PN’s 054A is more advanced than the PLAN’s own use.

[BERKEKHAN2]

Bhund pharu ship

[emoji23] [emoji23]

 

[Super Falcon]

Navy should procure destroyers from china too

 

[Dazzler]

Navy should procure destroyers from china too

Upon entering service with PN, these 054-Ps will be classified as destroyers.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

I agree with the above ... But set aside Indian hostilities and consider what Pakistan has achieved till to date :

1. A state with having no industrial base became highly industrialized (in 60s) in comparison to a standard of that time.
2. Achieved Nuclear capability.
3. Take on against soviet union and was the front line fighting force against soviet union and ultimately defeated them ...
4. India is not a smaller country but we are not only standing tall against wishes of India but have fought 3 wars against them in which we won in 48, a stalemate in 65 and lost 71 which is a really good score
5. US is hell bent on putting Afghanistan on us but we somehow standing strong on our position of no more support to US in Afghanistan ...

At time of our creation it was being estimated that we will not survive more than few years but we not only survived but are among one of the strong countries in the world ...

Currently we are in financial trouble but I have me belief and based on my financial analysis we will be back on track within couple of years ...

Pakistan wont even last for 5 years and will come crawling back to us; Nehru!

 

[FuturePAF]

For that you need destroyers.

We don't need destroyers if we just need long range cruise missile on a ship. we can modify the Azmat Facs to be like the Russian Buyan Corvettes (500-1000 tons) carry 8 long range cruise missiles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buyan-class_corvette

We should also look to add at least the 8 round fl-3000N to the corvette it can protect itself, and add a lower tier to the Type 054A air defense picture. Add in towed sonar arrays and some torpedos and put them in different formations and you have a better ASW screen then what one ship can do, because of triangulation.

BTW, if i'm not wrong the Azmat class cost around $50 million each. Therefore making smaller ships to carry the extra features will be better than overloading the type 054A design.

2-3 Azmats under the type 054A umbrella would be a real potent force for a modest price. Better than a destroyer at a fraction of the cost.

 

[ARMalik]

We don't need destroyers if we just need long range cruise missile on a ship. we can modify the Azmat Facs to be like the Russian Buyan Corvettes (500-1000 tons) carry 8 long range cruise missiles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buyan-class_corvette

We should also look to add at least the 8 round fl-3000N to the corvette it can protect itself, and add a lower tier to the Type 054A air defense picture. Add in towed sonar arrays and some torpedos and put them in different formations and you have a better ASW screen then what one ship can do, because of triangulation.

BTW, if i'm not wrong the Azmat class cost around $50 million each. Therefore making smaller ships to carry the extra features will be better than overloading the type 054A design.

2-3 Azmats under the type 054A umbrella would be a real potent force for a modest price. Better than a destroyer at a fraction of the cost.

Exactly! I have said this plenty of times that one does not need huge destroyers to fire long rang cruise missiles like these. The Buyan class can fire Kalibr missiles and only a few months ago, these frigates fired missiles from Black Sea to hit targets in Syria.
Now although some will say that these were SSM type, and not SAMs but a few tweaks here and there will fix this.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Well a good purchase and if it can arrive sooner even better

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Pakistan can integrate long-range SAMs to the Type 054A in the long-run.

 

[syed_yusuf]

Bhund pharu ship

Awesome

 

[The Accountant]

Dont compare Pakistan with other countries as smaller ships of those countries works under air cover of larger ... for example in case of china d52 destroyers have long range high altitude SAM cover then type 54 has medium range SAM cover and the small corvete has small SAMs for point defence but in case of Pakistan F22 are front line current and they cannot handle saturation attack ...

We don't need destroyers if we just need long range cruise missile on a ship. we can modify the Azmat Facs to be like the Russian Buyan Corvettes (500-1000 tons) carry 8 long range cruise missiles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buyan-class_corvette

We should also look to add at least the 8 round fl-3000N to the corvette it can protect itself, and add a lower tier to the Type 054A air defense picture. Add in towed sonar arrays and some torpedos and put them in different formations and you have a better ASW screen then what one ship can do, because of triangulation.

BTW, if i'm not wrong the Azmat class cost around $50 million each. Therefore making smaller ships to carry the extra features will be better than overloading the type 054A design.

2-3 Azmats under the type 054A umbrella would be a real potent force for a modest price. Better than a destroyer at a fraction of the cost.

 

[ZY-CN-CA]

We should get LY-80 with 70km range .

yes ,I think LY-80B 70+km is better

 

[FuturePAF]

Dont compare Pakistan with other countries as smaller ships of those countries works under air cover of larger ... for example in case of china d52 destroyers have long range high altitude SAM cover then type 54 has medium range SAM cover and the small corvete has small SAMs for point defence but in case of Pakistan F22 are front line current and they cannot handle saturation attack ...

I agree the current 40 km LY-80A is not adequate for the threats the PN faces now and in the coming years. If the PN is going for this ship its should budget a little extra and spring for the LY-80B (70 km), which is a decent start. Its two type 730 CIWS; one on port and one on starboard are also well placed. For a little more adding the 24 cell FL-3000N will help cover sea skimmers.

The true requirement for the PN is indeed long range AAW, there is no way to get around that. The PN should invest in having the ship builder redesigning the ships to carry the long range vls on board. removing its box launchers for anti-ship cruise missiles, and more the engine exhausts forward will free up space to add 16 HQ-9 sized VLS Cells or Long Range Cruise Missile Cells. The HHQ-9/FD-2000B at 100-150 km would be perfect to cover the long range threats, at it would just require a slight lengthening of the ship.
range reference: https://plarealtalk.com/hhq-9-naval-sam-9fd58e610322

Add in the 2-3 Corvette and you have 16-24 long range anti-ship cruise missiles along side the full AAW cover. I would love for the PN to have Type 52D Destroyers, but we can't afford to buy them. We are looking at operations, basically within our extended EEZ. Its a defensive mission; Protect SLOCs and prevent blockade of our ports.

The Type 054A is 4000 tons and the Type 052D is 7500 tons. We need something in the middle; 5800 ton "Destroyer" Sounds about right. The ship will also need an integrated mast with Four panel AESA radars to see far enough to adequate guide the HHQ-9/FD-2000D. Four of these vessels will really be a game changer for the PN-IN Balance.

The Design Should look something like the FREMM-ER Frigate but with those long range VLS aft of the Exhaust.

It needs similar radar to the one on the Type 052D just smaller: Similar to the one on the Norweigan Nansen Class (BTW each ship costs only $500 million, we don't need to go for the billion dollar destroyers)

 

[帅的一匹]

We should get LY-80 with 70km range .

anytime

 

[ZY-CN-CA]

anytime

how about HHQ-9?

 

[帅的一匹]

how about HHQ-9?

HHQ-9 is longer.