Jinnah class guided missile frigate has entered detailed design phase, after completion of conceptual design phase

[CivilianSupremacy]

I don't see Turkey as a long term partner, unfortunately, over there, it will be very dependant on who's in office. I can see another few decades of close cooperation while their industries are still in their fledgling stages, then when they start to chase larger, more lucrative contracts, political considerations will come into play and they will want to distance themselves from us unless something changes in our political standing on the global stage. Remember, money trumps all, this miskeen idea of turks doing this and that out of love is so so so naive, people forget, the Turks are after money, not too long ago they were chasing an Indian navy fleet tanker contract while others out there were chanting Turkey Pakistan Bhai Bhai lol.

Absolutely Spot on. Nothing is static in politics. Turks are doing business and that's all. The 4 baburs were the highest ever order for Turkish defence industries if I am not wrong. If years later our adversary orders 10 times bigger contracts to Turkey than Turks will happily do it. However, I do see Turks & Pak to continue working together for foreseeable future if Pak officially commits itself in KAAN and participation in JCF may be there too.

im suspecting itll be PMDS but thats just me reading into words too much

Hope so. That's a missing element in Pak fleet.

 

[Corax]

Kindly refer to my following post....



To further elaborate my aforementioned post, following are the Possibilities:

For front VLS (32 cells) AD role, either one from below -

• Quad pack CAMM-ER/MR (10 x 80-100km) with Sylver-A50/70
• Quad pack Siper B2 (30 x 150km) with MIDLAS

For center VLS (32 cells) Strike role, either mix of below or one of them -

• Indigenous - P282 (under development, no specifications released yet)
• Turkish - ATMACA (AShCM - range 250km)
• Chinese - CM 302 (export version of YJ-12, range 250 - 400km)

For slant Launchers (2x4 or 4x4) Strike role -

• Either one from above AShCM, all depends on compatibility.

Well there's been no indication yet by the PN that the P282 will be VLS compatible. Irrespective of that, I was also referring to the current indigenous AShMs beings converted to VLS compatibility, but clearly that isn't happening, as the PN seems content with using 2x3/4 launchers, so there's no basis to assume this is going to change any time soon.

 

[time pass]

Nothing harm in admitting. Good that you accepted.

Its not just one poster who misunderstood

So posting images for "ignorance" or whatever were unnecessary or perhaps a self reflection.

 

[ghazi52]

.,.,

https://twitter.com/x/status/1703279200323678629

 

[time pass]

Though we are discussing the proposed/concept AS-3600's weapons loadout (AAW & AShW capabilities) for Jinnah FFG, we haven't yet discussed the following crucial elements:

- Radars/Sensors
- ASuW
- Propulsion (CODAG/COGAG/IEP ??)
- Command & Control systems
- And others

Respected members, let's talk about the above while viewing at the diagram below.

 

[arslank03]

Though we are discussing the proposed/concept AS-3600's weapons loadout (AAW & AShW capabilities) for Jinnah FFG, we haven't yet discussed the following crucial elements:

- Radars/Sensors
- ASuW
- Propulsion (CODAG/COGAG/IEP ??)
- Command & Control systems
- And others

Respected members, let's talk about the above while viewing at the diagram below.

View attachment 954744

nothing to discuss, these things are usually up to the end user. The OEM will provide the hull to spec, with modifications if needed.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Design wise, the AS3600 isn't too far off from the Jinnah-class frigate (JCF) -- i.e., 300 tons heavier displacement, 5 m longer, near-identical breadth. I'd wager that a lot of the additional firepower is coming through thanks to an improved VLS and other internal configuration work, which -- IMO -- the PN could probably carry out on the JCF as-is.

It seems the PN got a new VLS solution via the OPV 2600/Yarmouk Batch-2, so we'll probably see that on the JCF and, in turn, a 32-cell VLS capability. Granted, it's not 64-cell, but at the same time, I doubt the PN has the budget right now to fund that many CAMM-ERs per ship.

A 64-cell VLS configuration will only be a thing when Pakistan's producing its own naval SAMs, which is probably not a factor in the JCF roadmap at this time. Perhaps in the future when the need to replace the F-22P arises.

 

[dBSPL]

.,.,

https://twitter.com/x/status/1703279200323678629

I like the design of this ship very much. I hope the Turkish navy will also consider adapting this design for itself. We also need a large number of frigates and I personally believe that there should be a second program running in parallel with MILGEM-Istif. It is an open seas multi-role frigate with a compact superstructure with as low a logistical footprint as possible, and lower maintenance, upkeep, personnel needs than heavier frigates.

 

[Tank131]

Design wise, the AS3600 isn't too far off from the Jinnah-class frigate (JCF) -- i.e., 300 tons heavier displacement, 5 m longer, near-identical breadth. I'd wager that a lot of the additional firepower is coming through thanks to an improved VLS and other internal configuration work, which -- IMO -- the PN could probably carry out on the JCF as-is.

It seems the PN got a new VLS solution via the OPV 2600/Yarmouk Batch-2, so we'll probably see that on the JCF and, in turn, a 32-cell VLS capability. Granted, it's not 64-cell, but at the same time, I doubt the PN has the budget right now to fund that many CAMM-ERs per ship.

A 64-cell VLS configuration will only be a thing when Pakistan's producing its own naval SAMs, which is probably not a factor in the JCF roadmap at this time. Perhaps in the future when the need to replace the F-22P arises.

Honestly, even a 32 cell system can be appropriate if you have quad packable weapons and cells. The MILDAS seems to be equivalent to the Sylver A50/A70s. That should allow quadpacks of CAMM-ER if PN can get it certified on MILDAS. That would allow 8 cells for 32 MRSAMs and allow you to use 8 cells possibly for Harbah. The other 16 can be used for LRSAM if PN can get one (Siper for example). Then you can keep 4-6 P282 in the center. Gives you a multitude of offensive and defensive options. In the rear you can have either Gokdeniz or PDMS for additional protection.

 

[ghazi52]

.,.,.,

https://twitter.com/x/status/1708087882882392122

 

[Bilal.]

A 64-cell VLS configuration will only be a thing when Pakistan's producing its own naval SAMs

Why can’t this be used on our ships:

 

[Tank131]

.,.,.,

https://twitter.com/x/status/1708087882882392122

View attachment 957180

View attachment 957181

Honestly, if this the JCF has only 16 cell VLS when you have a design like AS3600 out there already based on MILGEM, i will be truly disappointed. JCF at 3300t should be able to house a 32 c vls or it should be made larger. A 32 cell MILDAS would probably enable quad packing of CAMM-ER provided the required clearances are obtained on it from Italy (doubt it would be politically too difficult). That could allow significant flexibility when it comes to mission loadouts based on the role the ship is fulfilling. Could allow PN to acquire Siper and put 32 CAMM-ER in 8 cells, and use the other 24 cells for Siper, AShMs or anti-sub Rockets. Can still use the midship for longer range AShM/LACM. But 16 cells to be honest, doesn't really meet the needs for PN and these ships will be undergunned.

 

[CivilianSupremacy]

Honestly, if this the JCF has only 16 cell VLS when you have a design like AS3600 out there already based on MILGEM, i will be truly disappointed. JCF at 3300t should be able to house a 32 c vls or it should be made larger. A 32 cell MILDAS would probably enable quad packing of CAMM-ER provided the required clearances are obtained on it from Italy (doubt it would be politically too difficult). That could allow significant flexibility when it comes to mission loadouts based on the role the ship is fulfilling. Could allow PN to acquire Siper and put 32 CAMM-ER in 8 cells, and use the other 24 cells for Siper, AShMs or anti-sub Rockets. Can still use the midship for longer range AShM/LACM. But 16 cells to be honest, doesn't really meet the needs for PN and these ships will be undergunned.

Only one reason I see Why PN is opting lesser number of missiles per ship and that's lack of funds.

I doubt your solution of MILDAS would be implemented as that would increase the cost quite a lot. PN best bet can be using GWS but utilizing all the space that's already there. There is enough space to have atleast 18 (if not 24) GWS cells on Babur. But PN only went for 12. I don't have any figures how much they saved, if the amount is not that much then one can argue if it was worth to keep the SAM missiles less by 50% - that could effectively decrease the survivability of the ship.

As can be seen in this image that even with GWS VLS there is ample space on babur for atleast 18 missiles if not 24. There could not be anything underneath which would have been an issue if that was planned upfront.

I think cash / funds issues are definitely the only reason keeping these platforms under gun. We already saw with Tughril class ships, they can easily carry 8x CM302 but these are carrying 4 each. Yarmook batch-1 are commissioned few years by now but still those harbahs SSMs are pending.

The yarmook-IIs or baburs if gets the old school phalax ciws instead of PDMS will be another example how the economic & funding issues are impacting in real sense.