Pakistan-Turkey 4 Milgem Ada Class Corvettes Contract - Construction started

[khanasifm]

What I don't get is, why reduce VLS to 12 when 16 was already planned? Can't be a space issue, can it...if 16 were already planned earlier.....?? What other reason is there? Even cost doesn't seem logical reason.

Also would appreciate if someone can shed light on how CAMM-ER is superior to the Chinese alternative that was planned earlier.

I would guess not the space but cost may be next step would have been another 6 totaling 3x6 =18 Vls which were perhaps cost going up too much not sure but space does not seems to be a problem especially when chines/Russian Vls and missiles are usually far larger than western types

As far as sam goes two way data link and active guidance vs passive meaning missile seaker pick up 10-15 km after launch not needing ship providing updates also leading to more simultaneous engagement of targets I think hq-16 can do 6 vs say camm twice as many or more but then there are total 12 missiles not sure if in case of camm there is auto loading and Can Cary another load of 12 down under the Vls in the front ??

 

[Scorpiooo]

I would guess not the space but cost may be next step would have been another 6 totaling 3x6 =18 Vls which were perhaps cost going up too much not sure but space does not seems to be a problem especially when chines/Russian Vls and missiles are usually far larger than western types

As far as sam goes two way data link and active guidance vs passive meaning missile seaker pick up 10-15 km after launch not needing ship providing updates also leading to more simultaneous engagement of targets I think hq-16 can do 6 vs say camm twice as many or more but then there are total 12 missiles not sure if in case of camm there is auto loading and Can Cary another load of 12 down under the Vls in the front ??

That was answered by @Tipu7 that there will be 12 missile per ship no additional, if i am not wrong

 

[Scorpiooo]

@Tipu7. @Bilal Khan (Quwa)
Is there any possibility that we can see both western VLS and Chinese VLS together on our upcoming Jinnah-class (based on milgem class)

 

[araz]

@Tipu7. @Bilal Khan (Quwa)
Is these any possibility that we can see both western VLS and Chinese VLS together on Jinnah-class based on milgem class

Not that I am an expert but in general mixing equipment brings about complexities both with maintenance, operations, training and repairs. As such it might be better to install one sort of equipment on one platform.
It is intersting and I am not-sure why posters have not latched on to it, but changing equipment such as SAMs midplanning leads to a-few-questions. Firstly, is this really necessary or is-this a cryptic message to someone to up their game and produce and install comparable equipment? PAF has on multiple occasions asked for western equipment for the main vendor to come up with a comparable but cost effective product.
Secondly is this an indication of the infefiority or lack of maturity of the previously planned equipment or simply a bait to the Western providers that we have comparable products in case there is some reluctance?
Lastly what are the plans for indegenization? I dont think we need to worry too much about the system but the ammo can be built in house saving us costs and providing us-with an avenue to build up-our future weaponry?
Perhaps @bilal khan Quwa or @Tipu7 or @Aakh1112 or @Blacklight migt want to comment on this aspect.
Regards

 

[waz]

@Tipu7. @Bilal Khan (Quwa)
Is these any possibility that we can see both western VLS and Chinese VLS together on Jinnah-class based on milgem class

No different systems, integration will be complex and not worth the time. The Milgem will have Turkish or western i.e. NATO compatible systems.

 

[Akh1112]

@Tipu7. @Bilal Khan (Quwa)
Is these any possibility that we can see both western VLS and Chinese VLS together on Jinnah-class based on milgem class

Theres no benefit to such a thing.

Whats the point, the smallest AAW missile the chinese make for ships is the HQ-16

The HQ-16 is a pretty meh missile for modern standards. Alongside this, the entire HQ-16 complex(Radars, illuminators, missiles) cannot stand saturation attacks. They can only engage 4 at a time. Theoretically, the CAMM based solution could expend all of its missiles in rapid succession to take on saturation attacks.

Alongside this, range wise, the CAMM-ER is the same as, if not superior to HQ-16(baseline CAMM has been proven to take out targets at ranges of 40km when its stated range is 20km-ish,m of course, with far far degraded pK, it will only really be useful against slow, non-maneuvering targets.)

Chinese VLS is also large and bulky, vs something like ExLS, SYLVER A43 or even GWS-26(as much as i hate the latter).

This isnt a problem of integration, Chinese munitions can be easily integrated into the CMS of the ship, yes you may need to carry a seperate set of radars(+illuminators) , so integration is not an issue. Its a matter of it not being worth it.

The HQ-16 is a far inferior AAW missile to stuff like CAMM/ER, ESSM, BARAK, etc. CAMM also serves as a far better point defence weapon, an important capability as the J/Ada lacks Missile based PD systems (RIM-116, HQ-10) which are far better for defeating faster and larger threats, like the ones we're facing vs gun based CIWS.

 

[RadarGudumluMuhimmat]

Theres no benefit to such a thing.

Whats the point, the smallest AAW missile the chinese make for ships is the HQ-16

The HQ-16 is a pretty meh missile for modern standards. Alongside this, the entire HQ-16 complex(Radars, illuminators, missiles) cannot stand saturation attacks. They can only engage 4 at a time. Theoretically, the CAMM based solution could expend all of its missiles in rapid succession to take on saturation attacks.

Alongside this, range wise, the CAMM-ER is the same as, if not superior to HQ-16(baseline CAMM has been proven to take out targets at ranges of 40km when its stated range is 20km-ish,m of course, with far far degraded pK, it will only really be useful against slow, non-maneuvering targets.)

Chinese VLS is also large and bulky, vs something like ExLS, SYLVER A43 or even GWS-26(as much as i hate the latter).

This isnt a problem of integration, Chinese munitions can be easily integrated into the CMS of the ship, yes you may need to carry a seperate set of radars(+illuminators) , so integration is not an issue. Its a matter of it not being worth it.

The HQ-16 is a far inferior AAW missile to stuff like CAMM/ER, ESSM, BARAK, etc. CAMM also serves as a far better point defence weapon, an important capability as the J/Ada lacks Missile based PD systems (RIM-116, HQ-10) which are far better for defeating faster and larger threats, like the ones we're facing vs gun based CIWS.

Camm has already been finalized for saturation attacks. I don't usually sample Turkish solutions here, but for area defense, Hisar RF and Siper will be ready by 2023.

 

[Dreamer.]

Chinese VLS is also large and bulky, vs something like ExLS, SYLVER A43 or even GWS-26(as much as i hate the latter).

And yet when switching from chinese VLS to western we reduce numbers?? How come?
If the western options were less bulky, should we not have more than 16 vls now?

 

[Akh1112]

And yet when switching from chinese VLS to western we reduce numbers?? How come?
If the western options were less bulky, should we not have more than 16 vls now?

theres a very good chance this graphic is a placeholder. Its incomplete, for example, its missing the Datalink domes for CAMM.

GWS.26 is also not rated for CAMM-ER yet anyway.

Im relatively confident we are not going for GWS.26 and will go for a sylver or another VLS solution in the end.

 

[Tipu7]

And yet when switching from chinese VLS to western we reduce numbers?? How come?
If the western options were less bulky, should we not have more than 16 vls now?

Possibly this decision is related to Economics. Otherwise, generally speaking from visual observation, that there is space for two additional sets of VLS modules (six missiles each).
In theory, the total missile load out can reach 24 CAMM-ER per ship provided Navy pockets allow to do so.

theres a very good chance this graphic is a placeholder. Its incomplete, for example, its missing the Datalink domes for CAMM.

GWS.26 is also not rated for CAMM-ER yet anyway.

Im relatively confident we are not going for GWS.26 and will go for a sylver or another VLS solution in the end.

Best will be a Sylver-A43 set with 8 Tubes. Ship will be able to carry 32 missiles in Quad configuration.

 

[Akh1112]

Camm has already been finalized for saturation attacks. I don't usually sample Turkish solutions here, but for area defense, Hisar RF and Siper will be ready by 2023.

If a navalized siper can be readied, theres a chance we could see it on Jinnah since i expect them to focus on area wide air defence as opposed to localized AD like the vessels in the pipeline do so. Its a matter of timelines, for the same reason i also see potential for an ASTER based solution for Jinnah Class- a more risky option being the Navy's domestic SAM project but @Bilal Khan (Quwa) can talk more about that.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

If a navalized siper can be readied, theres a chance we could see it on Jinnah since i expect them to focus on area wide air defence as opposed to localized AD like the vessels in the pipeline do so. Its a matter of timelines, for the same reason i also see potential for an ASTER based solution for Jinnah Class- a more risky option being the Navy's domestic SAM project but @Bilal Khan (Quwa) can talk more about that.

I agree that the Jinnah-class frigate will likely be an AAW-focused system. IMHO, the PN is leaning towards the Aster-30. Obviously, if that falls through, the PN will look at other options if they're available, but IMHO, Aster-30 would be the preferred solution.

 

[Scorpiooo]

In theory, the total missile load out can reach 24 CAMM-ER per ship provided Navy pockets allow to do so.

Best will be a Sylver-A43 set with 8 Tubes. Ship will be able to carry 32 missiles in Quad configuration.

But question is can we afford it now or even in future?

 

[Tipu7]

But question is can we afford it now or even in future?

Who knows. its just a speculation on my part ...

 

[khanasifm]

Not sure why pn ship has 40 plus personal capacity vs Turkish Ada

?