The Pakistan Navy's Frigate Options

[Gen Padmanabhan]

whats kadai?



well dont you guys have design rights to the f22p?

No, they dont have, design is Intellectual Property Right of China. By building Scorpene in India doesnt means India become owner of designs of Scorpene hull & various systems.

 

[Penguin]

Likewise Sylver

The A-35 and A-43 possibly even A50 could be a possibility. VT1 is the crotale replacement missile.

Kareef class corvette, Oman. Mica VL (just over 3m long).

No, they dont have, design is Intellectual Property Right of China. By building Scorpene in India doesnt means India become owner of designs of Scorpene hull & various systems.

Uhm, they can license build F22P. You can redesign that. Or simply order/license built C28Ps. Besides, as if China itself is known for respecting Intellectual Property Rights.... (J11B, J-15, J-11BS/J-16)

 

[Gen Padmanabhan]

Uhm, they can license build F22P. You can redesign that. Besides, as if China itself is known for respecting Intellectual Property Rights....

Actually they cant without Chinese help, they have no infrastructure, Human Resource, Capabilities & Funds.

Also if they violate the IPR, China has full authority to stop delivery of spare parts & aftersale warranty as null & void. Designing, building & assembling are all different things.

And if they authorized western OEMs to check Chinese CMS, then story is finished, China never again going to trade with them.

India paying the price of reverse engineering INS Sindhukirti.

 

[Penguin]

So I wasn't wrong when i say C28A are mixed design of Azmat and F-22P right ?

I have no idea if C28A has any Azmat input. However I would think C28A is simply a refinement, enhancement of F22P, itself a development/refinement of the Jiangwei IIs of PLAN.

Smart S Mk.2 is volume search radar, not Fire Control Radar,

for greater situation awareness it must be integrated into CMS (like most of modern destroyers), but that is not necessity. But Fire Control Radar & weapon systems are must to be integrated with CMS..

I am aware of what SMART S Mk 2 is. It is being built in Hengelo, the Netherlands. But it is besides the point here.

Signaal Multibeam Acquisition Radar for Tracking.

SMART-S Mk2 is the newest Thales Naval 3D multibeam radar, successor to SMART-S, and is optimized for medium-to-long range air and surface surveillance and target designation. It is an optimal sensor for target indication to a fire control tracking system. By providing 3D tracks the radar supports correct classification and rapid acquisition. The elevation accuracy is high (even in case of multipath by using receive beams below the horizon) and suited to directly launch fire and forget missiles. Also used for surface gun fire support

And I am pretty sure there are no western weapon systems that integrated with Chinese CMS ( or with Chinese FCR ), or vice versa. Actually I am 100% sure.

You are actually wrong, the C28A is an example. And I bet, if I do my best, I can find some more examples.

It would be pretty daft if the Smart on C28A was NOT integrated into the CMS. It is designed for easy integration in both Thales and non-Thales CMSs.

Besides, authoritative sources state that it is.

Question here is WHO's CMS? Chinese or non-Chinese. Noting that Chinese CMS are influenced by the French Tavitac ( (Traitement Automatique et VIsualisation TACtique) and the Italian IPN-10. Tavitac was a Thomson-CSF product and Thomson-CSF later became part of Thales, just like Hollandse Signaal did. Tavitac 2000 is used on the French LaFayette class.

In Europe, the naval C4I systems industry is dominated by Thales, which builds a number of systems including Senit, Sewaco, Sic-21, Stacos, Tacticos and Tavitac. BAE Systems meanwhile produces a range of products including Acmis, Adaws-2000, Adimp, Nautis, SSCS and the SMCS-NG. Selex Sistemi Integrati of Italy produces the IPN-5, -10 and -20 systems, along with the Numc/Nupa Combat Management System (CMS). Saab Systems has enjoyed considerable success with its 9LV CMS series, while Atlas Elektronik has produced the Isus 90-1 system. Joint ventures between BAE Systems and Alenia Marconi have yielded the command and control systems for the Royal Navy's Type-45 class destroyers while collaborations between Thales and DCNS have resulted in the Subtics and Sycobs submarine command and control system, and the Setis-Fremm CMS. Finally, Terma has designed and produced the C-Flex system for the Kongelige Danske Marine (Royal Danish Navy) Absalon class command and support vessels.
Naval C4I systems: naval command and control stays out of the limelight. The thousands of miles of wires and the hundreds of computer screens are rarely seen on news footage from the global war on terror, or during humanitarian intervention and stability operations. For the media, it lacks the 'sex appeal' of troops in combat, or helicopters lowering aid packages to stricken villagers. - Free Online Library

 

[Gen Padmanabhan]

You are actually wrong, the C28A is an example. And I bet, if I do my best, I can find some more examples.

It would be pretty daft if the Smart on C28A was NOT integrated into the CMS. It is designed for easy integration in both Thales and non-Thales CMSs.

Besides, authoritative sources state that it is.

If that is that case, and it is integrated into Chinese CMS.

Then what was the reason to buy different consoles, different datalinks , buses, & it seems like different architecture for Smart S from Thales?

It would be pretty daft if the Smart on C28A was NOT integrated into the CMS. It is designed for easy integration in both Thales and non-Thales CMSs.

Obviously it is easy to be integrated, albeit OEM ( in this case Thales ) authorized to work on CMS.

 

[rockstar08]

I have no idea if C28A has any Azmat input. However I would think C28A is simply a refinement, enhancement of F22P, itself a development/refinement of the Jiangwei IIs of PLAN.

Ok, but in terms of Capabilities , what C28A's can add to or benefit us , over our F-22P's . can't we just fit a VLS system in our F-22ps and give them name of F-23 ? add some more sensors and Radar's to make it slightly better than existing F-22's .

 

[Penguin]

Assessing China's Naval Power: Technological Innovation, Economic ... - Sarah Kirchberger - Google Boeken

ZKJ-5 <> Tavitac
ZKJ-6, ZKJ-7 <> IPN-10
JRSCCS/JRNG <> Tacticos

Alternatively
ZKJ-4B/6 (developed from Thomson-CSF TAVITAC) combat data system
Type 054A frigate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Early in 1992, Signaal introduced the TACTICOS command system. This is basically an evolutionary development of the earlier STACOS system using the experience gained in the design of SEWACO VII. TACTICOS was officially a new command system designed by combining the best features of the Thomson-CSF TAVITAC 2000 and Signaal STACOS systems
Spain updates AEGIS destroyers - Page 4 - DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums

The terms SENIT 5 and SENIT 7 were assigned semi-officially to the Thomson-CSF (now Thales) TAVITAC and TAVITAC 2000 systems, which were developed as private ventures.
ВИФ2 NE
: Ветка : SENIT 9 - это обычная современная общекорабельная БИУС

The SENIT 7 combat system is based on the Thales Tavitac 2000, with additional elements of the SENIT 8 system in service on the Charles de Gaulle aircraft
Al Riyadh (F3000S Sawari II) Class - Naval Technology

TACTICOS combat system + Smart-s Mk2 radar
See Almirante Padilla class upgrade.
Almirante Padilla-class frigate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Given this alledged lineage, I strongly suspect even a Chinese CMS can well accommodate a Smart S Mk2.

 

[Blue Marlin]

By 'you guys' I suppose you mean PN (I am Dutch, so it's not strictly speaking 'my' ship).



An 8 cell Mk41 measures 2.62m x 3.43m ('deck area). It is available in 3 lengths, the shortest of which is 5.3 m for the self-defense version, 6.8 m for the tactical version, and 7.7 m for the strike version.

For reference, the length of a Crotale missile (from which the HQ7/FM80/FM90 derive) is 2.35m. With an allowance for the container, that's pretty close to 2.62 (2 rows of 4 cells). Missile diameter is 0.165m. With an allowance for folded wings,for each missile containter, for the rack in which the container are placed, and for the turntable supports in which the rack sits you might well approach 3.43m. A depth of 5.3m is, what, 2 decks and a bit? See the Australian Perry/Adelaide class that received a Mk41 for ESSM

And should Mk41 single 8-cell block be too big, it also comes in Single Cell Launcher variant. Besides, for ESSM only, there is the compact Mk48/Mk56 VLS. One compact 6 cell unit can pack 12 ESSM.

Mod 1 (Dutch M frigate)

Mod 3 (Red cap, on Danish vessel) Mod 0 (grey on Canadian vessel)

Mod 2 on South Korean vessel

The Mod 3 has been fitted to ships as small as the SF300 patrol/attack cract of the Danish navy. Penetrated only 1 deck.

well i knew you were dutch as i remember you saying it before, but i was under assumption that your a dutch Pakistani. is that correct? apologies if it's incorrect.


but do you think the usa would provide mk41'vls systems?
the ohp the pakistan has, had a older vls which was removed prior to being transferred

No, they dont have, design is Intellectual Property Right of China. By building Scorpene in India doesnt means India become owner of designs of Scorpene hull & various systems.

@Penguin @Rashid Mahmood is this true? pakistan does not own the design rights to the ship!

 

[Penguin]

well i knew you were dutch as i remember you saying it before, but i was under assumption that your a dutch Pakistani. is that correct? apologies if it's incorrect.

I'm as nordic as they get around here.

but do you think the usa would provide mk41'vls systems?
the ohp the pakistan has, had a older vls which was removed prior to being transferred

OHP never had a vls. The single rail launcher Mk13 it had was removed in 2003 from all USN OHPs, including the one Pakistan later got. So, that was not removed because the ship went to Pakistan. You want stuff from the US, they will have some terms, esp. if Pakistan would like the US to pick up some of the tab.

@Penguin @Rashid Mahmood is this true? pakistan does not own the design rights to the ship!

They built a single ship in Pakistan. What is to stop the yard from building another and not mounting a HQ7 but rather e.g. 2x6 VL Mica in a Sylver A-35 VLS? That's not a major design change. Nor it putting on a different radar. Besides, if China was willing to license the F22P why would they be unwilling to license C28A?

Then what was the reason to buy different consoles, different datalinks , buses, & it seems like different architecture for Smart S from Thales?

No idea. I would assume radar performance, and fleet compatibility.

 

[Blue Marlin]

I'm as nordic as they get around here.

OHP never had a vls. The single rail launcher Mk13 it had was removed in 2003 from all USN OHPs, including the one Pakistan later got. So, that was not removed because the ship went to Pakistan. You want stuff from the US, they will have some terms, esp. if Pakistan would like the US to pick up some of the tab.

never knew that but do you really think they will go for it? and what will it cost to even procure, and modify the hull for its installation?

They built a single ship in Pakistan. What is to stop the yard from building another and not mounting a HQ7 but rather e.g. 2x6 VL Mica in a Sylver A-35 VLS? That's not a major design change. Nor it putting on a different radar. Besides, if China was willing to licence the F22P why would they be unwilling to licence C28A?

well thats settled then, pakistan should modify it to hold a vls and a decent radar. preferably the smart-s. like what Algeria did with the c28a. or buy the c28 with tot. or a larger vessel with more teeth (which is unlikely) god knows what the pakistani navy is up to.

 

[Penguin]

shocked?

never knew that but do you really think they will go for it? and what will it cost to even procure, and modify the hull for its installation?

APRIL 09, 2007
Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) recently received a $16 million contract to provide four MK 41 Vertical Launcher
System (VLS) ship sets to the Australian and Spanish navies. The contract for the below-deck missile launching systems is a modification to an existing Foreign Military Sales contract with the U.S. Naval Sea Systems Command.
The fixed-price contract modification covers the labor associated with production of MK 41 Baseline VII VLS ship sets for three Royal Australian Navy Hobart-class Air Warfare Destroyers (AWD) and one launcher ship set for an Alvaro de Bazan-class Spanish F-105 frigate.

Lockheed Martin Receives $16 Million Contract to Provide MK 41 Vertical Launching Missile... -- re> BALTIMORE, April 9 /PRNewswire/ --
These have 4x8 Mk41. Labor for that was $4 million per set. So say, $1 million for a single 8-cell module?

The $37.7 million contract requires Launching Systems to deliver, install and integrate six, single-module tactical launchers beginning in Jan. 2002 through Jan. 2005

Lockheed Martin to Provide VLS to Australian Frigate Upgrade
These 6 were for the ANZAC class (MEKO 200s) > about $6.2m per single module.

Allowing for inflation etc, an 8-cell Mk41 for F22P can't be more than $10m today IMHO. This would give 32 ESSM capabiliy. But... would need modifications to radar sets (you need either a pair of STIR, or something like CEAFAR/CEAMOUNT on a mast)

INcidentally, CAMM was testfired from Mk41 using Extensible Launching System (quad packing, in a long canister) and this could be used with Single Cell Launcher, so there would be an option for e.g. 4 single cells, with 16 missiles (semi-active radar homing ESSM or active radar homing CAMM). Or 3-cells and 12 missiles.
Lockheed Martin to qualify ExLS CAMM launcher in 2016 | IHS Jane's 360
Lockheed Martin to Begin Qualification Testing of 3-Cell ExLS in 2016 -- BALTIMORE, Sept. 15, 2015 /PRNewswire/ --

 

[ACE OF THE AIR]

shocked?



Lockheed Martin Receives $16 Million Contract to Provide MK 41 Vertical Launching Missile... -- re> BALTIMORE, April 9 /PRNewswire/ --
These have 4x8 Mk41. Labor for that was $4 million per set. So say, $1 million for a single 8-cell module?


Lockheed Martin to Provide VLS to Australian Frigate Upgrade
These 6 were for the ANZAC class (MEKO 200s) > about $6.2m per single module.

Allowing for inflation etc, an 8-cell Mk41 for F22P can't be more than $10m today IMHO. This would give 32 ESSM capabiliy. But... would need modifications to radar sets (you need either a pair of STIR, or something like CEAFAR/CEAMOUNT on a mast)

INcidentally, CAMM was testfired from Mk41 using Extensible Launching System (quad packing, in a long canister) and this could be used with Single Cell Launcher, so there would be an option for e.g. 4 single cells, with 16 missiles (semi-active radar homing ESSM or active radar homing CAMM). Or 3-cells and 12 missiles.
Lockheed Martin to qualify ExLS CAMM launcher in 2016 | IHS Jane's 360
Lockheed Martin to Begin Qualification Testing of 3-Cell ExLS in 2016 -- BALTIMORE, Sept. 15, 2015 /PRNewswire/ --

1) Is it possible to have some Turkish stuff rather than the ones you have mentioned above. The Turkish would come with much easily and with TOT.

2) Brazil was also helping Pakistan with some weapons may be they are available for future ships.

3) Recently there was a MOU between Pakistan and South Africa still details are not available so there could be some thing cooking.

4) South Korea is also interested in developing a naval assembly plant in Pakistan and they have openly mentioned this during the IDEAS 2015. What are they offering is still too early to say.

@Rashid Mahmood may be able to shed some more light...

 

[Penguin]

1) Is it possible to have some Turkish stuff rather than the ones you have mentioned above. The Turkish would come with much easily and with TOT.

2) Brazil was also helping Pakistan with some weapons may be they are available for future ships.

3) Recently there was a MOU between Pakistan and South Africa still details are not available so there could be some thing cooking.

4) South Korea is also interested in developing a naval assembly plant in Pakistan and they have openly mentioned this during the IDEAS 2015. What are they offering is still too early to say.

@Rashid Mahmood may be able to shed some more light...

Licence produced Smart-S mk2?

15km AiHSF and 30-35km OiHSF SAMS? Roketsan Unveiled Short Range Air Defence Missile

[Turquie] Défense aérienne - Asie / Océanie - AIR-DEFENSE.NET

CAFRAD integrated mast.Turkish Naval Programs | Page 35

No VLS seen yet.

Designated AV-MMA (AVibras Medium Altitude Missile), the new system would be based on MBDA’s CAMM (Common Anti-Air Modular Missile) family of missiles, but tailored to Brazilian requirements using Avibras technologies and components provided by other Brazilian industry partners.
Companies Present Missile System

 

[Penguin]

 

[Tank131]

@Penguin wouldnt the DK-10 (some say has ability to be quad packed) be better choice of sam in a revolver styled chinese cold launch vls or their own hot launch vls make more financial sense. Also if they couldnt fit it in (which i doubt as the fm90 sits on a platform which itself is 1 deck elevated so likely would only need to occupy the single deck below it aswell to fit a vls) the FM-3000 with 30km range would seem as good as CAMM and better than mica-vls given range and can also be quad packed, not to mention cheaper. Also given that you advise for ir guided missiles, do they have any drawbacks with respect to intercepting AShMs?

Additionally, why not simply move the vls behind the conning tower and in front of the smokestack (where it could be mostly above deck if space is an issue) and enable you to have mostly any size of vls you want. Move the c802 boxes to where the fm90 is now. You could likely get 8-12 cells there.