PNS Azmat Class - Fast Attack Missile Craft | Updates & Discussions.

[imranyounus]

PN had invested quite a lot in this ship. But with Type 54 yarmook and Jinah class ships now in progress there seems to be a some what question mark on Azmat role.

Its not as fast as latest FAC. and any plan to upgrade it to a mini corvette seems illogical considering we are developing yermook class ships.

what is the future of Azamat. I guess a bigger size around 1000 tons with more LACM and ASM may be considered as a missile corvette. As a cheep way to boost size of our Navy. but than why invest in Damen ships.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

PN had invested quite a lot in this ship. But with Type 54 yarmook and Jinah class ships now in progress there seems to be a some what question mark on Azmat role.

Its not as fast as latest FAC. and any plan to upgrade it to a mini corvette seems illogical considering we are developing yermook class ships.

what is the future of Azamat. I guess a bigger size around 1000 tons with more LACM and ASM may be considered as a missile corvette. As a cheep way to boost size of our Navy. but than why invest in Damen ships.

I think the most logical outcome is to make the Azmat/FAC(M) into an even cheaper design. Basically work it into a pure LACM carrier, i.e., no sensors, just rely on data-link to off-board sensors, etc.

 

[imranyounus]

I think the most logical outcome is to make the Azmat/FAC(M) into an even cheaper design. Basically work it into a pure LACM carrier, i.e., no sensors, just rely on data-link to off-board sensors, etc.

definitely a logical step in current scenario. But need to get little bigger. if PN can add 2 more launcher with data links and small radar such a ship can be very useful in both stand alone deployment to target indian land target or as a support ship in a full flotilla.

ideally a flotilla consisting of 4 larg ships, one Tupe 54 one Ada one F 22 one Yarmook and 4 Azmat class missile ships will have sufficient fire power at sea.

And PN can have 4 of this combination add one submarine in the mix along with one aircraft. while old F 21 and Augusta 70 can be deployed in west to protect gawadar

 

[Armchair]

I think the most logical outcome is to make the Azmat/FAC(M) into an even cheaper design. Basically work it into a pure LACM carrier, i.e., no sensors, just rely on data-link to off-board sensors, etc.

I think that Azmat can make sense as the smallest all round combatant, at the lowest price. Here are some ways to go low price:

1. CIWS in front and rear (no main gun)
2. 6x locally developed short range SAM just behind the forward CIWS (since no main gun, there is some space and weight opportunity
3. Navalized version of JF-17 radar (assuming its actually being produced inhouse)
4. Armed drone
5. sonar and ASW rocket launcher
6. 6x Harbah

While @Bilal Khan 777 noted that the ship is limited and cannot easily be stretched, I think a minor stretch of 5 feet is possible.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

I think that Azmat can make sense as the smallest all round combatant, at the lowest price. Here are some ways to go low price:

1. CIWS in front and rear (no main gun)
2. 6x locally developed short range SAM just behind the forward CIWS (since no main gun, there is some space and weight opportunity
3. Navalized version of JF-17 radar (assuming its actually being produced inhouse)
4. Armed drone
5. sonar and ASW rocket launcher
6. 6x Harbah

While @Bilal Khan 777 noted that the ship is limited and cannot easily be stretched, I think a minor stretch of 5 feet is possible.

I think PN/MTC should look at evolving the Azmat FAC into something like the Sa'ar 72 (but minus the helicopter deck, since you hate those so much). Adding a recessed VLS might be tough, but the Denel Rheinmetall Munition Cheetah CRAM/PDMS can fit top-level (it's apparently light enough).

https://www.israel-shipyards.com/naval-003.asp

 

[GumNaam]

I think PN/MTC should look at evolving the Azmat FAC into something like the Sa'ar 72 (but minus the helicopter deck, since you hate those so much). Adding a recessed VLS might be tough, but the Denel Rheinmetall Munition Cheetah CRAM/PDMS can fit top-level (it's apparently light enough).

https://www.israel-shipyards.com/naval-003.asp

@Armchair whats wrong with having a helicopter on deck? it only helps increase the eyes and anti-sub warfare capabilities of the ship when no AWACS or P3C orion is immediately available...

 

[Tipu7]

I think PN/MTC should look at evolving the Azmat FAC into something like the Sa'ar 72 (but minus the helicopter deck, since you hate those so much). Adding a recessed VLS might be tough, but the Denel Rheinmetall Munition Cheetah CRAM/PDMS can fit top-level (it's apparently light enough).

https://www.israel-shipyards.com/naval-003.asp

The way Navy has evolved OPVs and Milgem, it seems if Navy will develop new FAC-M then it will be a comprehensively modified solution with technology absorbed from foreign sources.

@Armchair whats wrong with having a helicopter on deck? it only helps increase the eyes and anti-sub warfare capabilities of the ship when no AWACS or P3C orion is immediately available...

Add unnecessary complexities considering the fact that these vessels are primarily meant for coastal defense. Heli borne operations are more suited for larger vessels like Corvettes we are getting.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Helicopter are must , need to hunt the submarines

The current Azmat class design is great just need to make it slightly bigger

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

The way Navy has evolved OPVs and Milgem, it seems if Navy will develop new FAC-M then it will be a comprehensively modified solution with technology absorbed from foreign sources.


Add unnecessary complexities considering the fact that these vessels are primarily meant for coastal defense. Heli borne operations are more suited for larger vessels like Corvettes we are getting.

Yes, but remember, the PN/MTC has actually absorbed the FAC(M) design. FAC(M)-4 was built without any OEM help -- MTC and KSEW worked with the input suppliers directly, and even made some design changes. So, it follows that if they want to make a small corvette/big FAC, they'll try doing it on their own.

I think the 2 roles to focus on with such a ship are (1) ASW and (2) AShW/LACM. The advantage of such a small -- and low-cost -- ship is that we can cover more areas, so boost our ASW coverage. We would also have more attack vectors for long-range strikes and A2/AD.

I am not too concerned about AAW at this level since these would operate well within our waters. Moreover, we can post larger frigates to provide area-wide AAW coverage. But if you can add SHORAD (10-15 km) at a decent cost, then why not?

 

[Akh1112]

I think PN/MTC should look at evolving the Azmat FAC into something like the Sa'ar 72 (but minus the helicopter deck, since you hate those so much). Adding a recessed VLS might be tough, but the Denel Rheinmetall Munition Cheetah CRAM/PDMS can fit top-level (it's apparently light enough).

https://www.israel-shipyards.com/naval-003.asp

But then we run into issues, i know the Sa'ar series can only be operated in very calm/low sea states, im unsure about the azmat class but loading it to the brim like the Sa'ars could be an issue. A fun choice would be to turn the Azmat into an AAW frigate with limited anti surface capability, i guess like having them protect other very vunerable aspects of the fleet, i.e F-22Ps which have honestly, terrible defensive capabilities. God the FM-90 is such a poor system, the F-22Ps are literally sitting ducks for the BrahMos, they'd have to rely on CIWS to take it out since the FM-90 cant engage AShMs. But i feel like thats a bit of a dreamy/unrealistic option. However, a fleet based off of smaller surface combatants with capable munitions isn't a bad shout in my opinion. Say we do decide to have a fleet of 12 for example larger ships, have a buttload of smaller FAC sized ships, have them carry out dedicated roles, i.e AAW or ASh roles would be an interesting and cost effective take. Bit of a wild idea lol. CAMM could be a genuine candidate for such an AAW corvette

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

But then we run into issues, i know the Sa'ar series can only be operated in very calm/low sea states, im unsure about the azmat class but loading it to the brim like the Sa'ars could be an issue. A fun choice would be to turn the Azmat into an AAW frigate with limited anti surface capability, i guess like having them protect other very vunerable aspects of the fleet, i.e F-22Ps which have honestly, terrible defensive capabilities. God the FM-90 is such a poor system, the F-22Ps are literally sitting ducks for the BrahMos, they'd have to rely on CIWS to take it out since the FM-90 cant engage AShMs. But i feel like thats a bit of a dreamy/unrealistic option. However, a fleet based off of smaller surface combatants with capable munitions isn't a bad shout in my opinion. Say we do decide to have a fleet of 12 for example larger ships, have a buttload of smaller FAC sized ships, have them carry out dedicated roles, i.e AAW or ASh roles would be an interesting and cost effective take. Bit of a wild idea lol. CAMM could be a genuine candidate for such an AAW corvette

tbh it's not outlandish from a technical standpoint. The biggest bottleneck is cost.

That said, they can opt to make the MILGEM-J a beast. Use the 2x3 cells for hot-swapping subsonic-AShM/LACM (i.e., Harbah) and the supersonic-cruising AShM. Use the VLS to quad-pack 32 CAMM-ERs and 8 Aster-30s. Then build like 8-12 more of these ships.

 

[Akh1112]

tbh it's not outlandish from a technical standpoint. The biggest bottleneck is cost.

That said, they can opt to make the MILGEM-J a beast. Use the 2x3 cells for hot-swapping subsonic-AShM/LACM (i.e., Harbah) and the supersonic-cruising AShM. Use the VLS to quad-pack 32 CAMM-ERs and 8 Aster-30s. Then build like 8-12 more of these ships.

Definitely, would really add to the fleet.


Would it really effect cost that much though? Surely its a more cost effective means of an AAW capability, a more numerous one at that too. Have like, a very barebones ship as you suggested but then have them just filled to the brim with the A-43 or ExLS, former being the most accessible ofc and then have them get their targeting data from either another sensor suite or potentially have them carry some form of smaller radar for such a role. Would be a pretty good means of countering the BrahMos, could then look at the PN purchasing land based systems to protect strategic assets like ports and bases from the IN to prevent situations like those in '71.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Definitely, would really add to the fleet.


Would it really effect cost that much though? Surely its a more cost effective means of an AAW capability, a more numerous one at that too. Have like, a very barebones ship as you suggested but then have them just filled to the brim with the A-43 or ExLS, former being the most accessible ofc and then have them get their targeting data from either another sensor suite or potentially have them carry some form of smaller radar for such a role. Would be a pretty good means of countering the BrahMos, could then look at the PN purchasing land based systems to protect strategic assets like ports and bases from the IN to prevent situations like those in '71.

Hopefully the bottleneck is relative...as in...it costs more, but isn't prohibitive.

But yea, I like the idea of small, specialized ships. That said, I would make ASW a standard feature across all as we would benefit from maxing out our ASW coverage. Just as we'll try to leverage busy waters to damage India, I think the IN will attempt the same with its submarines. Of course, I do believe in the adage, 'a submarine is the best sub hunter...' so mini-SSKs are a good idea, but adding ASW to new FAC(M)s might be cheaper/easier.

@Akh1112

How about this...? Damen Sigma Fast Attac 7310.

https://products.damen.com/-/media/...te-7310/Product_Sheet_Sigma_Corvette_7310.pdf

 

[Akh1112]

Hopefully the bottleneck is relative...as in...it costs more, but isn't prohibitive.

But yea, I like the idea of small, specialized ships. That said, I would make ASW a standard feature across all as we would benefit from maxing out our ASW coverage. Just as we'll try to leverage busy waters to damage India, I think the IN will attempt the same with its submarines. Of course, I do believe in the adage, 'a submarine is the best sub hunter...' so mini-SSKs are a good idea, but adding ASW to new FAC(M)s might be cheaper/easier.

@Akh1112

How about this...? Damen Sigma Fast Attac 7310.

https://products.damen.com/-/media/...te-7310/Product_Sheet_Sigma_Corvette_7310.pdf

Definitely interesting, i feel like the sigma would be a really good candidate for the ExLS or the smaller version of the MK47, i forget what its called, it carried ESSM's i assume as its medium ranged system. Though, it is quite large, like, quite. 900T displacement vs the Azmat's what, like 500T? Also, id agree with what you say. Perhaps the PN should look at maximising their assets by diverting funds to smaller, relatively capable force multipliers, smaller SSK's, specialised ships alongside ISTAR uav's etc to support the larger, more capable surface combattants, if anything, small, specialised and numerous platforms could potentially even be more of a threat to the IN than the full on variants.

I feel like perhaps the PN should use the Sigma/Sa'ar for inspiration but then again, that is what the Ada class are, their cost is a real issue though, thats why i proposed a potential variant based off of the Azmat since they can be procured in larger numbers and modified sufficiently due to the in house knowledge and expertise of the platform. for the SSKs, a very good choice would be the French Andastra class, i'm sure the Indians will throw a fuss but they have no customers/orders, im sure KSEW could be able to get a contract for local production. They share like 70% of their components with the Scorpene so that would be nice on cost grounds however they only displace 855t vs the Scorpenes 2000t, also they're equipped with AIP which is a nice bonus. Whaddya think?

 

[Tipu7]

Hopefully the bottleneck is relative...as in...it costs more, but isn't prohibitive.

But yea, I like the idea of small, specialized ships. That said, I would make ASW a standard feature across all as we would benefit from maxing out our ASW coverage. Just as we'll try to leverage busy waters to damage India, I think the IN will attempt the same with its submarines. Of course, I do believe in the adage, 'a submarine is the best sub hunter...' so mini-SSKs are a good idea, but adding ASW to new FAC(M)s might be cheaper/easier.

@Akh1112

How about this...? Damen Sigma Fast Attac 7310.

https://products.damen.com/-/media/...te-7310/Product_Sheet_Sigma_Corvette_7310.pdf

This Ship is love in first sight.
But as you mentioned before, PN will follow the route of Azmat class design based vessels.
Once there was a requirement for 4-6 more vessels (considering the fact we couldn't arm our MRTP33 with SSM) quoted back in 2016. I don't know where that requirement stands now. Still valid or compensated after induction of Yarmook class corvettes.