Modernization and Acquisition of Combatant Vessels for Pakistani Navy.

[ABBASIA]

Well as far as I think;

PN may go for another batch of Agosta 90B to replace the four old Daphne class submarine which were overhaulled and have service life starting to end from year 2008. So If PN readily goes for the same 90B design then by 2008 we may be able to replace the two Daphnes. As for the frigate program is concerned I am very much sure that PN is eyeing the Type 54 frigates primarily due to its greater endurance, and there were news of PN planning to acquire 8 frigates. And I have posted on PDF that these many include 4 F-22P's and 4 Type 54A class frigates.

 

[Ethan]

I think actually Daphne class subs are the ones being replaced by the Agosta 90B, and yeah you are right, PN is also eying a second batch of an additional 4 frigates, but this is only speculation and has not been reported widely.

 

[doggychow14]

If the Pakistan Navy will be getting 054As, it will not be any time soon. China, herself, doesn't have a 054A in her inventory yet.

 

[tatra]

I'm a bit surprised by the absense in these kinds of threads on Pak navy ships of possibility of ship offerings from European yards. My South Korean sourcing option was shot down. Perhaps I've missed something, but so far it seems the only source for new ships is China? If ships from European sources are not an option, then what about the possibilities of acquiring used ships from Europe. Increasingly, European navies are retiring ships earlier in order to pay for fewer but newer and more advanced ships. The Dutch have just off-loaded 4 perfectly good ships to Chili. All 4 have Sea Sparrow and Goalkeeper. 2 have Standard SM1, the other 2 have a helicpoter and 76mm DP gun. All have Harpoon and lightweight ASW torpedos. Chili is also acquiring 3 Type 23 from the RN, with 4.5: gun, VL Sea Wolf, Harpoon, lightweight ASW torpedo tubes, helicopter. IMHO, picking up - for example - 4 used Type 23's from the UK (when these become available) would provide more capable ships than even new built Type 054 from China.

 

[srirangan]

Relations are a matter of choice and can change. Besides, business is business. Why would a country like Pakistan want to stay associated with North Korea anyway? For nuke and missile tech? There are other possible sources for that plus look at where PAK already is in those fields today. I'm sure the US wouldn't mind providing incentives for breaking those ties that would be of interest to PAK.

Woah, would S.Korea sell stuff to a country that has perhaps nuke armed N.Korea? The Pak-N.Korea nukes for missile scenario is perhaps not proved but its widely accepted amongst intelligence and information circles. Now appreciating that the intelligence agencies would know something more than we speculate about, it will be a fair assumption that military ties of S.Korea with Pak and China will not grow in the immediate, near of mid term future. Note: I said military ties, economics is economics.

Now your point of PN acquiring decommissioned ships from Europe would be termed as an option, but really customization and refurnishing of warships is a pretty hefty affair and I doubt Pak has that type of money to spare for her navy. I seriously believe the best option for the PN for the next 5-10 years is leasing new modern hi-tech warships from China or some Arab country. This way you deny IN the tech edge while not breaking your financial backbone.

 

[Aussie Digger]

If Pakistan wishes to acquire a greater naval capability, there are, AFAIK, 5 British Type 23 Frigates available for purchase right now. These ships have been retired from the Royal Navy due to financial constraints, not for capability reasons, and are very modern and capable frigates with plenty of operational life left in them. I've mentioned them before, but they would be a good (and quick) enhancement to the Pakistan Navy (or just about any navy for that matter)..

 

[srirangan]

lol .. You sound like a salesperson

 

[Aussie Digger]

I just like to be practical... Everyone here says the Pakistan Navy needs to be strengthened, this is a relatively easy and quick (probably cheap as well) way to do it... :?:

 

[adsH]

Type 23 Frigates FFG
the type 23 is the largest class of Frigates constructed for the Royal Navy since the 26 ships of Leander Class
Like the Leanders, the Type 23 Duke class provides the backbone of the royal navy anti-submarine operations in the rough waters of the north atlantic, using their towed array sonar to locate targets. the type 23 Frigates were the first stealthy ships to enter service in the royal navy, with superstructure and hull angled off the vertical to reduce radar reflectivity.
The Ships are also equiped with a new Combined Diesel Electric And gas (CODLAG) propulsion system that allows them to cruise slowly and extreamly quietly, useing electric motors, while hunting submarines.
After the Flaklands Conflict Harpoon anti ship missiles and a 114mm gun were added to the design to give the class a powerfull suite of weapons that fits them for wide service as general purpose frigates.
with the End of the Cold war, the frigates have progressively taken on new worldwide roles in more temperate waters. For the future, an extensive series of equipment upgrades is in prospect for the ships. most noticeably their 114mm MK8 guns for the MOD1 version, which has a new multi-faceted turret to reduce radar reflectivity.
the ships are also to receive modifications to their Sea Wolf GWS26 system, which will include new production missiles and updated guidance systems, to maintain system effectiveness. they are also to receive the new and powerfull towed Sonar 2087, which will be fitted into the space vacated by the exsisting towed towed Sonar 023iZ, which equips the first ten ships of the class.
Sonar 2087 will equip the ships to find the much quieter modern submarines that may operate in inshore waters in the future.
Further studies are in hand into ways of extending the life of these large and capable vessels and of the further enhancing their military capabilities

e 23 Duke Class Frigates

Ship Name
Pennant No.
Ship Name
Pennant No.

Norfolk
F230
Northumberland
F238

Argyll
F231
Richmond
F239

Marlborough
F233
Somerset
F82

Lancaster
F229
Grafton
F80

Iron Duke
F234
Sutherland
F81

Monmouth
F235
Kent
F78

Montrose
F236
Portland
F79

Westminster
F237
St Albans
F83





Type 23 Statistics

Displacement:
4,900 tonnes

Length:
133m / 436ft

Beam:
16.1m / 52.9ft

Complement:
185

Armament:
2 x Quad Harpoon Missile launchers
Vertical Launch Sea Wolf anti-missile system
4.5in (114mm) MK 8 gun
2 x 30mm Close range guns
2 x Magazine launched anti submarine torpedo tubes
NATO Seagnat and DLF3 Decoy Launchers

Sensors:
Type 1007 navigation radar
Type 996 air/surface surveillance radar
2 x Type 911 Sea Wolf tracking radars
UAT Electronic Surveillance System
Type 2050 active sonar

Aircraft:


MK 8 Lynx helicopters:

                 Armament:


                 Sea Skua anti-ship missiles


                 Stingray anti-submarine torpedoes


                 Mk 11 depth charges


                 Machine guns

Propulsion:


Turbines:


                 CODLAG (Combined Diesel and Gas) - 2 x


                 Rolls Royce Spey gas boost


Diesels:


                 4 x GEC-Alsthom Paxman Valenta


Electric:


                 2 x GEC motors






Ahh doing my homework i need to prepare for my second Interview with the royal navy in which i'll have to know about every ship in the fleet :roll, wish me Luck guys

and plus this is a fine ship i wish they installed the GoalKeaper on it so it would certainly beat any wepon fired at it. CIWS 30mm gatling gun firing 4200 rounds perminute thats 70 rounds per second targetting and eliminating targets in the range of 350 and 1500 meters away. Oh and yess its fsater and better then the Phalanx but i guess phalanx has its advantages.

Aussie are yeah sure the Roayl navy is tryign to get rid of 5 of these Type 23, is type 22 that your onn about. i'd imagine the only better thing in the books then these warships would be the Type 45 and we should have our first launch of such vessel in 2005, its the nicest and teh cleanest warship ive seen to date

 

[adsH]

Phalanx is not a substitute for medium range missiles and new multirole frigates, which is what Pakistan needs. I hope Pakistan is not paying for this crappy stuff out of it's own pocket. As far as I am concerned this is a complete waste of money.

A phalanx is not a "Crappy Stuff" its an amazing BIGGGGGGG! Gun and its a CIWS (CLOSE IN WEAPONS SYSTEM),Fastest reacting Radar youd ever see in works, and the smoothest shooter. Its a last resort weapon!!

About the Phalanx

Phalanx provides a last-Chance defense by automatically detecting tracking and engageing anti- air warfare threats such as anti-ship missiles and aircraft. Phalanx is fitted in the type 42 destroyers (RN) LPD (Landing Platform Dock), LPH(Landing platform helicopter ), and AOR (Auxiliary Oiler replenishment ) (All RN).this 20 mm (smaller then the Goalkeeper )automatic Gatling gun CIWS has a range of approximately 1 mile and can fire at the rate of 3000 rounds per minute

its NOT A replacement for a Anti ship or SAM system!!!!....

Phalanx 1B is going to be fitted onto our next gen TYPE 45 Destroyer so it has to capable weapon. the system works by first recieving a warning from the main radar system and then as a last resort facing the threat focusing in and using its autonomous radar abilities to track and fire on the target. very effective. i'd personaaly choose the goalkeeper.

 

[tatra]

If Pakistan wishes to acquire a greater naval capability, there are, AFAIK, 5 British Type 23 Frigates available for purchase right now. These ships have been retired from the Royal Navy due to financial constraints, not for capability reasons, and are very modern and capable frigates with plenty of operational life left in them. I've mentioned them before, but they would be a good (and quick) enhancement to the Pakistan Navy (or just about any navy for that matter)..

Does this number include or exclude the 3 Type 23 that are/were to be acquired by Chili? They might also be a good buy for Belgium, seeking replacement for the old Wielingen class light frigates.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Yeah they were definitely Type 23's, which is what surprised quite a few people. One advantage the Phalanx has over the Goalkeeper is that it only requires deck space to operate. I believe the Goalkeeper is intrusive into the ships hull.

In addition the Phalanx version the PN is getting is the 1B which is the dual targetting version. The weapon system can be radar guided or optically/thermal guided and has equal utility against surface craft, missiles and aircraft to the limits of it's range. The 1B also boasts a longer range than earlier versions of the Phalanx, due to longer barrels.

 

[Aussie Digger]

The Frigates I've read about that are to be paid of shortly are HMS Norfolk, Marlborough and Grafton. I believe that 2 older Type 23's have also recently been retired, 3 Type 42 destroyers are being disposed of as well including HMS Cardiff, Newcastle and Glasgow.

 

[adsH]

my Naval Career liaison was telling about the strains the new strategy is putting the service. its Family time being taken away from the Operators they would end up spending more time at sea then home. works out for the Buck but not the soldier. its a pitty our target set by the government is less then the required 30 highly capable warships, Excluding our armada of support vessels

 

[tatra]

The Frigates I've read about that are to be paid of shortly are HMS Norfolk, Marlborough and Grafton. I believe that 2 older Type 23's have also recently been retired, 3 Type 42 destroyers are being disposed of as well including HMS Cardiff, Newcastle and Glasgow.

I read about 3 Type 23 and 3 Type 42 being retired. Perhaps the other two ships are Type 22. For the pre-owned market, it would be interesting if they were indeed also Type 23's.

 

[Aussie Digger]

I'm not surprised ADHS, though the "required" number is a matter of debate. You don't "require" any ships at all if you don't see a role for them... Unfortunately "strategic reviews" are all too often used to justify a lack of defence spending, rather than really deciding what is necessary to defeat any perceived threats.

For instance the UK MoD has decided that "high tech" is the way to go, due to it's commitments in the "war on terror". But look at the assets it actually has FIGHTING the "war on terror". A reduced squadron (6) of GR-7 Harriers in Afganistan.

What's so high tech about that? The Harriers aren't even JDAM capable. They have deployed with Maverick air to ground missiles, and Laser (and un-guided) bombs as their only offensive weapons... Where does the "high tech" nature of warfare fit into these deployments, particularly?

 

[adsH]

i think the UK is going through this phase where they have to think twice before they make there choice since what they choose now will determine our capability in the future, Should we give up our impressive heavy INdustrial capabilities or should we just give into the lure ofimported technology. imported (in some cases)technology is better cheaper and more readily available. I reckon the british Government has chosen its path, they are going, to focus on R&D part of the development, Its a shame our surface and heavy ship building facilities are shutting down (Except our Sub Facilities). we'r practically out sourcing our construction part to Italy and france, the exact thing Labour came into power rallying to stop!!. we'r now focussing on Electronics and high tech equipments its something we see a markect inn and is something we think we will have an edge over a better part of the world, So wish us luck guys. its a 20 year plann half our young populations would have to hold some sort of university degree, and the other half would have to finish off a technical or foccussed vocational course. Labour party does think when they draw up plans.

the QEEN MARY 2 cruise liner is an example of our industries impotence. we buit the first one but couldn't even own the second one, the QM2 was paid for by americans and built by Italian. Loads of indian workers had a bash at it too. but i think we desinged it and the crew is British.

 

[Ethan]

Well the Type-23 Frigates were designed originally for anti-sub warfare, however with the addition of the Seawolf VLS (range is 6 KM) and the harpoon anti-ship missiles the Type-23 frigate has been turned into a multirole vessel. However the setback is that the Seawolf SAM has a range of only 6 KMs. Anyways the frigates being retired are the Batch 1 vessels, HMS Norfolk, Grafton and Marlborough, will be retired in early 2006. The three frigates have been offered to the Chilean Navy. There is no mention of them being offered to Pakistan and no indication that Pakistan has shown any interest in acquiring these vessels. If Pakistan goes for these vessel, this will enhance it's immediate capability but I think it will still have to be retrofitted with a medium range SAM system as opposed to the short range Seawolf. I think the likely western candidate might be the ASter 15 (range - 30 KM). These are the same missile being retrofiited onto the F-2000 firgates of Saudi Arabia.

 

[tatra]

Not necessarily. PAK navy deploymnent of these vessels would be singly or in pairs. There is not a fleet to protect and they would be operating within range of land based air craft. Good point defense (to survive and fight) would be more important than large(r) area coverage.

Of the Type 21s, 3 have 4 Harpoon and Phalanx, the other 3 have a five round CHinese SAM launcher (manual reload) and Phalanx. By comparison, each Type 23 has 8 Harpoon and 32 VL Sea Wolf and can deploy a heavier ASW helicopter. The Type 23 would be a substantial improvement over the Type 21s currently deployed, especially if 1-2 Phalanx CIWS would be added to each ship (e.g. 1 on each beam complementing current weapons fit, or 1 on the hangar and 1 on the bridge if Sea Wolf were replaced by VL MICA allowing front and rear radar directors to be removed). I'ld take 3 Type 23 over 6 Type 21 any day.

 

[adsH]

Any one think the Goal keeper would be a better option then our trusted beloved phalanx 1b, the Phalanx has got a longer range but its all about hitting an incoming target, i think the more you fire the more chances of hitting the target, i'm assuming the fire control and radar and optical sensors are equally competent on both platforms.