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

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

I think the thread title needs to be changed with likely part to be removed. If our version is the LF2400 what weapons will be deployed for the 16 cell vls? Also pardon my ignorance but can the same vls be used for different systems like SAM and Babur?

If we opted for the LF-2400, then the VLS will likely be used for SAMs. You could theoretically put in LACM, but I think the PN would want to have as many VLS available for anti-air warfare (AAW) than long-range strikes, which can be done via submarines or even anti-ship missile (AShM) launchers. One could quad-pack (e.g. MBDA CAMM/Sea Ceptor) for 64 missiles, or single-missile-per-cell (e.g. Umkhonto EIR or HQ-16) for 16 missiles.

 

[OguzSenturk]

I think we should wait until any sort of agreement signed. S&H Magazine is mostly accurate though, still better to wait and see.

 

[IceCold]

If we opted for the LF-2400, then the VLS will likely be used for SAMs. You could theoretically put in LACM, but I think the PN would want to have as many VLS available for anti-air warfare (AAW) than long-range strikes, which can be done via submarines or even anti-ship missile (AShM) launchers. One could quad-pack (e.g. MBDA CAMM/Sea Ceptor) for 64 missiles, or single-missile-per-cell (e.g. Umkhonto EIR or HQ-16) for 16 missiles.

Thanks for the detailed response. My understanding was that submarine's equipped with SLCM will be used for 2nd strike so we can use this platform for conventional strikes using babur on key enemy installations, something on the lines of how US uses TomaHawk. Since same VLS can be used hence ships can be assigned different roles. The escorts will be equipped with SAM while others with cruise missile.
This also begs the question isn't 4 a very small number? SA ordered 5 and they don't face the level of threat PN does. Any chances numbers will increase?
Plus I have another question if I am not bothering you too much, is there any difference in the range or otherwise between a missile fired through VLS compared to tubes?

 

[RIP Pak LAW]

This is no official confirmation yet.

 

[Tank131]

What will be really interesting to know is what variant we go for once the deal does happens. Will it be Ada-class corvettes with only point defense anti-air weapons (we have those already) or will be finally opt for the TF-100 class frigates (with VLS for ESSM or may be some Chinese or Turkish air defense missile). OR, go for a hybrid? An extended Ada Class which is not exactly a TF-100.

I will personally welcome any vessel with decent air protection but frankly still fail to see what exactly will they offer over plenty of other options, For example Type 54 (which will give us some weapon commonality as well). Are we going for this just for the sake of diversification. MILGEM project for PN makes sense to me ONLY if we follow up the corvettes (same as present or the modified ones) with frigates (even TF-2000 to fill in that med-heavy category). Otherwise, there are plenty of other better options available.

The advantages of I-class or LF-2400 over type 054A are
1)diversification of suppliers of vessel and weaponry (which you mentioned) .
2)access to top level net centric combat management systems which allow these vessels to coordinate the fleet and serve as command vessels.
3)smaller crew sizes (99 vs 165) whit entails better automation and likely less cost to operate over the life of the vessel.
4)smaller ship with same capabilities (except less range) but potential for larfer number of SAMs (potentially 64 medium range AND 21 short range plus 2 ciws vs 32 medium range and 2 ciws).

If we opted for the LF-2400, then the VLS will likely be used for SAMs. You could theoretically put in LACM, but I think the PN would want to have as many VLS available for anti-air warfare (AAW) than long-range strikes, which can be done via submarines or even anti-ship missile (AShM) launchers. One could quad-pack (e.g. MBDA CAMM/Sea Ceptor) for 64 missiles, or single-missile-per-cell (e.g. Umkhonto EIR or HQ-16) for 16 missiles.

Putting LACM in these ships would depend on the VLS selected. You would need a 7m vls like the A70 or Mk41 strike version. As you said, it makes little sense to do in a ship like this. If you want LACM then replace the AShM with LACM that have AShM capabilities.

 

[-------]

Turkish Navy is pushing ahead with National projects, some of the key missile systems currently in development and nearing completion - thought for Consideration for our Pakistani brothers;

• Indigenous Vertical Launch System
• GEZGIN Cruise Missile
• SAPAN Surface to Air Missile
• ATMACA Surface to Surface Missile
• TEMREN Air to Surface Missile
• AKYA Heavy Weight Torpedo

@cabatli_53

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

And a great news for Pak too!!! It's called strengthening the Flanks!!!

Looks like with small steps a new Hakikat is slowly building up away from the maddening mobs engaged in killing, lynching and exploiting!!! Turkey+Pak+KSA(GCC) = a way forward to keep at the least some semblance of sanity and peace in this volatile region!!! Don't expect others to do the job for you which is your responsibility at the first place...

A proper move to help safeguard regional safety

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Turkish Navy is pushing ahead with National projects, some of the key missile systems currently in development and nearing completion - thought for Consideration for our Pakistani brothers;

• Indigenous Vertical Launch System
• GEZGIN Cruise Missile
• SAPAN Surface to Air Missile
• ATMACA Surface to Surface Missile
• TEMREN Air to Surface Missile
• AKYA Heavy Weight Torpedo

@cabatli_53

Is there a lightweight torpedo in development? Could they re-purpose the Aselsan TORK for that role?

 

[Arsalan]

The advantages of I-class or LF-2400 over type 054A are
1)diversification of suppliers of vessel and weaponry (which you mentioned) .
2)access to top level net centric combat management systems which allow these vessels to coordinate the fleet and serve as command vessels.
3)smaller crew sizes (99 vs 165) whit entails better automation and likely less cost to operate over the life of the vessel.
4)smaller ship with same capabilities (except less range) but potential for larfer number of SAMs (potentially 64 medium range AND 21 short range plus 2 ciws vs 32 medium range and 2 ciws).
.

Ok, that helped. Thank you.

1. Diversification of supplier is already acknowledged.
2. Do you think the Chinese vessels lack such net centric combat management systems?
3. Smaller crew size is one big attraction, thanks for reminding me of that. It surely is very important.
4. the 64 SAM is far fetched, i do not see we will get a 64 cell VLS on boat this size and getting a quad-packed missile like CAMM is going to be too difficult. But if we can somehow acquire similar technology then yes these ships will make perfect sense and will be of great service to a limited budget navy like our.

Thanks again.

 

[eagleeye]

Is there a lightweight torpedo in development? Could they re-purpose the Aselsan TORK for that role?

Tork is an anti torpedo torpedo as i know. An light torpedo is also in development.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Ok, that helped. Thank you.

1. Diversification of supplier is already acknowledged.
2. Do you think the Chinese vessels lack such net centric combat management systems?
3. Smaller crew size is one big attraction, thanks for reminding me of that. It surely is very important.
4. the 64 SAM is far fetched, i do not see we will get a 64 cell VLS on boat this size and getting a quad-packed missile like CAMM is going to be too difficult. But if we can somehow acquire similar technology then yes these ships will make perfect sense and will be of great service to a limited budget navy like our.

Thanks again.

It's not 64-cell VLS. It's a 16-cell VLS with quad-packing, meaning, for some missile types (e.g. CAMM) you can fit 4 per cell (16 x 4 = 64).

Ok, that helped. Thank you.

1. Diversification of supplier is already acknowledged.
2. Do you think the Chinese vessels lack such net centric combat management systems?
3. Smaller crew size is one big attraction, thanks for reminding me of that. It surely is very important.
4. the 64 SAM is far fetched, i do not see we will get a 64 cell VLS on boat this size and getting a quad-packed missile like CAMM is going to be too difficult. But if we can somehow acquire similar technology then yes these ships will make perfect sense and will be of great service to a limited budget navy like our.

Thanks again.

One route might be to select the Denel Umkhonto EIR (30-35 km), but with the condition of accessing the Marlin program, and having it emulate the CAMM and SM platform. Basically, collaborate with South Africa to develop a 60+ km SAM with a finless design so that it can be quad-packed. That missile could also form the core of a next-gen BVRAAM.

 

[Arsalan]

It's not 64-cell VLS. It's a 16-cell VLS with quad-packing, meaning, for some missile types (e.g. CAMM) you can fit 4 per cell (16 x 4 = 64).
.

Yup sir, it is quite obvious for a boat of this size. That is why the complete point was written as:

the 64 SAM is far fetched, i do not see we will get a 64 cell VLS on boat this size and getting a quad-packed missile like CAMM is going to be too difficult. But if we can somehow acquire similar technology then yes these ships will make perfect sense and will be of great service to a limited budget navy like our.

The options you mentioned do cover that second part of the mentioned point sir.

One route might be to select the Denel Umkhonto EIR (30-35 km), but with the condition of accessing the Marlin program, and having it emulate the CAMM and SM platform. Basically, collaborate with South Africa to develop a 60+ km SAM with a finless design so that it can be quad-packed. That missile could also form the core of a next-gen BVRAAM

Yes, ONLY IF such an option can be pursued and make it to reality will give these ships significantly more firepower (64 vs 32 as mentioned in a post above) than the other options we could have opted for. However couldn't we have done the same if we were getting ships from China? In fact, asking Chinese to make something on these lines for the ships we are BUYING from them would have been easier. So essentially, it all boils down to:

• Diversification of supplier
• Smaller crew size and operational costs.

 

[royalharris]

Yup sir, it is quite obvious for a boat of this size. That is why the complete point was written as:


The options you mentioned do cover that second part of the mentioned point sir.

Yes, ONLY IF such an option can be pursued and make it to reality will give these ships significantly more firepower (64 vs 32 as mentioned in a post above) than the other options we could have opted for. However couldn't we have done the same if we were getting ships from China? In fact, asking Chinese to make something on these lines for the ships we are BUYING from them would have been easier. So essentially, it all boils down to:

• Diversification of supplier
• Smaller crew size and operational costs.

At last,find some guy would like to tell truth without boast

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Yup sir, it is quite obvious for a boat of this size. That is why the complete point was written as:


The options you mentioned do cover that second part of the mentioned point sir.

Yes, ONLY IF such an option can be pursued and make it to reality will give these ships significantly more firepower (64 vs 32 as mentioned in a post above) than the other options we could have opted for. However couldn't we have done the same if we were getting ships from China? In fact, asking Chinese to make something on these lines for the ships we are BUYING from them would have been easier. So essentially, it all boils down to:

• Diversification of supplier
• Smaller crew size and operational costs.

That depends, do the Chinese want to part with the critical technology behind dual-pulse rockets? This isn't easy stuff to develop, and I honestly doubt even South Africa may part with it, but they are promising so - so we could either call their claims, or take the opportunity. If the claims are empty, we'll need to develop it ourselves.

 

[YeBeWarned]

At last,find some guy would like to tell truth without boast

why don't you enlightened us with truth yourself