which means the definition of MR is shifting. Meanwhile, if 15km is insufficient, why do we continue to see RAM block 2 and FL300N and similar close in missile sysems?

 

[Penguin]

HAS capable RAM & Sea RAM or equivalent of these should be standardized on all PN surface vessels, specially if we cant get modern medium range SAM.

RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Can we fit ESSM & RAM on our OHPs where MK-13/22 launcher has been removed like these? if cant afford / get VLS.

Mk-29 guided missile launching system GMLS NATO Sea Sparrow RIM-7

You could put the 76mm in the spot where Aussies and Turks put the MK41 and then you'ld have 2 placed for one of these launchers as well as the Phalanx CIWS. Or replace Phalanx with RAM and stick on a Mk29 with no reloads and some Harpoon. You'ld also need a new radar illuminator installed for SeaSparrow or ESSM from the Mk29 (although technically the CAS of the OHP can illuminate for Sea Sparrow but it probably lacks power and range for ESSM).

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Navy would be ideally in good shape

a) 3 OHP frigates from USA
b) 6 Submrines from China

That is more then enough for now