Pakistan orders Dutch OPV (1,900 tons, 90 m). To be built at KSEW

[Penguin]

What about the Anti Air & Sea capabilities as the news says it will have these capabilities but the design doesn't have those.

Requirement/Statement:
It is a state of the art vessel which is especially suited for Anti Surface, Anti Air Operations, Maritime Security Operations (MSO), Day & Night Helicopter Operations, Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) and Surveillance and Intelligence Gathering Operations.
http://www.pid.gov.pk/?p=41509

From Damen folders referred to before:

Simply having a Westland Sea King or a Harbin Z-9EC to attack on board will give this ship a means to attack surface vessels with antiship missiles (French AM39 Exocet or e.g. Chinese C-701), and submarines with lightweight ASW torpedoes (US Mark 44 and Mark 46 or Chinese ET-52), even if the ship itself does not mount such systems (or even sonar).

The interceptor boats may be armed and this would count as anti-surface capability (against light craft)

Any gun armament (as PMSA ship that could be a 30mm cannon plus several HMGs, but as navy OPV it may be a 76mm gun plus some lighter cannon) would be dual role i.e. usable against both air and surface targets. Esp. if lighter cannon and HMG mounts are fully remote control. But even the twin 23mm on the Azmat class is dual role.
Light cannon mounts could carry several MANPADs integral to the mount. Another possibility would be some pedestal mounted MANPADS. Certainly would be feasible to park Phalanx or RAM launcher atop the superstructure. Possibly could carry some rack mounted AShM (Harpoon, C802) on deck (e.g. 2x2 Harpoon right behind the main gun). Possibly you could chuck seamines out the stern. But that's about the extent of it.

Folks should remember these are Offshore Patrol Vessels, not full-fledged combatships.

 

[CriticalThought]

Wouldn’t you agree that designing a rifle is far more simple that building a naval ship? Why are we testing foreign designed rifles?

Answer is that copying something as they do in Darra Adam Khel or building under license is totally different from designing something ‘ab initio’. The new design has to be better and cheaper than buying it off the shelf, else it is a waste of time and effort.

Please understand that neither Thunder, nor Al-Khalid is totally of Pakistani origin. Augusta’s were simply assembled in Pakistan.

In addition to the engine, weapons, avionics, command & control systems all of which would have to be imported to ensure that these are state of the art; designing a vessel hull especially of a warship is a very fine art.

Even building ordinary fishing boats requires skill and experience because the vessel hull is continuously under the effect of different types of forces acting at the same time while it is in water. There are constraints on combination of length, beam (breadth) and draft (depth in water) depending upon the maximum speed and manoeuvrability else the vessel will not be stable. Once this has been established, naval architects have to find materials that have high durability and resistance to prevent structural damage during 20 to 30 years of operation.

Naval architecture like any other discipline is a specialized field. We can surely build something similar but would it be as good and cheaper?

Sir, as far as designing guns is concerned, the reason we are looking at foreign designs is to get access to new manufacturing techniques. You cannot access the POF of lacking innovation. The LSR isca hood example, and even there we lack the manufacturing expertise for reliable barrels.

 

[Zarvan]

You didn't mentioned name of any procurement this time?

Frankly, its good because whenever you mention procurement specifically than the chances of that deal narrows substantially

Lot of things will come soon. We are going to get bigger and badder really soon

 

[Inception-06]

3750 tons, 108.5m, 21.5kn (bigger than most light frigates)

PN ordered two units of ONUK MRTP 33 FACs to Yonca-Onuk JV as a result of a tender open to international competition in 2006. First boat has been delivered in 2007 and second in 2008. PN has also acquired 2 x 25mm and 2 x 12.7mm Stabilized Naval Gun Systems (STOP and STAMP) from Aselsan, Turkey for installation on these boats. These platforms have been successfully integrated into PN Fleet operations. Armed with a 25mm STOP Remote Controlled Stabilized Naval Gun System MRTP 33 FACs can be also integrated with 4 Harpoon SSMs. However due to resource constraints procurement of additional boats and modifications to integrate SSM capability to MRTP 33 FACs are pending and will be initiated upon availability of funds.

 

[Penguin]

PN ordered two units of ONUK MRTP 33 FACs to Yonca-Onuk JV as a result of a tender open to international competition in 2006. First boat has been delivered in 2007 and second in 2008. PN has also acquired 2 x 25mm and 2 x 12.7mm Stabilized Naval Gun Systems (STOP and STAMP) from Aselsan, Turkey for installation on these boats. These platforms have been successfully integrated into PN Fleet operations. Armed with a 25mm STOP Remote Controlled Stabilized Naval Gun System MRTP 33 FACs can be also integrated with 4 Harpoon SSMs. However due to resource constraints procurement of additional boats and modifications to integrate SSM capability to MRTP 33 FACs are pending and will be initiated upon availability of funds.

Have you monitored them since 2008?

http://defenceasian.blogspot.nl/2011/09/pakistan-gets-two-mrtp-33-fast-attack.html

 

[Into the Fire]

Have you monitored them since 2008?

the article is from this month though:
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...-long-live-turkey-pakistan-friendship.501050/

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Here's the latest regarding the MRTP-33 issue:

https://1drv.ms/i/s!Atx6TdJBbVIbgQ4vhhptOeLYCFTc

https://1drv.ms/i/s!Atx6TdJBbVIbgS4LLBjRQVx9sohz

 

[Penguin]

the article is from this month though:
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...-long-live-turkey-pakistan-friendship.501050/

Agree, but that doesn't necessarily mean nothing happened to the boats. One would need to look at appropriations. And the most recent images.

 

[Inception-06]

Agree, but that doesn't necessarily mean nothing happened to the boats. One would need to look at appropriations. And the most recent images.

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) thank you for clarification, you have cleared my suspicion that the MRTP-33was delivered without the Harpoon package.

I have checked the latest images since years I did always try to finde out the issue why the boats were delivered without the arms package, and there is no indicate for the Harpoon missiles, only an empty box ! so the report posted by @Bilal Khan (Quwa) explains everything.

 

[Penguin]

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) thank you for clarification, you have cleared my suspicion that the MRTP-33was delivered without the Harpoon package.

View attachment 403437

I have checked the latest images since years I did always try to finde out the issue why the boats were delivered without the arms package, and there is no indicate for the Harpoon missiles, only an empty box ! so the report posted by @Bilal Khan (Quwa) explains everything.

As Type 21s are retiring, Harpoon launch racks and control systems (console) can be freed up and reused (no sale involved). Missiles themselves are available to PN in submarine, surface and air launched varieties already I do not see what elements are missing that are not under Turkish of Pakistani control already and that would be needed.

Harpoon went from here:

To here:

No problem.

Or perhaps the Turks could make the MRTP-33 missile capability work with the C705 (smaller brother of C802)

Or Roketsan Atmaca antiship missile

 

[Gryphon]

Could well be, esp. if more than 2 are envisioned in the long run. Increased length could also allow for boarding a larger helicopter (SH3): the Multi-Mission Hangar (MM Hangar) is capable of storing an 11-tonne NH-90 helicopter and aUAV (unmanned aerial vehicle) such as the Boeing ScanEagle®. The sea-axe bow is optional, I believe.

OPV1800

Multimission bridge

Multimission bay

http://www.navyrecognition.com/inde...-meet-demand-for-multi-mission-platforms.html

Damen OPV 1800 is 83m in length and has a displacement of 1890 t. Now, if the length is increased to 90m, won't the displacement be much higher than 1900 t ?

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Damen OPV 1800 is 83m in length and has a displacement of 1890 t. Now, if the length is increased to 90m, won't the displacement be much higher than 1900 t ?

Not necessarily. The STM LF-2400 is basically a MILGEM Ada with a lengthened hull (by 10-11 m), but its displacement is only 50 tons more (2,350 tons vs. 2,300 tons).

 

[Penguin]

Damen OPV 1800 is 83m in length and has a displacement of 1890 t. Now, if the length is increased to 90m, won't the displacement be much higher than 1900 t ?

Not necessarily. Displacement is the weight of water moved by the hull. The 90m hull of the OPV2400 is not only longer but also wider and deeper than that of OPV1800. But if you simply added some length, you would not be adding as much to tonnage. Or a longer, bigger hull but with a smaller superstructure. Damen offers 72m, 83m, 90m and 98m variants, with common building blocks. I'm sure they find a way. The ship proposed for Malaysia MAE at Lima 2017, for example, lacks a hangar (though it can land and rearm/refuel an AW139) and has exactly the 1900 ton, 90m and 22kn criteria. Remember, they are intended as OPV not as combat ships

OPV1800

OPV2400

http://www.malaysiandefence.com/two-contenders-mrss/

 

[Tank131]

I find it interesting that PN is going for OPV when that role in Pakistan is already carried out by the PMSA. Why go for an OPV, that too a different design than the 2 your sister service just inducted and is being built in your own shipyards? My suspicion is they wanted a modular design that they can build light frigates from in the future.

These will be used to patrol gwadar area or relieve PN's proper warships ships from CTF duties.

 

[Muhammad Omar]

Are we getting 1 or 2??? and which one is it??