Ideal PLAN missile boat

"China Cat" missile boat: PLAN's missed opportunity

What's the feeling on PLAN's choice not to purchase the "China Cat" FAC. I know it's nowhere near as advanced as the 022 class but for its size it is by far the most potent FAC design in the world (IMO). For litorial combat it seems ideal.




China Cat exported to Iran (missiles not fitted in this pic):

Until the '022 class the PLAN's missile boats were somewhat average at best, characterised by poor air-defence and basic sensors. Even with the type '022s entering service, there are still a massive number of legacy systems in the PLAN inventory in need of replacement.

What do YOU think the ideal FAC would be? Bigger? Faster? Stealthier? Cheaper? Cooler? Ocean-going? Multi-role? Shore-bombardment?

And please, I beg you, open up MS Paint and have a go at drawing your ideas, it makes for a cooler thread.

Re: "China Cat" missile boat: PLAN's missed opportunity

This particular FAC seems very short on endurance and sustainability in littoral areas. I would say that the 022 has more staying power and a more efficient hull design. This greater edge on 022 is the reason I think China will focus on that design. Those are the only reasons I can see at the moment. There may be other factors into the decision. Because if you want a sustained presence in the waters that these boats are operating, these smaller boats don't look like they'll do the job IMO.

Rather predictably I'm the first to contribute a pretty picture. This is a bit off the wall and not really what I originally had in mind, but I think a reasonable case can be made in its favour:

China Cat II


The main enhancement is stealth, allowing these mini-FACs to pounce on their prey unexpected, or at least with minimal warning.

Four C-702 or TL-10A lightweight anti-ship missiles are carried in stealthy angled silos behind the cabin which is itself arranged more like a fighterplane than a conventional boat. Four crew; Commander, driver, weapons system operator and engineer (two large speedboat outboard motors...) are all housed in the main cabin with minimal living space.

I've also added a VLS in the forward position which could be SA-15 SAM although I think that's too ambitious for a hull this size.

My illustration lacks some of the sensors and trimmings that would be required; just imagine them in place.

This design trades endurance and seaworthiness for speed, cheapness and compactness. Imagine how many of these add up to the price of just one normal FAC.

well i would go on for opposite direction. Modern FACs most precious thread comes from the form of Helicopter launched SSMs that western superpowers (likely cnadinates for Chinese enemyes) used to crible Iraqian potentially strong FAC fleet.
Also the experiences whit the standard size Facs (I Use the Lürsen 45m as one) has proven that such small boats whit high masts to support their advanced sensors have come with the proplems. To avoid topweigth, the mast have had to be as ligth as possiple and in highspeed small boats that has coused common vibration that in worst cases has prevented small boats to operate its weapons and sensors. Also the small size has prevented to take aboard active and passive ECM and airdefence systems.

So the world trend is to go on for bigger, corvette size ships and that would be my solution also. A basic unit would be round 58-67meters long, 600 tons in maxium and would have armament of one 76mm gun, 6-8 YJ-83, if possiple a CADS-1 or similar chinese domestic CIWS system and good sensor suite. A stealthyer and slightly bigger derivate of the Houjian class FAC?? To support that force, I would build also few 'flotilla leaders' or bigger ships whit less SSMs but helicopter onboard to give maxium advantage of the over the horizon targetting. This would be similar in size to Eilat class, but with lot more less topweigth layout. Such ship could be also replaced with Russian 20388 class SRK type small coastal defence frigate.

there, my contribution.
Do not be fooled by its appearance. it is not a sub. it can not go underwater. it is not built to withstand any kind of depth pressure. What it is built for is to have majority of its body submerged, with just the main tower and the tip of the spine protruding from the water. main tower would have the radar (blue), various comm equipment, chimney (at half the height of the tower), bridge, etc. small sam vls unit in the class of sidewinder would be located in the smaller ffront section of the spine. (not marked by color, sorry)

antiship missiles are marked by pink color. doesn't have to be just 6, that's for illustration only. Anyhow, whole idea is to sacrifice speed for stealth. at the same time, with length of 40 meters and a very, very small crew, there'd be enough space for long endurance missions. Also, i believe ship's layout would be very stable at high seas (though, granted, still very vomit inducing for the crew) I don't believe max speeds could go over 20 (cruise speed even lower) so technically it wouldn't be be Fast attack craft... maybe more like SAC

Re: "China Cat" missile boat: PLAN's missed opportunity

Sea Dog said:

This particular FAC seems very short on endurance and sustainability in littoral areas. I would say that the 022 has more staying power and a more efficient hull design. This greater edge on 022 is the reason I think China will focus on that design. Those are the only reasons I can see at the moment. There may be other factors into the decision. Because if you want a sustained presence in the waters that these boats are operating, these smaller boats don't look like they'll do the job IMO.

Click to expand...

Yup..I think this boat is more suitable in Yangtze river than Taiwan strait.

Well at first, I also belive realy small sized boats should be used as patroll vessesl perhaps, but not missile boats.
You'd have to refill their magazines and fuel quiete often, wich really makes for a short stay on duty.
I also think you shouldn't scrifice speed for stealth. RCS can be reduced by the right shaping quite a lot. Imo, relativly small vessels, corvette sized, live from theier ability to quickly change positions and course. The slow and quiet "close in" thing is something for subs.
For self defence CIWS, probably medium layer air defence. An ASW capability, and a missile system for ship and land attack.

The Norweign Skjold is only 274 tons, but carries 8 x SSM's, 76mm gun, 12.7mm gun, Mistral SAMs, and 32 MASS decoy rockets:


If I were to design a Missile Boat, I'd use a flexible design where you could swap out mission packages. For example, in the forward gun position, I'd want these options: (choose one)
* 57mm, 76mm, or light 100mm gun
* ADGMS (CIWs gun + SAM)
* 8-cel SAM VLS (like Israeli Barak)
* ASW MLRS & Sonobuoy launcher

To the side of the boat, we'd have 2x decoy MLRS that can use these rockets:
* Chaff
* Flare
* Acousitc decoy

In the large missile compartment, I'd want the option (choose one) for:
* 16 x Light SSM
* 8 x SSM
* 4-8 x ASROC

In the aft section of the ship, we'd have optional small towed array sonar. One of the SSM quad launchers could be replaced with towed sonar & cables/equipment. The boat can also carry small dipping sonar, MANPAD, small arms, etc. We'd prolly also add 2 x 12.7mm machinegun mounts to the side.


Usually the boat would be used for anti-surface warfare. But it can be configured for supplemental ASW duties with shore-based ASW Helicopters, or operations with larger ASW ships via data link.

Re: "China Cat" missile boat: PLAN's missed opportunity

That boat looks cheap enough that if the PLAN REALLY wanted some, I think they can afford it easily.

It's way too small for... anything other than very near shore deployements.