Type 022 Missile Boat
- Thread starter DPRKPTboat
- Start date
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
Re: Missiles for 2208 catamaran FAC
But there's a datalink for coordination with probably recon aircraft. So since the Type 22 is a littoral vessel, there's going to be multiple access to info from 2nd party sensors.
But there's a datalink for coordination with probably recon aircraft. So since the Type 22 is a littoral vessel, there's going to be multiple access to info from 2nd party sensors.
Type 022 FAC Thread
I noticed this thread was missing (or too lazy to search)
But anyways how about we star counting the FAC's and piling up all pics we have of them to see if we can reach a good estimate
I'll do it later I gotta go buy some food right now....
I noticed this thread was missing (or too lazy to search)
But anyways how about we star counting the FAC's and piling up all pics we have of them to see if we can reach a good estimate
I'll do it later I gotta go buy some food right now....
Re: Type 022 FAC Thread
swimmer, this sounds like a noble cause, but a little unlikely. If they had some kind of serial number on these things, it would make counting so much easier.
I noticed this thread was missing (or too lazy to search)
But anyways how about we star counting the FAC's and piling up all pics we have of them to see if we can reach a good estimate
I'll do it later I gotta go buy some food right now....
swimmer, this sounds like a noble cause, but a little unlikely. If they had some kind of serial number on these things, it would make counting so much easier.
Re: Missiles for 2208 catamaran FAC
Over the past few months I've been paying great attention to pics of the Type-022 FAC, in particular to the missile launch bins. I have determined that the missiles they house are significantly smaller than the bins may at first appear.
I feel very confident that the missiles are not YJ-602 or Moskit as many may have hoped. There are at most YJ-83 with a lesser possibility that they are a smaller missile such as TL-4 or C-702.
What do you think?
Over the past few months I've been paying great attention to pics of the Type-022 FAC, in particular to the missile launch bins. I have determined that the missiles they house are significantly smaller than the bins may at first appear.
I feel very confident that the missiles are not YJ-602 or Moskit as many may have hoped. There are at most YJ-83 with a lesser possibility that they are a smaller missile such as TL-4 or C-702.
What do you think?
Re: Missiles for 2208 catamaran FAC
I’ve also concluded that the Type-022 is between 45 and 55m long, probably about 52m. That makes it substantially shorter than the Houjian class FACs:
Length
Type-022: ~52m
Houjian class: 64m
Houxin class: 62m
Huangfeng (/Osa): 38m
How I estimated the length:
The various pictures of the Type-022 being lifted onto the ’82 also illustrate the extremely shallow draught of the boat, which will give it a littoral advantage even over conventional monohull FACs.
I’ve also concluded that the Type-022 is between 45 and 55m long, probably about 52m. That makes it substantially shorter than the Houjian class FACs:
Length
Type-022: ~52m
Houjian class: 64m
Houxin class: 62m
Huangfeng (/Osa): 38m
How I estimated the length:
The various pictures of the Type-022 being lifted onto the ’82 also illustrate the extremely shallow draught of the boat, which will give it a littoral advantage even over conventional monohull FACs.
Re: Missiles for 2208 catamaran FAC
YJ-83 is a likely choice but active radar guided missiles tends to have problems along the coast. Stuff like reflections from the shallow sea bed, rocks along the coast, all contribute to coastal clutter.
C-701 is also a possibility. The missile is TV guided, so you can have a man in the loop system. The targets can be visually viewed through datalink inside the ship, and commands to target and lock can be sent the same way. The C-701 is too small however for the size of the housing.
I believe its a new missile variant of the YJ-8X family. Instead of radar guided, this missile is TV or EO guided like the C-701. Possible? Quite so, since an air launched variant (TV/EO guided with man in the loop) has been discussed as a potential standoff missile for the JH-7A and H-6M bombers.
YJ-83 is a likely choice but active radar guided missiles tends to have problems along the coast. Stuff like reflections from the shallow sea bed, rocks along the coast, all contribute to coastal clutter.
C-701 is also a possibility. The missile is TV guided, so you can have a man in the loop system. The targets can be visually viewed through datalink inside the ship, and commands to target and lock can be sent the same way. The C-701 is too small however for the size of the housing.
I believe its a new missile variant of the YJ-8X family. Instead of radar guided, this missile is TV or EO guided like the C-701. Possible? Quite so, since an air launched variant (TV/EO guided with man in the loop) has been discussed as a potential standoff missile for the JH-7A and H-6M bombers.
antiterror13
Brigadier
Price of 2208 and C-803 missile
I am 99% sure that C-803 is the missile for 2208 catamaran.
many people said C-803 is a cheap missile .. how cheap ( $100K ? ) and how good the miisile compare to Exocet and Harpoon ($1 M ? ).
If my prediction is right, it is very cheap, China will be able to produce practically unlimited number and expendable .. now the question is how good the missile is ?
I am 99% sure that C-803 is the missile for 2208 catamaran.
many people said C-803 is a cheap missile .. how cheap ( $100K ? ) and how good the miisile compare to Exocet and Harpoon ($1 M ? ).
If my prediction is right, it is very cheap, China will be able to produce practically unlimited number and expendable .. now the question is how good the missile is ?
Last edited:
Re: Missiles for 2208 catamaran FAC
Assuming YJ83...
Yes I agree too, and many will argue against the point of having YJ83 which has 200km+ range for such a small craft.
But the point is logistics...the more missiles you produce, the cheaper cost will be, and the easier for munitions logistics teams to service and supply the missile...if PLAN operates too many types of missiles, then its not good for the FACs, let alone the surface combatants.
Eg, Harpoon was given to the Pegasus missile hydrofoil, and why the heck would USA put Harpoon, a 66mile+ missile onto something that can't detect beyond the horizon? Cause it was for logistical reasons.
YJ83's performance...
Hmmm, in the Sino-Russo naval exercise, one missile reportedly scored a hit on a target out t 200km. And its bound to have improved software and electronic systems over the predecessor YJ8 and YJ82. Something yet to be tested or properly analysed by experts is the claimed ability to attack at Mach 1.5 in its terminal attack phase.
Compared to Harpoon (and probably Exocet), it does exceed in range and terminal attack speed, and is probably superior to the Russian SS-N-25 and Otomat. But Harpoon has ability to fly on selected points, meaning that a swarm of Harpoons can be programmed to attack a target at multiple directions. Harpoon also is known for its deadly pop-up and S maneouvres that can throw off basic CIWS and gun systems. I think same thing can be done for Exocet (correct me if I'm wrong). But Harpoon and Exocet probably have better ECM than YJ83.
I also read however, that the C-802 used by Hizbollah against Israeli shipping scored less well (though was still very dangerous). Thought to have been coastal clutter etc, and also Israeli ships were probably better equipped in terms of ECM, and C-802's software fell short. Fortunately, the YJ83 has already (or should after these experiences) improve on the C-802's short comings.
Assuming YJ83...
Yes I agree too, and many will argue against the point of having YJ83 which has 200km+ range for such a small craft.
But the point is logistics...the more missiles you produce, the cheaper cost will be, and the easier for munitions logistics teams to service and supply the missile...if PLAN operates too many types of missiles, then its not good for the FACs, let alone the surface combatants.
Eg, Harpoon was given to the Pegasus missile hydrofoil, and why the heck would USA put Harpoon, a 66mile+ missile onto something that can't detect beyond the horizon? Cause it was for logistical reasons.
YJ83's performance...
Hmmm, in the Sino-Russo naval exercise, one missile reportedly scored a hit on a target out t 200km. And its bound to have improved software and electronic systems over the predecessor YJ8 and YJ82. Something yet to be tested or properly analysed by experts is the claimed ability to attack at Mach 1.5 in its terminal attack phase.
Compared to Harpoon (and probably Exocet), it does exceed in range and terminal attack speed, and is probably superior to the Russian SS-N-25 and Otomat. But Harpoon has ability to fly on selected points, meaning that a swarm of Harpoons can be programmed to attack a target at multiple directions. Harpoon also is known for its deadly pop-up and S maneouvres that can throw off basic CIWS and gun systems. I think same thing can be done for Exocet (correct me if I'm wrong). But Harpoon and Exocet probably have better ECM than YJ83.
I also read however, that the C-802 used by Hizbollah against Israeli shipping scored less well (though was still very dangerous). Thought to have been coastal clutter etc, and also Israeli ships were probably better equipped in terms of ECM, and C-802's software fell short. Fortunately, the YJ83 has already (or should after these experiences) improve on the C-802's short comings.
Last edited: