Pakistan Navy Gun Boats - News / Discussion
- Thread starter ghazi52
- Start date
Tank131
Registered Member
The quad packing potential is all well and good but China doesnt have a quad packable missile. Italy would never allow CAMM-ER to be fired from a Chinese launcher. Turkey is likely the only way to go. Other option with the current Bonhomie between US and Pakistan, is go for a bunch of MK41. Like buy 8 of them now (4 for Baburs and 4 for other ships be it JCF or possibly upgrade for F-22P - following the thai Naresuan class upgrade pattern) to fit CAMM-ER in quad packThis proposed Type 05X destroyer at 9000 tons and 80 VLS, that China maybe building for its Type 004 Carrier escort task force, seems to be a good option, IMHO, for Pakistan’s need for 6 destroyers. Commonalty with the PLAN can allow for interoperability and for Pakistani facilities to host visiting PLAN vessels, possibly at an expand facility at Ormara, or a new larger facility near Karachi.
It’s the ship on the right, which I suspect will have two CGT-40 gas turbines at 42 MW each. Which would be world class, in terms of “thrust to weight”.
View attachment 154960
Source: from the other thread about Chinese carrier development
With 80 UVLS, it can have enough space to quad pack enough modern missiles to counter the barrages of dozens of Brahmos the Indians plan to fire in a conflict.
Similar to how the Mk.41 can carry 4 CAMM-ER missiles per tube:
View attachment 154974
View attachment 154977
Source for these two pictures:
DSEI2025: Η γκάμα της MBDA σε αντιαεροπορικούς πλοίων, CAMM σε πολλαπλή φόρτωση, Aster 30 ίσως και σε εκτοξευτή Mk41, MICA VL! - Πτήση
Την ποικιλία των ναυτικών αντιαεροπορικών της όπλων, έδειξε η MBDA στη διεθνή αμυντική έκθεση DSEI 2025, που πραγματοποιείται από τις 9 έως τις 12 Σεπτεμβρίου στο Λονδίνο. Ανάμεσα τους και η εμφάνιση σε πρόπλασμα, ενός αντιαεροπορικού βλήματος Aster 30 B1 NT, τοποθετημένου σε κελί εκτοξευτή, που...flight.com.gr
FuturePAF
THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Not referring to the Type 055B, but the smaller 9000 ton Type 05X destroyer with 80 VLS. In the same weight class as the Arleigh Burke, and possibly as modern systems on board as the Flight III.
FuturePAF
THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Pakistan would probably be better off going with a Turkish VLS for Turkish missiles or a European VLS for the CAMM-ER. Better for long term logistics and and support.
But with the growing threat of an Indian blockade and salvos of enemy missiles targeting our fleet and ports, a modern destroyer maybe needed to deal with this growing threat. If we map out India’s goal over the next 15-20 years; hegemony of the Arabian Sea and Northern Indian Ocean in general, Pakistan will need the means to not be blockaded.
There is a possibility that only a few ships maybe in place at the point of contact, and as we saw with the J-10, having a modern platform will not only be decisive but most of the actual kinetic conflict.
Aamir Hussain
THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
It is futile and not very cost effective to match missile to missile, quantity and quality (At this point, Brahmos is their Ace up the sleeve) with INS. They have had, have and will always have numbers on their side. The answer lies in the beefing up of Intel gathering and situational awareness in the North Indian Ocean and Arabian Sea. And longer range submarines equipped with anti ship missiles.
Beef up the Martime Strike squadrons with AWACS surveillance cover for long range engagement. given that INS has two aircraft carriers.
The real fear for INS remains the elusive submarine. They have lot to loose if one gets through. The psychological impact of loosing or damage to an aircraft carrier is huge. The deterrence to coming near enough to our shores for a hypersonic strike, remains PN sub presence.
Here, near to real time, Satellite imagery, and intelligence will play a pivotal role for PN and its efforts to defend our SLOC and our ports. I believe the recent satellite launch is part of that plan.
Beef up the Martime Strike squadrons with AWACS surveillance cover for long range engagement. given that INS has two aircraft carriers.
The real fear for INS remains the elusive submarine. They have lot to loose if one gets through. The psychological impact of loosing or damage to an aircraft carrier is huge. The deterrence to coming near enough to our shores for a hypersonic strike, remains PN sub presence.
Here, near to real time, Satellite imagery, and intelligence will play a pivotal role for PN and its efforts to defend our SLOC and our ports. I believe the recent satellite launch is part of that plan.
Last edited:
Oscar
Moderator
Not just subs but also other quills of the porcupine. It is a layered and more importantly PN has spent a lot of efforts to be able to “hear” well beyond EEZ. It helps that PN has a much smaller relative area to guard against threats and potential probing points versus India’s massive coasts and ocean gaps which means it needs a lot more to monitor every potential approach a lone PN sub could use to outflank all formations and dispatch their carrier or launch a CM attack against a refinery or two
Tank131
Registered Member
The type of VLS is less important than what its certified for. Sylver and Mk41 are currently the only VLS that CAMM is certified on outside of its own GSW. 26. The MDAS has the capacity to do so but Turkey and Italy need to agree to perform the integration. China and Italy would never agree to it (hence no UVLS as the mainstay). Sylver is a French product and France will never sell this to Pakistan due to indian pressure. Not to mention, its tremendously expensive. But in order to defend against Brahmos (both the fleet and coastal areas) yes PN needs to invest in a surface fleet with higher missile capacity. Best option at itd disposal is CAMM-ER/MDAS combo.
Matching missile to missile is not actually sufficient because Pakistan will need to have 2-3 SAMs missiles per Brahmos it wants to shoot down. If Pakistan doesnt have more SAMs than India has Brahmos you are in real trouble. And that has been a glaring openning in Pakistan's armor for many years. What PN doesnt need to do is match IN ship for ship. I think many have taken this notion a bit too far however to be the same as saying PN doesnt really need to advance it's surface fleet and focus exclusively on sub fleet. Without air defense, the subs will be quickly hunted down by Poseiden and surface ships. And air wings are not enough to provide that for a number of reasons including the fact that aircrat cant defend against brahmos launched from ground and sea. And there will not be enough aircraft for Pakistan to defend Pakistani airspace, ASW/AEWC/Special missions craft, and attack IN with reliability while also launching strikes against India proper. The strategy must be multi faceted air defense from Aircraft, ground and sea based SAMS. Lets not forget that while damage was limited India/Brahmos was able to hit Pakistani airbases during operation Sindoor. The coastal advantage over PN/PAF air defense is far more prominent so PAF bases will likely not be able to launch aircraft unimpeded, so increasing the layered air defense is necessary.
i wouldnt be too concerned about this.
if we know it physically fits, then certification is just a paperwork/throw money at it exercise. CAMM integration is relatively easier too since the missiles are cold launched via their own gas generator.
TBH, i actually cannot come up with any excuse for the PN not developing their own VLS system, particularly because they can continue to be re used, typically long after the hull is dead. Especially, when it comes to CAMM, the task at hand is a far, far easier one than say something like ESSM.
FuturePAF
THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Considering Pakistan’s relationship with Italy, the CAMM-ER is a great missile program to collaborate on with them. 166 kg missile with a 45+km range. Building on an acquisition of this missile and the VLS system, Pakistan could look to acquire and build under license the CAMM-MR; greater than 100 km range, and probably to relatively light weight, allowing great maneuverability and possibly a two stage rocket for higher hit probability.
If we look at the flight trajectory of the Brahmos, we can see a 100+ km missile can have a higher probability of intercepting the missile when it is still high (before its terminal attack run) if the missile is flying its full 300 km course. Even for an all low flying course for the Brahmos, with a 100+km range interceptor, a ship could pick off the launching platforms.
If the PN goes down this path, we may see the PN choose to build a fleet around many more surface ships in the Jinnah class size, and perhaps go for a more modest destroyer (6000 ton) to provide powerful at sea radar support; distributed lethality and distributed defense.
It maybe the only way the PN can afford to equip enough ships with enough high quality interceptors, so at the point of contact there is no compromise on defense, allowing our platforms to buy time to go on the offensive properly.
Last edited:
Tank131
Registered Member
Unfortunately CAMM-MR is a UK/Poland program, not involving Italy. That said, the UK has never really been shy of selling to Pakistan. I think to yours and @arslank01 points i dont think Pakistan going it alone to build a VLS system is really the right move. The time and money going into development and testing would be better spent joining a joint production venture for MDAS with Turkey in a similar fashion to the Babur project. Then they could refit the F-22P, Baburs, Yarmooks and eventual put the VLS into JCF themselves. Long range SAMs could be acquired via Turkey and Siper
yesnt.
id keep an eye on this, a very keen and close eye.
PAF and China have ample SD-10 stocks. Pak also has an SD-10 production line.
What is happening here is they're re using SD-10, just forward of the motor, mating it with a new motor/body to give you an entire family of SAM's.
This could genuinely be quite a good proposal for the PN. The only thing is that these may just be recycling the older SD10 electronics, but, there is an upgrade if you want to call it that, rather, a new variant of the SD-10 which for all intents and purposes is a deep modernisation, with AMRAAM D ranges and an AESA seeker from the PL-15. Could possibly be a very good option for a modern family of naval air defence SAM's.
This is the sky dragon family of missiles.
The lowest range shorads here has a range of 20km, with the skydragon 100 extending to 100km. Its just larger than the CAMM-ER and thus could probs be 4packed in a larger cell like the chinese use on the D's.
the fundamental divergence with my solution and MDAS is simply that MDAS is designed for use on hot launch and maybe cold launch missiles.
effectively, its more complex than what we need at the moment.
It will also likely cost an insane amount, id say somewhere between MK41 and Sylver.
For CAMM, we literally just need a tube, ballistically protected and suitable for a missile. You dont need any of the fancy cooling, venting, and all of that crazy metallurgy required to make it re usable.
i dont joke, but i wonder if pak could develop a CAMM specific cell using the camm surface launcher as guidelines, like, its a far, far simpler solution than something extremely cost prohibitive like MiLDAS.
People see VLS and dont expect it to cost as much as it does, but obviously, numbers varying contract to contract, an MK41 cell costs 700,000 usd per cell, remembering, this was only brought down to this number after 14,000 cells were delivered and put into service. Thats why Sylver is so expensive, because there is just so little economies of scale there.
Idk how much lower labour/overheads can offset the EoS, but im guessing in scenarios like this, not alot.
But yes, if the PN wanted a more forward thinking solution, MiLDAS could be the way, but id only propose it if the PN was able to fit it onto modules like StanFlex otherwise, you're going to balloon ship costs by probably atleast $30-50 million dollars a piece(fitted,tested,certified etc), which in our environment is a significant additional cost.
rafale
Registered Member
what's that SD-100? Is it PL15?
