What's new

Pakistan hopes to revive its naval modernization program

@rockstar08

Excrept from the Article Chinese Houbei Fast Attack Craft Beyond Sea Denial, Author- John Patch, Published in: US Naval War College China Maritime Studies Number -11 China's Near Sea Combat Capabilities (link to download full report: U.S. Naval War College | China Maritime Studies)

Quote

Page-3

Houbei within a Changing Naval Strategy

It is important to note that with an expectation of increasing far-seas missions for larger PLAN combatants, fast attack craft will, logically, need to be relevant well outside coastal waters. The far-seas concept endorsed since the mid-2000s, for instance, clearly requires a PLAN that will operate with increasing reach and with offensive capabilities. The Center for Naval Analyses assesses that Beijing’s intent to extend its strategic depth for active defense is an “expansion of the armed forces’ geographic and functional security interests.” PLAN development trends in support of far-seas missions include longrange standoff weapons and extended overseas deployments including the requisite sustainment, such as at-sea logistics and overseas bases. As PLAN major combatants move out of the near seas, then, smaller combatants like the Houbei can be expected to fill the gap in the near seas.

The Houbei missions fit within the recent PLAN emphasis on expanding near-seas missions beyond sea denial (which, of course, is inherently defensive) to sea control. The PLAN has naturally focused on sea control for a Taiwan contingency, but recent exercises and deployments involving fast attack craft seem to demonstrate a shift to sea-control missions in the larger near-seas region. Indeed, RAND assessed in 2009 that PLAN modernization is “specifically designed to allow the PLAN to move over this period from sea denial to sea control capabilities in a regional conflict.” Many respected China watchers have reached similar conclusions, describing these developments as distinctly offensive in nature.

Page-4

Houbei’s Potential for Offensive Roles and Missions

If the fast attack craft is to be relevant to sea control missions, it must have inherently offensive capabilities and it does.

At first blush, the craft may seem to have only defensive weapons, but it is the Houbei’s collective offensive punch that has the most potential for sea control, as opposed to denial. Houbei fits into “green-water active defense,” but some forget that this role involves offensive missions in certain circumstances. The PLAN clearly designed the Houbei to act as an element of a larger combat system or linked network. For example, its largely passive electromagnetic and electro-optical sensors provide only localized, line-of-sight targeting, preserving the ship’s ability to operate undetected but seriously limiting its ability to identify and track targets. The Houbei’s surface-search radar cannot provide over-the-horizon targeting (OTHT), and stealthy ships by their nature rarely use active sensors in any case. Houbei’s extensive data-link connectivity, however, supports long-range coordination with aircraft, submarines, and other warships. All this points toward a craft optimized to receive over-the-horizon targeting within a larger combat network. Many sources cite China’s growing open-ocean OTHT capability, making coordinated antiship Houbei operations more possible. In 2011, a RAND analyst concluded that “China’s greatly improved detection, tracking, targeting, and long-range missile systems will soon pose a very real threat to US carrier groups operating to the west of Guam.” Offensive missions in the far reaches of all three near seas, however, will require the numbers necessary to make the Houbei a viable offensive arm of the PLAN. If so, the logical implication is that it will be unavailable for coastal-defense missions.

Eight long-range YJ-83 (C803, 135 nm range) antiship cruise missiles provide the Houbei’s offensive punch. A study by the U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) highlighted the YJ-83 and follow-on antiship cruise-missile threat: “Future anti-ship cruise missiles are expected to continue to utilize advanced seeker capabilities including the expanded use of millimeter wave seekers and the possible use of coherent radar seekers that allow enhanced countermeasure discrimination.” Just a single YJ-83 would be a serious potential threat to a U.S. carrier or expeditionary strike group, but Chinese naval tacticians do not envision single-missile strikes against adversary capital ships. Hence, seen as a larger combat system, externally cued Houbeis become much more than coastal-defense craft.

Page-5

Houbei’s “semistealth,” speed and volume antiship-cruise-missile fires also make it a potentially lethal element within a stratagem of offensive surprise. The importance of the Chinese concept of the “assassin’s mace” is well known, but many analysts still associate PLAN near-seas capabilities within an anti access and area-denial (A2/AD) paradigm that is, largely defensive in nature. Alongside an increasing fleet of long-range antiship cruise-missile platforms, the Houbei class provides a distinctly offensive potential capability within the active-defense strategy. A recent RAND assessment points out that Chinese writings stress preemptive attacks on key U.S. power-projection capabilities including aircraft carriers prior to or quickly following formal declaration of hostilities. This stratagem is designed to disrupt the deployment of forces to the region, place Washington in a passive position, and deliver a psychological shock to the United States and its allies. RAND goes farther, to state that an aircraft carrier with escort, if surprised, would be particularly vulnerable to a saturation missile attack. Chinese descriptions of Houbei fast attack craft consistently stress covert, long-range attacks taking advantage of stealth, surprise, and standoff ranges.

A final factor that supports the idea of the offensive nature of the Houbei class is the fact that new Chinese coastal-defense cruise-missile (CDCM) capabilities are lessening the need for coastal-defense craft, freeing up the Houbei for missions farther out in the near seas—though, again, they cannot replicate the roles or missions of offshore patrol vessels.

Page-6

The PLAN could also use Houbeis for missions other than surface warfare. For example, some analysts argue that the Houbei could carry missiles other than antiship cruise missiles, possibly antisubmarine missiles or torpedoes. While the Houbei has no antisubmarine sensors, within a linked fleet it could act simply as a “shooter,” just as it can in coordinated surface attacks. Antisubmarine missiles fired from a low-signature, fast surface craft provide the advantages of surprising enemy submarines, not giving away the location of escorting Chinese submarines, and limiting enemy response, in that, as analysts assert, the Houbei would be a hard target for torpedo attack. Finally, some argue that the PLAN could modify the Houbei for land attack cruise missiles, as the missile housing can apparently accommodate C601 and similar weapons of the type. These possibilities remain speculative, though, as no evidence clearly indicates that the PLAN will deploy missiles other than an antiship type on Houbei.
Unquote
 
.
Type 052D destroyers should be bought it will counter ani IN aggresiion in pak waters
 
. .
Not enough at all Pakistan needs around 18 Frigates and Corvettes and around 6 Cruise Missile destroyers and several fast Attack Crafts
pakistan navy is defensive force these assests will be enough n will give huge boosts to its capabilities...they should just need to add 3 squadrons dedicated for naval role
 
.
@Bratva @Oscar @Rashid Mahmood @fatman17 @Arsalan

Why did the PN procure these primitive F-22Ps when designs like Formidable Class and Valour Class were already around? Who profited from that deal? Or was it simply done to appease the Chinese? What was the deal with that?
 
Last edited:
.
@Bratva @Oscar @Rashid Mahmood @fatman17 @Arsalan

Why did the PN procure these primitive F-22Ps when designs like Formidable Class and Valour Class were already around? Who profited from that deal? Or was it simply done to appease the Chinese? What was the deal with that?

At that time, majority of the budget was committed to F-16, AWAC program, Strategic missiles R&D and War on terror. With meager funds available and urgent desire to replace Type-21 frigates. Only cheap option available was F-22
 
.
@Bratva @Oscar @Rashid Mahmood @fatman17 @Arsalan

Why did the PN procure these primitive F-22Ps when designs like Formidable Class and Valour Class were already around? Who profited from that deal? Or was it simply done to appease the Chinese? What was the deal with that?
Other projects were on priority at that time and F22p was a good enough ship, specially considering what they would be replacing.

Also the two classes you mentioned were something we may not have gotten at all:

Formidable class is actually La Fayette class of the French navy. Using Thales radar, EW suite by Rafael and other western electronic equipment. The missiles it carries are the US Harpoons and the EU Asters. All in all, it was something that was a bit out of reach (sanction wise/may not even be offered to us to start with).

Valour class, though have more South African subsystems still is a German MEKO family warship and have significant parts from the west. With sanctions looming on our heads all the time, F22p was a wise choice. Now we have a good enough boat and an opportunity to build on that (even go for some western systems this time as they know that alternatives are available)
 
.
8 S-20 subs
8 Azmat Fast attack crafts
6 type 0-22 stealth missile boats
4 improved F-22 Frigates
6 Patrol vessels
This procurement will seriously be a game changer for the navy . :cheesy::flame:
Improved F 22 is not good enough we need bigger. Class of ship which can handle better weapons in quantity and please these projects we are listening since 10 years nothing new in it

At that time, majority of the budget was committed to F-16, AWAC program, Strategic missiles R&D and War on terror. With meager funds available and urgent desire to replace Type-21 frigates. Only cheap option available was F-22
We had enough of F 16 and navy never had a chunk of a good deals since 50 years time to give them more and ask airforce and army to stop for few years for any procurement since navy need to modernize itself
 
.
Other projects were on priority at that time and F22p was a good enough ship, specially considering what they would be replacing.

Also the two classes you mentioned were something we may not have gotten at all:

Formidable class is actually La Fayette class of the French navy. Using Thales radar, EW suite by Rafael and other western electronic equipment. The missiles it carries are the US Harpoons and the EU Asters. All in all, it was something that was a bit out of reach (sanction wise/may not even be offered to us to start with).

Valour class, though have more South African subsystems still is a German MEKO family warship and have significant parts from the west. With sanctions looming on our heads all the time, F22p was a wise choice. Now we have a good enough boat and an opportunity to build on that (even go for some western systems this time as they know that alternatives are available)
At that time, majority of the budget was committed to F-16, AWAC program, Strategic missiles R&D and War on terror. With meager funds available and urgent desire to replace Type-21 frigates. Only cheap option available was F-22
So both of you are absolutely sure that we couldn't have done better?
 
.
So both of you are absolutely sure that we couldn't have done better?
Well frankly there always is room for improvement and chances of things getting better. However you need to understand that most of the ideas that we are having now and the analysis we do now are what we could have done only now in 2016! We have the advantage of "knowing" the event of past few years, of knowing the performance reports and technical data available to us now. So yes at that particular time, F22p made perfect sense and was a great deal. It still should be and is termed as a good deal. Only now we have learned how that South African SAM may be better than the Chinese one so we are talking about that. "Knowing" is the luxury we only have now after all those years!
 
.
Only now we have learned how that South African SAM may be better than the Chinese one so we are talking about that. "Knowing" is the luxury we only have now after all those years!
HQ-16 requires a big frigate and ADA Class Corvette and F-22p aren't big enough accommodate HQ-16 that is why PN is interested in Umkhonto.
 
.
Well frankly there always is room for improvement and chances of things getting better. However you need to understand that most of the ideas that we are having now and the analysis we do now are what we could have done only now in 2016! We have the advantage of "knowing" the event of past few years, of knowing the performance reports and technical data available to us now. So yes at that particular time, F22p made perfect sense and was a great deal. It still should be and is termed as a good deal. Only now we have learned how that South African SAM may be better than the Chinese one so we are talking about that. "Knowing" is the luxury we only have now after all those years!
The subsystems can always be upgraded. The hull design is too primitive by today's standards. Look at the difference between F-22P and its successor. The evolution represented in C28A's design was already the standard in frigate designing back in 2003 when we decided to go for the F-22Ps whose hull's design I'm not sure is even an upgrade from the ship it replaced. Nay, After looking closely at Type 21, I think it just might be a downgrade.
15300342_200901280902117067.jpg

HMS_Arrow_(F173)_underway_c1982.jpg

c28a_algeria_6.jpg


@Bratva
 
.
@Arsalan The trend is to go for compact medium/long-range SAM - e.g. Barak-8, CAMM and Aster 15/30. The benefit of the shift is that smaller warships, e.g. Ada-class, F-22P and even a sub-1500 ton design, would be able to pack proper AAW equipment. The South African Umkhonto has the potential, especially with Denel developing the ~35km EIR and ~60km R.
 
.
F-22P cost the PN $175M each. Given that price it is a very good ship. Remember, when PN signed the contract in 2006, it had just come out from under sanctions, it was recieving F-16s, JF-17 and had limited resources. The F-22P was lightyears ahead of the Type 21 and has strong antisurface and antisubmarine capabilities. It has enough capabilities to defend itself from attack via FM90 15km (triple guidance missile) and 2 Type 730 CIWS. That being said, the time has come where PN should develop its capabilities with upgrade anti-air capabilities. For F-22P, that should include replacing the FM90 with a VLS with hopefully CAMM, or Umkhonto R or EIR or even FM-3000 (30km against aircraft and 20km against missiles) which looks like it could potentially be quad packed. F-22P could likley fit a 24-32 cell VLS where the FM90 launcher and deck are on a refit. FM-3000 would give it reasonable air defense.
 
.
F-22P cost the PN $175M each. Given that price it is a very good ship. Remember, when PN signed the contract in 2006, it had just come out from under sanctions, it was recieving F-16s, JF-17 and had limited resources. The F-22P was lightyears ahead of the Type 21 and has strong antisurface and antisubmarine capabilities. It has enough capabilities to defend itself from attack via FM90 15km (triple guidance missile) and 2 Type 730 CIWS. That being said, the time has come where PN should develop its capabilities with upgrade anti-air capabilities. For F-22P, that should include replacing the FM90 with a VLS with hopefully CAMM, or Umkhonto R or EIR or even FM-3000 (30km against aircraft and 20km against missiles) which looks like it could potentially be quad packed. F-22P could likley fit a 24-32 cell VLS where the FM90 launcher and deck are on a refit. FM-3000 would give it reasonable air defense.
I'm beginning to wonder...

Our maritime AAW needs, are they of need in order to defend our SLOC, or to strengthen our A2/AD? Pakistan's merchant navy is on the small side, so I am not sure if maritime trade will be a decisive factor for us in wartime (unless other countries are willing to engage if given PN escorts - unlikely). It seems maritime AAW would be centered on A2/AD. If we come into possession of compact MR/LR SAMs, would we really need larger frigates? Why not take the Israeli approach and build maritime AAW on sub-2500 ton (and sub-1500 ton) ships?
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom