Pakistan in talks for 4 Ada Class Corvettes, T-129 Helicopters & modernization of agosta fleet

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

VLS provides maximum utilization of available space. With a slant launcher, which was the case in the SM-1 days, you'd be using a lot of room for 1-4 missiles, room that otherwise could be used for 16 vertically set missiles. That is lesser ability for countering saturation strikes, for example.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Nice points certainly large ships can easily get the VLS tech , due to the depth of the ships inner structure , the fast attack platform or some of the corvettes may not have that depth below the deck to vertically house a missile
for such platform only a slanted , in your word unefficient choices would have to be made. However still no reason why we should not have even the slanted version of launcher

a) For our OHP ship (1 Ship x 8 Missiles (2 launchers) = 8)
b) For our 4 Fast attack Stealth Boats (4 Ships x 4 Missiles (Assume 1 launcher per ship) = 20 Missiles)

Better to have 28 Missiles for Anti Air protection on such platform

Plus would really not be bad to have 4 Fast attack boats armed with NASR tactical punch, refering to the ships we have under construction or for future

However bringing in a VLS based ship from Turkey will certainly be a great plus point , but we will still have to think about Slanted launcher systems for existing platforms

 

[ziya]

fake news

anyway the frigate is useless without air defence.
even small Chinese coverts have better airdefence

Milgem has some new techs for anti submarine warfares,not for air defence,its corvette or light frigate you can not expect it.Our soldiers said that milgem can detect submarines from very far away then other our ships such as meco and perry,because she has more client and also she is more stealth to surface ships as well.We have to wait some time because you wanna make desicion to payload some systems different from the original milgem

 

[Penguin]

Really don't see what is the fuss about VLS get some surface based launcher installed for SAM and we are good to go, install the units on the deck

Seems like we have various tech on launcher based platform already operating in Military made locally in Pakistan

Or import some basic air defence

Which can easily be setup on ship deck due to its small size
(worse case scenario)

I would put it to you that land based systems do not well withstand the corrosive environment that sea based systems have to face. Also, the 3-D motion of a ship at sea probably far outstrips what even stabilized, fire on the move capable, land-based systems can handle. Finally, I doubt a BUK TELAR like the one above but without missiles would weigh less than e.g. a 12 round VLS unit without missiles plus firecontrol radar for Shtil, while the latter can carry 3x the amount of ready rounds.

The other TEL is a "Multi-tube Ballistic Missile" launcher with 60km range artillery rockets. Why put that on a ship?

This can even be installed on our Fast Attack boats get rid of the useless cannon and install this in front forget about the looks

If the connon is still needed it can may be get moved a bit further to the front

We could technically introduce a special class which carries the Nasr on it at sea

Since we are planning to make 10-20 Fast attack Stealth Boats might as well go in that direction

IMHO you got your scaling wrong (missile launcher projected on ship is depicted too small).

Besides:

That would be the Turkish missile, with truck-mounted VLS

M113/AIFV/ACV > height to hull roof is approx 2mhttp://www.aselsan.com.tr/en-us/cap...sar-a-low-altitude-air-defense-missile-system
http://www.aselsan.com.tr/en-us/cap...sar-a-low-altitude-air-defense-missile-system

Take humans for size reference

Biggest advantages VLS: 360 degree coverage, rapid fire, compact, lower breakdown risks and less maintenance (fewer moving parts). The first two are of importance for dealing with saturation attacks esp. from multiple angles of attack. The latter are related to design, mission availability and operating cost.

 

[RIP Pak LAW]

Another face palm thread by Zarvan ?

 

[Penguin]

Nice points certainly large ships can easily get the VLS tech , due to the depth of the ships inner structure , the fast attack platform or some of the corvettes may not have that depth below the deck to vertically house a missile

Have you seen how a very long VLS was incorporated into the RUssian Buyan class FAC-M?

Original Buyan class

Buyan-M with Russian Universal Launcher VLS

That's a 4 deck deep launcher ....

Draft:

• 2 m (7 ft) (project 21630 Buyan)
• 2.5 m (8 ft) (project 21631 Buyan-M)

Beam:

• 9.6 m (31 ft) (project 21630 Buyan)
• 11 m (36 ft) (project 21631 Buyan-M)

Length:

• 62 m (203 ft) (project 21630 Buyan)
• 75 m (246 ft) (project 21631 Buyan-M)

Displacement:

• 500 tons standard (project 21630 Buyan)
• 949 tons full (project 21631 Buyan-M)

 

[Penguin]

Another face palm thread by Zarvan ?

Well, I don't know. It just isn't as simple as it may appear. And, for some missions (e.g. gun and rocket fire in support of amphibious landings), putting grond equipment on ships can be an option. But for e.g. anti-air, your deck-lashed ground equipment would not be integrated with ship sensors and command system.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Well landing troops on land and support their landing by means of a cannon fire is great for nations that wish to be doing lot of landing of troop type missions. Pakistan's objective generally is keeping others from reaching our shores

Pakistan Navy , quite a few of our platforms , need the SAM systems

1- OHP
4-5 Fast Attack boats
0 Corvettes ("Zero")

Even having a round of 4-6 Missiles per ship creates a proper air security umberella , note the anti ship missiles are nomally located in the rear of the fast attack ships so its not like it can't be integrated

For the SAM missiles from Turkey or China I would assume we could install the slanted missile launcher, and then may be run the wiring and create it's own dedicated center of operation

I feel if we wanted we could technically arm the fast attack boats with leathal launchers

a) Nasr (Surace level engagement)
b) Hisar-O , Hisar-A series (Low / Medium Air defence)

 

[Signalian]

Well, I don't know. It just isn't as simple as it may appear. And, for some missions (e.g. gun and rocket fire in support of amphibious landings), putting grond equipment on ships can be an option. But for e.g. anti-air, your deck-lashed ground equipment would not be integrated with ship sensors and command system.

can u go a bit deep deep in setting trajectory and others factors necessary for firing from a moving surface hitting a:
1. Stationary target.
2. Moving target.

 

[Penguin]

Well landing troops on land and support their landing by means of a cannon fire is great for nations that wish to be doing lot of landing of troop type missions. Pakistan's objective generally is keeping others from reaching our shores

Regarding Pakistan's marines:

The Pakistan Marines (Urdu: پاکستان سمندریوں); English IPA: pɑkʰ məriːniz (or/ simply Marines Urdu: سمندریوں); reporting name PM), is an expeditionary and naval warfare uniform service branch of the Pakistan Navy that consists of active duty, high-ranking officers and other personnel of the Navy. The Pakistan Marines are responsible for providing force projection from the sea, using the mobility of the Pakistan Navy to rapidly deliver combined-arms task forces. [Re-]Established in 1990, it is estimated to comprise about 2,000 active-duty personnel from the Navy, with plans to grow to brigade strength by 2015.

In the Pakistani military leadership structure, the Marines are a component of the Pakistan Navy, often working closely with the Navy for training, executing expeditionary operations and logistics purposes. They are not a separate branch of the armed forces. The Marines were first formed as an amphibious battalion on 1 June 1971, in East-Pakistan as naval infantry to execute operations; however after poor performance in the 1971 war with India, they were disbanded in 1974. In 1990, the Marines were re-established by Commander Obaidullah; since then they have been a part of Navy, often conducting operations with other Pakistani naval forces

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

1971 = battalion
A battalion is a military unit. The use of the term "battalion" varies by nationality and branch of service. Typically a battalion consists of 300 to 800 soldiers and is divided into a number of companies.

2015 = brigade
A brigade is a major tactical military formation that is typically composed of three to six battalions plus supporting elements. Strength varies from 2,000 to 4,000. It is roughly equivalent to an enlarged or reinforced regiment. Two or more brigades may constitute a division.

Known dedicated amphibious assets PN:

2x KS&EW built Landing Craft (Mechanized) (LCM)
(More could be available: KS&EW had constructed similar six landing crafts for Pakistan Navy in 1976. As compared to the previous ones, the new LCMs are distinct because of their design and additional equipment.)

12x Griffon 2000TD hovercraft (also used by Special Service Group Navy aka SSGN, which are the Pakistan Navy's elite principal special operations force component. Together with the special forces of the air force, army [including army rangers], and naval marines, they form the Pakistan Special Operations Command P-SOC).

1x PNS Moawin (ex-Dutch navy Poolster class AOR)
In Dutch service, this was fitted so it could accommodate 150 marines with equipment and service as - provisional - transport for 1 marine company. In Dutch service would normally have 2 Sea Lynx helicopters but could handle/host up to 5 to support marine air assault.

Conclusion: While other ships could be used to stage assaults e.g. frigates, for any sea-borne assault of significant proportion, PN would have to take up ships from trade.

Pakistan Navy , quite a few of our platforms , need the SAM systems

1- OHP
4-5 Fast Attack boats
0 Corvettes ("Zero")

Even having a round of 4-6 Missiles per ship creates a proper air security umberella , note the anti ship missiles are nomally located in the rear of the fast attack ships so its not like it can't be integrated

For the SAM missiles from Turkey or China I would assume we could install the slanted missile launcher, and then may be run the wiring and create it's own dedicated center of operation

I feel if we wanted we could technically arm the fast attack boats with leathal launchers

a) Nasr (Surace level engagement)
b) Hisar-O , Hisar-A series (Low / Medium Air defence)

I fully agree that SAM systems are needed. This is why 4 new F22P with HQ7, C802 and a two gun (30mm gatling) CIWS are better than 6 old Type 21s, of which only 3 were refitted with SAM and 3 with Phalanx and Harpoon.

Instant additions are hand-held or pedestal mounted manpads. But these will not be integrated into ships combat system (at best with visual or audio cueing of operator on the basis of radar info).

There will be Type 21s decommisioning from which any DS-30 (B) AA Guns, Harpoon missiles and launch racks, Phalanx CIWS and LY-60 launcher and guidance radar could be dismounted and reused. I suspect that is how PNS Alamgir has gotten its Phalanx and Harpoon systems.

LY-90 is a semi-active radar homing missile, a Chinese Sea Sparrow/Aspide equivalent. This could be mounted on a platform over the closed-off base of the MK-13 launcher on PNS Alamgir, much like Americans have installed a platform with a 25mm cannon there. This would not hinder the 2x4 Harpoon already installed there, particularly not if the platform were extended a little farther forward. Alternatively, relocate the 76mm to the location that the Australian and Turkish navy have used for mounting a Mk41 VLU, and put the LY-60 onto the ship's "back".

As the Taiwanese Cheng Kung variant shows, one could mount a small caliber cannon (such as the DS-30B) on extended platforms at the ships flanks. MANPADS could be integrated with such mounts. Even 1 such gun with manpads in front of the bridge is an improvement over the present.

On PNS Alamgir, target illumination for this SARH missile could possibly be done by the WM-25 'egg' over the bridge and/or installation of the Chinese radar illuminator associated with LY-60 onto the superstructure behind the main mast, where the STIR for the SM1 used to be (there is now a tripod mounted little satcom dome, but this could be relocated).

See https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...-information-pool.203829/page-21#post-7901660

DS-30(B) guns on Type 21

LY-60 on Type 21

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

@Penguin

Is it possible to cram a VLS system into the MILGEM Ada corvette without completely omitting the main gun at the bow? Would moving the main gun up a metre or two cause balancing issues? Or could there be two VLS sets sitting parallel to one another (port and starboard) just in front of the bridge?

 

[Tank131]

@Penguin

Is it possible to cram a VLS system into the MILGEM Ada corvette without completely omitting the main gun at the bow? Would moving the main gun up a metre or two cause balancing issues? Or could there be two VLS sets sitting parallel to one another (port and starboard) just in front of the bridge?

By parallel vls do you mean on the edge of the bow like on the USS Zumwalt?

It could theoretically be possible but I suspect that the price of such a redesign/refit would lead to a cost increase that would make the Istanbul class more viable to get then the redesign Ada.

 

[Penguin]

can u go a bit deep deep in setting trajectory and others factors necessary for firing from a moving surface hitting a:
1. Stationary target.
2. Moving target.

This is just straight shore bombardment i.e. blanketing an area and forcing the opponents to keep heads down while you are landing. You anchor your ship. Weather needs be calm. Use cluster munitions.

For the SAM missiles from Turkey or China I would assume we could install the slanted missile launcher, and then may be run the wiring and create it's own dedicated center of operation

I feel if we wanted we could technically arm the fast attack boats with leathal launchers

a) Nasr (Surace level engagement)
b) Hisar-O , Hisar-A series (Low / Medium Air defence)

Hisar is IIRH. If it is capable of lock-on before launch (LOBL), then it 'seeker needs to 'see' the target i.e. the system needs a turntable. If it can do lock-on after launch (LOAL), then it needs integration with ship's systems to receive target location information before launch.

For naval applications, the IIRH Hisar will be VLS launched. Land systems also are VL but vehicle mounted.
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/turkey-setting-sails-on-big-naval-ambitions.429539/#post-8293787

This is just a test launcher... It elevates but I don't think it rotates.

Nasr is an artillery rocket system, a short range surface to surface ballistic missile, its 60km rockets aren't guided. Suitable only for (nuclear) shorebombardment therefor. Of no value for anti-shipping roles.
http://isssp.in/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/R17-2013_NASR_Final.pdf

@Penguin

Is it possible to cram a VLS system into the MILGEM Ada corvette without completely omitting the main gun at the bow? Would moving the main gun up a metre or two cause balancing issues? Or could there be two VLS sets sitting parallel to one another (port and starboard) just in front of the bridge?

It may be possible to shoehorn in 2 Single Cell Launchers e.g. close to the center in the area where the rear step in the superstructure is i.e. next to the forward end of the hangar. Possibly 2-4 right right behind the main gun (these could even stick out above deck a bit). It quadpacked, that could give 16-24 surface to air missiles. Given just a single STING-EO radar illuminator/tracker, I'm wondering whether IRH or ARH missile (e.g. CAMM, IRIS-T, HISAR) would not be preferred, or whether a second channel would be needed. Or, using mast mounted planar radars e.g. CeaFar/CeaMount instead of Smart-S Mk2 and Sting-EO.
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/ar...o-develop-single-cell-launcher-(mar.-27).html

Aside from Mk41 VLS/SCL, also consider Mk48 GWLS

Mod 1 On Dutch M-frigate "Doorman class"

Mod 0 on Canadian Patrol Frigate "Halifax class"

Using the mod 0 used on Canadian frigate but mounting it like mod 1 on Dutch frigate may be possible e.g next to hangar or against front of stack. The pics above show single round boxes for VL Sea Sparrow and ESSM but e.g. Denmark has these with duo-packed ESSMs so 4 boxes (2 port, 2 starboard or 4 against stack) would give 8 rounds. These are about 1.5 decks tall!

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

This is just straight shore bombardment i.e. blanketing an area and forcing the opponents to keep heads down while you are landing. You anchor your ship. Weather needs be calm. Use cluster munitions.



Hisar is IIRH. If it is capable of lock-on before launch (LOBL), then it 'seeker needs to 'see' the target i.e. the system needs a turntable. If it can do lock-on after launch (LOAL), then it needs integration with ship's systems to receive target location information before launch.

For naval applications, the IIRH Hisar will be VLS launched. Land systems also are VL but vehicle mounted.
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/turkey-setting-sails-on-big-naval-ambitions.429539/#post-8293787

This is just a test launcher... It elevates but I don't think it rotates.

Nasr is an artillery rocket system, a short range surface to surface ballistic missile, its 60km rockets aren't guided. Suitable only for (nuclear) shorebombardment therefor. Of no value for anti-shipping roles.
http://isssp.in/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/R17-2013_NASR_Final.pdf



It may be possible to shoehorn in 2 Single Cell Launchers e.g. close to the center in the area where the rear step in the superstructure is i.e. next to the forward end of the hangar. Possibly 2-4 right right behind the main gun (these could even stick out above deck a bit). It quadpacked, that could give up to 24 surface to air missiles. Given just a single STING-EO radar illuminator/tracker, I'm wondering whether IRH or ARH missile would not be preferred, or whether a second channel would be needed. Or, using planar radars e.g. CeaFar/CeaMount.

Can the main gun be moved up the bow by 2 metres? Could that provide enough room for an 8-cell unit (32 quad-packed SAM)?

 

[Penguin]

Hard to tell, depends on what is below deck. Perhaps an option would be to use a small above main deck structure for the gun, slightly more forward, and use current deck penetration and below deck volume for VLS. Would definitely work with the MK48 (One 6 cell unit fits same container as one 76mm gun)

Italian Comandante Fulgosi OPV: note how 76mm is mounted.

Same was used to install 76mm on ex-Royal Navy Type 22s of Romanian navy.