What's new

Featured Pakistan Navy Type 054AP Frigates - Update, News & Discussion

MANILA PHILIPPINES The lead ship of the Tughril class of guided missile & air defence frigates of the #Pakistan Navy , PNS Tughril arrived in the #Philippines on a two-day port of call and goodwill visit.
PNS Tughril’s captain and crew were received by Dty Asst Chief of Naval Staff of the Philippines Navy, Captain Emilo G Orio Jr.
FEzKx8RX0AE_1e8.jpeg
FEzKx8SXwAM6dZw.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • FEzKx8SXwAM6dZw.jpeg
    FEzKx8SXwAM6dZw.jpeg
    34.5 KB · Views: 40
  • FEzKx8SXoAE4RqL.jpeg
    FEzKx8SXoAE4RqL.jpeg
    50.4 KB · Views: 43
Last edited:
. . .
The reality is HQ-16 is an integrated design, with larger flying envelope than the booster based technical route such as CAMM-ER. Only second tier country such as British and France love this kind of technical route because it is cheap and easier to develop, while China and US never use it in short range SAM. Look our newly developed exported SAM such as FM-3000 and LY70 - land-based FM-3000 has a dynamic range of only 30km but with anti-missile range of 20 km, for comparison, Aster15 has the same dynamic range but only 15 km range to target missile.
China also has this kind of design with booster to elongate the range which makes the data looks beautiful but less competitive in reality sold by NORINCO, but it has never been adopted by any PLA units. And it is only for export

Here's the problem, does china have any equivalent missile operationalized for naval platforms... Yes. The HQ-16. Is the HQ-16 superior to the CAMM-ER in any way except price? No. Neither is it longer range (in fact the range of CAMM-ER could be as much as 120km), not is it more modern (still with the SARH vs ARH of the CAMM). THE CAMM-ER is smaller abd lighter as well allowing for greater weapons capacity. Looking into it, if the CAMM-ER comes with Mk-41 or Sylver A-50, it can be quad packed. If it comes with its own proprietary launcher "CAMM-ER MLS (maritime launch system)" the module still fits more missiles into a space due to the smaller size of the missile requiring a smaller footprint cell, that the overall number of missiles carries per sq foot of deck space will be higher with CAMM-ER. In every facet the CAMM-ER is superior to HQ-16. When other naval solutions for such a sized ship become available from China, we can discuss them, but at this time thats not the case.
 
Last edited:
.
Here's the problem, does china have any equivalent missile operationalized for naval platforms... Yes. The HQ-16. Is the HQ-16 superior to the CAMM-ER in any way except price? No. Neither is it longer range (in fact the range of CAMM-ER could be as much as 120km), not is it more modern (still with the SARH vs ARH of the CAMM). THE CAMM-ER is smaller abd lighter as well allowing for greater weapons capacity. Looking into it, if the CAMM-ER comes with Mk-41 or Sylver A-50, it can be quad packed. If it comes with its own proprietary launcher "CAMM-ER MLS (maritime launch system)" the module still fits more missiles into a space due to the smaller size of the missile requiring a smaller footprint cell, that the overall number of missiles carries per sq foot of deck space will be higher with CAMM-ER. In every facet the CAMM-ER is superior to HQ-16. When other naval solutions for such a sized ship become available from China, we can discuss them, but at this time thats not the case.
Correct, CAMM-ER is better in nearly every way than HQ-16A.
But that’s not a demerit for China or the HQ-16. That’s simply the difference In age. CAMM-ER With Albatross NG is better than the HQ-16 because it’s much newer. If you take most western missiles as old as HQ-16A, they’ll be comparable.

China already has better VLS systems in the form of HQ-9, which it has been focusing more on because they were needed for its destroyers. To China the 054A are basic support ships. Hence HQ-16s new naval version isn’t ready yet (however it’s modernized ground variant is already in service). China is already working on HQ-16C, which will probably be comparable if not better to CAMM-ER. But again, this is simply due to the ages of the systems. Not because one had better technology than the other.
 
.
This ship must be out of Phillipine, i expect next port of call to be Klang Malaysia and afterwards to Sri Lanka afterwards it reaches to Karachi.
 
. .
Those launchers/canisters look exactly like YJ-12. This is why it’s not good to jump to conclusions, it’s also why Twitter OSINT accounts shouldn’t be used as a single source. View attachment 797127View attachment 797128
So there will be only 4 of them or the number will increase in future?

Which ship is in the 2nd picture? it also has them in 2x2 configuration although there are empty slant launchers on the left but still 2 canister per set, does that indicate anything?
 
.
So there will be only 4 of them or the number will increase in future?

Which ship is in the 2nd picture? it also has them in 2x2 configuration although there are empty slant launchers on the left but still 2 canister per set, does that indicate anything?
They’re currently mounted in 2x2 configuration, they can be increased to 4x4 if needed, depends on the mission profile. Not a big deal.

2nd ship is Chinese destroyer, again, only 2 modules of 2x2 mounted there but more can be mounted if needed. That ship can have 16 in total.
 
. . . . . . .
Back
Top Bottom