Ideal PLAN missile boat
- Thread starter planeman
- Start date
Hi Golle,
I found the web site for KBP, exporter of AK-630 guns:
Here's the product specs:
The weight given for AK-630M is 1,000 kg for the AO-18 gun mount without ammunition, and 1,918 kg for the belt ammunition.
The Israeli Barak SAM weights about 100 kg each. Assuming if we double that with TLC's, then an 8-cel would weight about 1,600 kg. I think the weight would work?
I'm no naval engineer but I do know that you can't just place a VLS sytem without examining how that installation would effect sea-worthiness. You can place all the weapons on board you want. But if the vessel is not sea worthy it is useless.
The USN was planning to install VLS cells on Iowa class BB's. After some engineering expermits it was found that the removal of any turret and installatin of any type VLS would signifincently reduce sea_worthiness.
The USN was planning to install VLS cells on Iowa class BB's. After some engineering expermits it was found that the removal of any turret and installatin of any type VLS would signifincently reduce sea_worthiness.
You seem to have an anti-022 agenda. Correct me if I'm wrong but wave-piercing catamarans are designed to be front heavy, with most of the bouancy further aft.
The Type-022 is 45~50m long and about 10m wide, giving it a similar or greater internal volume than the Finnish Hamina class (51m x 8.5m) which has an 8 cell VLS for SAMs plus a 57mm gun - weight that the Type-022 lacks.
At any rate, a VLS need not be added in place of the CIWS.
Looking towards slightly larger missile boats, the soon to enter service Baynunah class of UAE will win the "most features in smallest hull" contest:
71m x 11m
76mm main gun
Helipad and hanger
Enhanced Sea Sparrow (ESSM) SAM in 8-cell VLS
Exocet MM40 Block III SSM
CIWS
Ok, tell me what I've got right/wrong; this is my concept for an ocean going missile boat:
It has a wave piercing bow but otherwise conventional hull and diesel engines giving it a max speed of about 40kts but ability to maintain 30kts+ even in heavy seas(?).
It is 70m long and 8m wide - that width is about the narrowest you can feasibly fit stealthy YJ-62 SSM launchers in a side-facing configuration. The SSM launchers are fitted amidships with each box carrying up to 4 x YJ-62 long range heavy anti-ship cruise missiles. Each YJ-62 can be replaced by 4 x YJ-7 or TL-10 light short range littorial SSMs.
With the ability to carry light SSMs there is no real need for a "main" gun so a lot of space/weight is saved. A 30mm CIWS, either AK-630 or variant of the Type-730 is carried behind the bridge - allowing the bridge structure to be lower and further forward than on most comparable boats, an arrangement that better suits the wave-piercing bow.
The rear of the vessel has a small helipad, though no hanger. The aft quarter also houses the VLS for 16 short/medium range SAMs, either a navalised SD-10 deriative or imported SA-N-9 Gauntlet (naval version of SA-15 which is already in PLA service).
The air-defence is further enhanced by two 4-round QW-4 laser guided SAM launchers amidships just in front of the SSM boxes. The QW-4, called FL-2000 in the naval form, has the advantage of not requiring very much below-deck space, allowing it to be added to the hull relatively easily. And it could be integrated into the existing sensor fit.
More sensors, life rafts, chaff/flare launchers etc would also be carried.
I also envisage an ASW version to replace the Hainan class sub chasers, but I'm not sure what sort of sonar suits this bow form. In other respects I'd expect the ASW version to delete the SSM launchers and use the space to relocate the SAM VLS, now only 8 cell, and making space for a small helicopter/UAV hanger where the SAM VLS currently is. This also allows for a marginally larger landing pad. The QW-4 SAM launchers would be reloated to above the hanger so that quad RPK-9 Medvedka (SS-N-29) ASW rockets can be mounted behind the bridge.
It has a wave piercing bow but otherwise conventional hull and diesel engines giving it a max speed of about 40kts but ability to maintain 30kts+ even in heavy seas(?).
It is 70m long and 8m wide - that width is about the narrowest you can feasibly fit stealthy YJ-62 SSM launchers in a side-facing configuration. The SSM launchers are fitted amidships with each box carrying up to 4 x YJ-62 long range heavy anti-ship cruise missiles. Each YJ-62 can be replaced by 4 x YJ-7 or TL-10 light short range littorial SSMs.
With the ability to carry light SSMs there is no real need for a "main" gun so a lot of space/weight is saved. A 30mm CIWS, either AK-630 or variant of the Type-730 is carried behind the bridge - allowing the bridge structure to be lower and further forward than on most comparable boats, an arrangement that better suits the wave-piercing bow.
The rear of the vessel has a small helipad, though no hanger. The aft quarter also houses the VLS for 16 short/medium range SAMs, either a navalised SD-10 deriative or imported SA-N-9 Gauntlet (naval version of SA-15 which is already in PLA service).
The air-defence is further enhanced by two 4-round QW-4 laser guided SAM launchers amidships just in front of the SSM boxes. The QW-4, called FL-2000 in the naval form, has the advantage of not requiring very much below-deck space, allowing it to be added to the hull relatively easily. And it could be integrated into the existing sensor fit.
More sensors, life rafts, chaff/flare launchers etc would also be carried.
I also envisage an ASW version to replace the Hainan class sub chasers, but I'm not sure what sort of sonar suits this bow form. In other respects I'd expect the ASW version to delete the SSM launchers and use the space to relocate the SAM VLS, now only 8 cell, and making space for a small helicopter/UAV hanger where the SAM VLS currently is. This also allows for a marginally larger landing pad. The QW-4 SAM launchers would be reloated to above the hanger so that quad RPK-9 Medvedka (SS-N-29) ASW rockets can be mounted behind the bridge.
Last edited:
kunmingren
Junior Member
Nice drawing, that would be a awsome ship!
but it looks too big to be a missile boat, it looks more like a corvett. And i agree with Golly, 022 is a very nice looking ship, but its usefullness is limited with China. I think the era of missle boat are over for China, it should build corvett for asw in costal area, frigates and destroyers to protect CV, and may be squeeze in a cruiser or two just for the hell of it
jk.
But seriously tho, like people said before, 022 is too small and defenseless against USN or the JDF, and it is too powerful to be used against pirates (if there are any still left in this day and age). May be it can be deployed effectively against vietnam, but a larger sized corvett would be even better. FAC 022 would be better served for countries like egypt or Iran or thailand.
but it looks too big to be a missile boat, it looks more like a corvett. And i agree with Golly, 022 is a very nice looking ship, but its usefullness is limited with China. I think the era of missle boat are over for China, it should build corvett for asw in costal area, frigates and destroyers to protect CV, and may be squeeze in a cruiser or two just for the hell of it
jk. But seriously tho, like people said before, 022 is too small and defenseless against USN or the JDF, and it is too powerful to be used against pirates (if there are any still left in this day and age). May be it can be deployed effectively against vietnam, but a larger sized corvett would be even better. FAC 022 would be better served for countries like egypt or Iran or thailand.
joshuatree
Captain
I brought this up in a few posts earlier. Do you think part of the reason for the FAC022 is to be another export product for China's defense industries?
Given that China's on a huge charm offensive with Africa, I can see these boats making their way to those nations too.
As for pirates, yeah, there's still plenty in this day and age around the east coast of Africa and the straits of Malacca. Think the USN has a task force patrolling off the coast of Africa to combat piracy.
The 022 can be effectively deployed against Vietnam, Philippines, and maybe Malaysia in case of any Spratly Islands dispute that may flare up.
weigth could, whitout looking any other aspects of it...but would topweigth? The dispute the weigth on the ship comes actually more important issue than the weigth as pure number...also, VSL system takes totally different volume from the boat and boat of that small, you dont have that much options to replace the systems basing taken out from the VSL way.....also, that would mean no gun, and no gun means, no practical purpose outside missile attack dashes and that means, pretty damn useless coastal combatant.
I wouldn't say anti-type22 agenda, I just point out its clearly oldfasioned concept and how that concept has been long ago countered by other navy and that doctrines unsuitability for superpowers coastal defence...and how tied the type22 is to that desing. The proplem is that most of you just want to see it in its best ligth, no matter what the facts are, and this by the sole factor that its new + and its chinese...and offcourse that has to equal = superior by every means.
Well things aren't always that simple
And to the comparision to the UAE and ours boat, yeas they seem to be superficially same size, but all of the compared boats are normal hulled.
Catamaran means also, that the weigth is to be much higher from the water line than in conventional boats, thus the volumius beam to make the boat stable. That migth superficially look like there is aviable volume for installing heavy equipment but things arent always that simple
well those boats would only have practical purpose if the opposite naval forces have already dismantled PLANs blue water precense and are seriously hazzaring chinese coastal traffic and conducting seaborne landings...then, fast and hard hitting daggers like type22 come unpleasent suprise to the enemy, but the unpleasent suprise is more likely to the boats crews if the PLAN decides to use them in open sea offensive operations against Philiphines, Malysia or Vietnam. Those boats simply doesent have the durability and endurance to withstand long deployments, expecially ones outside the range of PLANAFs imidiate aircover....
kunmingren
Junior Member
I dont see why not, its not like these boat contains some incrediblely advance technology that are very sensitive, they would make great posters for which ever navy wants to buy them. The operation with PLAN can show potential buyers that the new design can work, plus China has a very long history of exporting patrol boats to the developing world.
There might be concerns about the transfer of missiles that comes with the purchases of these boats, does anyone know if there is any international convention or treaty that limits the transfer of cruise missile?
joshuatree
Captain
I think you've overlooked one issue with this statement. You're assuming the 022 as a last line of defense where opposing naval forces have dismantled PLAN's blue navy. But a skirmish in the Spratly's could be one of limited engagement. If it was China vs Vietnam, there's no endurance issue with the 022. The countries are right next to each other and the 022s can dart across in raids. In the last naval skirmish between the two in the 80s, I think only small "frigates", if you could even call them that by modern standards, were engaged in the limited battle. As for Philippines or Malaysia, the 022s wouldn't be used to reach their shores but the 022s can be based on the Spratly Islands that China current occupies. They have built little garrisons out there, why not station some 022s there to beef it up? Some of these garrisons have airfields so there is limited air cover.
That was what I was thinking. Given China's history of exporting patrol boats to the developing world, this is just the latest product offering. And since China has one foot in the blue water doctrine and one still in the coastal defense doctrine, it doesn't hurt to replace their aging units too. Besides, like you said, if you have some in your own navy, it makes for an easier sales pitch.
I don't know much about this one too but I doubt China would sell her latest cruise missiles with these boats to a foreign buyer. Maybe some older missiles? Or maybe even just the boat since other countries may be able to obtain other foreign cruise missiles for their navies.