PLAN Littoral Combat Ships

[DPRKPTboat]

Since there has been little additional information on this topic, I think it is safe to speculate. I bleieve that the missile that this thing is armed with is accurate and fast, as this boat seems to be designed for a rapid surprise attack, given its stealthy features and streamlined shape. Here is a list of possible canditates for the catamaran's missile.

YJ-83
YJ-62
SS-N-22?
A new indigenous anti-ship system.

But i'm not really sure about most of these. The first two fit into relatively small launchers, and if you look at the photos ofthe new FAC, the launchers on it are much bigger. (why would they spend money building a massive launcer for a small missile, unless they want to keep us guessing) There is a question mark after SS-N-22 because although it fits the size, there is no evidence that China has been able to build a launcher for the Sunburn indigenously. Fitting this thing with an indigenous missile would be easier and cheaper. And they only have the launchers on the Sovremenny class destroyers bought from Russia. In my opinion the most likely canditate is a missile we haven't seen yet. It will probably be large, supersonic and accurately guided. It is possible it may be a derivative of the Sunburn, but that is just my opinion. If anyone has any other suggestions or theories, be my guest.

[tphuang]

It's going to be YJ-83 for sure.

YJ-83 is the standard AShM in pla right now. YJ-62 is currently just for 052C. The sunburns are simply too huge and expensive compared to the YJ missiles.

[jwangyue]

It's going to be YJ-83 for sure.

YJ-83 is the standard AShM in pla right now. YJ-62 is currently just for 052C. The sunburns are simply too huge and expensive compared to the YJ missiles.

I have the same feeling. The FAC does not have the same radar coverage as larger frigates or destoryers, unless there is battlefiled management system for information sharing. Its stealth feature allows it to get in close (hopefully) to its target. Therefore, a shorter range, but higher speed supersonic anti-ship missile would give the defender less time to react, which works much better in this situation.

[DPRKPTboat]

The PLAN would want to fit this boat with something that would casue alot of damage before the opponent could react or deploy any countermeasures. This thing seems to be designed for hit and run attacks, probably why it has stealthy features and a high-speed design. I reckon the PLAN is planning to use it for some nasty surprises against the U.S. navy in the Taiwan straight.

[tphuang]

commentary on possible uses of 2208, it claims type 22 can have enough launchers for 8 YJ-83 (basically 2 quadriple YJ-83 launchers), I'm not too sure about that.
　　任何武器系统在设计之初都要为其确定明确的作战用途。导弹艇由于自身的性能特点，决定了其主要用途就是 用来近海防御作战，主要打击敌水面舰艇，这也是当初导弹艇诞生时的最主要用途。在随后的几十年中，虽然导弹 艇的吨位不断增加，艇载武器不断增强（一些新型导弹艇的作战能力有了极大的提高，除原有的反舰能力外，还同 时具备了较强的反潜、防空及电子战能力，像俄罗斯的“毒蜘蛛”级导弹艇、瑞典的“哥德堡”级导弹艇等都是较 为典型的代表），但其基本的反舰使命并没有大的改变。从目前情况分析，2208艇的主要用途也并没有脱离导 弹艇的“老本行”——反舰作战。由于受到外形尺寸、吨位及作战思想的影响，2208艇的综合作战能力并没有 俄罗斯的“毒蜘蛛”级导弹艇、瑞典的“哥德堡”级导弹艇等大中型导弹艇那样强大，而只具备较强的反舰能力， 不具备反潜能力，防空能力也只是为了解决最基本的自身对空防御。但由于具备独特的自身特点（高航速、极佳的 航行性能、隐身性强），也使其具有了“毒蜘蛛”级所不具备的用途，像进行战场巡逻、侦察等都将具有很强的能 力。

　　对于2208艇的主要作战对象，笔者判断，除了在解决台湾问题中所要面临的台湾海军外，更为重要的是用 于对待可能插手台海战争的日本海上自卫队及美国航母战斗群。2208艇凭借其优异的性能特点将会在未来的作 战中发挥出极为重要的作用。

　　在采用了众多先进设计、制造技术后，2208艇的战术技术性能达到了一个较高的水平 ，其自身所具备的独特之处也是具备强大攻击能力的秘密所在。这些特点将会在战场中具有很大的作战优势，从而 保证作战目的及作战使命的完成。

　　特点之一：高航速。2208艇与其它类型导弹艇一样都具备很高的航速，它所采用的是4台大功率喷水推进 装置。在4台大功率柴油发动机的驱动下，最高航速可达到 50节以上，并可保持较长时间，十分有利于快速接敌、快速攻击及高速撤离的导弹艇的基本作战样式；而它在5 级海况的条件下应可达到40节的高速更是其它类型导弹艇无法达到的。因此，2208艇可在航渡中快速及时地 赶赴作战海域，而在作战时又可快速接敌，占据有利的攻击阵位，缩短敌方的反应时间，对敌实施较为突然的导弹 攻击。战斗结束后，凭借其50节的高航速可快速脱离战场，摆脱敌舰的反击，具备了较高的战场生 存力。

　　特点之二：体积小、隐身能力强。2208艇全长只有30多米，排水量不超过250吨，在导弹艇中也属于 较为轻小型。由于其外形尺寸及吨位小，吃水也较浅，自身雷达反射面积已经不是很大，而在采用了另一些隐身措 施后，隐身能力已达到了一个很高的水平，成为了一型“真正”的隐身型舰艇。上层建筑采用了低矮平滑、重心较 低的设计，上层建筑两侧外壁向内倾斜10度，这样可有效地降低雷达的反射面积。舰桥及桅杆均由多边形平面构 成，艇体后部高大的导弹发射箱同样采取了隐身措施，与艇身完美地融为一体。在采用了喷水推进系统后，避免了 传统螺旋桨在高速航行时所带来的巨大噪音，从而使2208艇具有极佳的综合隐身能力。一些外国军事分析家认 为，该艇的雷达反射面积不会超过一艘30吨级的小型渔船，可使敌方雷达的探测能力下降60%以上，正常海况 条件下，对海雷达对它的发现距离不会超过25千米；如果海况恶劣、气象条件复杂，加上2208艇使用电子干 扰设备，被发现距离将不会超过15千米，这对提高攻击的突然性及生存力是极为重要的。

　　特点之三：攻击威力大。2208艇可载8枚反舰导弹，其单艇反舰能力已超过了我军的“江湖”级导弹护卫 舰及改进前的“旅大”级导弹驱逐舰。虽然在数量上少于“旅沪”级导弹驱逐舰上所载的16枚，但就2208艇 200多吨的排水量而言，其综合反舰能力当属强大，完全具备了与大中型水面舰艇进行抗衡的实力，单艇一次8 枚导弹的连续攻击完全可以摧毁由1～2艘现代化驱护舰组成的小规模舰艇编队。除数量充足、威力较大的反舰导 弹外，艇上还装有较强的近程防空武器，这也是其它同吨位导弹艇所不具备的。艇载的1座6管30毫米速射炮及 2座四联装FSL-1防空导弹系统在艇上作战指挥系统的控制下，可组成较为严密的对空防御火力，对近距离空中目标及来袭的反舰 导弹都将具有很强的拦截能力。

　　特点之四：优秀的航行性能。该艇最大的特点就是所采用的新式双体穿浪型船型，是目前唯一一型采用这种高 速船型的导弹艇。作为吸取了小水线面船双体船及深 V型船船型优点于一身的新型高速船型，该艇由两个平行的细长艇体和一个中央艇体构成，两侧细长艇体为深V线 型，中央船体首部为深V型船首。在无风浪或低海况条件下，主要依靠两侧艇体提供所需的浮力，中央船体并未直 接接触水面，航行阻力主要是由两个侧体产生，阻力很小。在高海况下（6级以上海况），两侧细长艇体则利用其 锋利的首部从波浪中穿浪而过，从而保证了航行的稳定性。在纵摇严重时，中央艇体则接触水面，以帮助艇始终保 持良好的航行状态，具有极好的抗浪性及适航性，抗风浪水平可达到2000多吨中型水面舰艇的水平，而适航性 及稳定性又要高于常规排水型艇型，从而改变了小吨位导弹艇不能在远海及高海况下航行作战的问题 。

艇载武器的使用

　　2208艇上所装备的武器有小口径舰炮、轻型防空导弹及反舰导弹，合理的使用将会对2208艇的作战产 生极大的影响。

　　1、6管30毫米舰炮。2208艇首部装有一座6管30毫米速射舰炮，最大射程为8千米，对反舰导弹的 拦截距离为3000米，主要用于近程反导防空，最高射速可达4500～5000发/分，对反舰导弹具有较高的拦截能力，对薄装甲防护的小型水面舰艇也具有很强的毁伤能力。系统火控一般由艇上 的雷达或光电探测器负责，在艇上的雷达及光电探测器发现目标后，对目标进行跟踪，并将目标数据传送至该炮的 火控操纵台，当目标进入火炮的有效射程后，即可进行射击。经试验测试，该炮对单枚亚音速反舰导弹的拦截概率 接近100%，而对2～3枚反舰导弹的拦截概率也在80%以上。

　　2、FSL-1轻型防空导弹。这是一种轻型舰载防空导弹系统，主要用于近距离对空防御。每座发射装置装有4枚导弹，导弹 可以是被动红外制导也可是激光半主动制导，前者可作到发射后不管并可同时攻击多个来袭目标，而后者则抗干扰 能力较强。导弹的最大射程达到8千米，最小射程500米，最小射高只有10米，飞行速度为2.5马赫，可有 效地拦截低空掠海飞行的反舰导弹。该系统的探测系统是艇上的光电探测器，在探测器探测到目标后，可快速将目 标数据传输至导弹发射装置，导弹加电预热。在使用红外弹时，弹上的红外探测器探测到目标后即可发射，红外探 测器跟踪来袭目标的红外辐射信号，直至命中目标。在采用半主动激光制导时，则先由探测器中的激光照射器对目 标进行跟踪照射，导弹则跟据激光束的引导跟踪直至命中目标。

　　3、C803反舰导弹。该弹是我国90年代末开始装备使用的一种新型中程反舰导弹，导弹掠海飞行时采用 高亚音速飞行，接近目标时则进行超音速飞行，并可进行蛇形机动，以增加拦截的难度。导弹的最大射程在150 千米以上，采用中段指令修正加末端主动雷达制导，具备扇面发射、发射后不管、超视距攻击及多目标攻击能力。 导弹弹长6.56米，翼展1.18米（弹翼折叠后为0.58米），弹径0.36米，全重830千克，战斗部 为重165千克的半穿甲弹头，采用了延迟触发引信，单发命中率为95％以上。在作战时，首先通过外部信息探 测系统或艇上装备的目标探测设备获得攻击目标所必要的数据信息，目标进入导弹有效射程后，可以3秒一枚的间 隔时间发射全部8枚导弹。导弹点火后，固体助推火箭启动，使导弹飞离导弹发射箱，几秒钟后，助推火箭与弹体 分离，喷气发动机工作，使导弹速度达到0.9马赫；导弹保持原设定航向平飞，中途可接收通过卫星传输的目标 坐标数据，并可修改最初设定的攻击目标；距离目标10千米时，弹上的末制导雷达启动，对目标进行搜索并跟踪 。此时，弹上的油箱向发动机大量喷油，使导弹的飞行速度达到1.5马赫的超音速，同时，导弹下降到距海面5 米的高度进行掠海飞行，在距目标3千米时，导弹以25度俯冲角进入最后攻击阶段，在目标舰水线附近击中目标 。

作战使用

　　根据不同的作战任务和作战目标，2208艇所采用的攻击作战方式也有所不同，这在很大程度上都是由其自 身性能特点所确定的，其中既有传统导弹艇使用上的基本战术应用，也有其较为特别的应用方式。

　　1、单艇作战。指由1艘2208艇独自出海完成攻击作战任务。由于单艇的攻击力量有限，只能在近海海域 或在特定海区对少量敌方水面舰艇进行伏击或偷袭。而其攻击对象也仅限于1至2艘作战能力不强的驱护舰及少量 运输船队所组成的小规模舰艇编队。在采用此种作战方式时，由于其作战距离较近（300千米以内），可以得到 己方很好的作战支援，加上其特有的隐身性及高速性，在远距离被敌方发现的概率非常低。艇载的8枚C803反 舰导弹，即使使用自身目标探测设备及制导系统对反舰导弹进行引导，也可保证在40～50千米的距离上对敌发 起攻击，而在这个距离上敌舰是不可能立即发现攻击中的2208艇的。8枚反舰导弹对这种小规模舰艇编队的毁 伤能力是非常巨大的，即使达不到100%的摧毁率，也可使其完全丧失战斗力。采用此种方式时，必须保证作战 海域的制空权要掌握在我方手中，并要对战场中敌方舰艇的侦察、探测方面作到准确及时。

　　2、多艇协同作战。指由多艘2208艇组成集群攻击组，对敌水面舰艇编队进行导弹攻击。由于一个攻击组 由多艘导弹艇组成，因此在整体攻击能力上有了相当大的增强，并可借助复杂气象条件及高海况下敌水面舰艇航行 、作战能力下降之时，利用自身优异的适航性及在恶劣海况下的极强航行性能发起攻击。攻击组主要的作战对象是 由4至6艘驱护舰组成的中等规模水面舰队。在没有空中威胁的情况下，其作战距离可达1000千米（不过，2 208艇的海上自持力较差，在这样的距离上持续作战能力有限，因此，控制在500千米内对作战较为有利）。 由于2208艇的体积小、隐身性强，敌海上作战编队在较远距离上发现2208艇攻击组是较为困难的，即使使 用舰载直升机，发现距离也不会小于60千米。虽然编队中所载直升机（如S-70CM1）的最大作战半径达到200千米以上，但在战时，舰载直升机为保证生存力是不大可能飞离母舰10 0千米以外执行对海搜索任务的，而60千米这样的距离早已进入2208艇艇载反舰导弹的攻击范围 。4艘 2208艇总共有32枚反舰导弹可用，在进行导弹攻击时，可由2艘一组以最高航速从两个方向对目标发起饱和 攻击，以在最短的时间内发射所有导弹后高速脱离战场。类似于以2艘“成功”级、2艘“康定”级及2艘“诺克 斯”级所组成的舰艇编队的防空反导能力是无法抗击32枚C803反舰导弹的饱和攻击的，最多只能拦截下10 枚左右的导弹，而剩下的20多枚导弹将会完全摧毁敌作战编队。

　　多艇协同攻击的实现条件应是要保证作战海域的制空权，至少是部分制空权，这样就可避免攻击组在较远的距 离上被敌空中力量发现，保证攻击作战的隐蔽性和突然性。同时，还要在指挥通信信息保障上做到准确及时，在侦 察卫星、远程侦察机及预警机的配合下提高对战场瞬息万变的复杂情况的掌控能力。

　　3、多艇与其它作战单位协同作战。指由多艘2208艇与大中型驱护舰共同组成海上作战编队，一同在中远 海对敌海上舰艇编队进行攻击，此时，2208艇出色的适航能力可以满足其远海航行作战的需要。作战时，编队 中2208艇的数量可根据作战对象的不同有所差别，如作战对象是类似于日本“八八舰队”的规模，只需编入6 至8艘即可；如目标是1个航母战斗群，其数量至少要达到 10艘；如是2到3个航母战斗群，其数量至少应达到15艘以上。以我军现在的装备水平组建一个作战能力较强 的驱护舰编队，一般应由2到3艘护卫舰和4艘以上的驱逐舰构成，能同时发射30～40枚反舰导弹对目标进行 攻击（每艘舰上留有一定数量备用弹），如果作战对象是类似于日本“八八舰队”的规模，则基本可对其造成重创 ，如在编队中加入8艘2208艇，整个作战编队一次导弹攻击的导弹数量将会达到100枚以上，完全可以彻底 摧毁一个完整的“八八舰队”。但对手要是多个航母战斗群时，这些反舰导弹能否突破层层反导防御体系还尚未可 知。美国一个航母战斗群中至少有4艘装有“宙斯盾”系统的巡洋舰和驱逐舰，它们一次就可同时拦截48个空中 目标，加上其它护航舰只的防空武器及各舰上的近防武器系统等，40多枚反舰导弹对其已不能构成太大的威胁。 但如果在编队中加入 15艘以上的2208艇随同大编队作战，一次导弹齐射的数量会达到近200枚，这样，基本可以保证一定数量 的反舰导弹突破其防御体系，重创或摧毁一个标准的航母战斗群。在进行这种高强度反舰作战时，基本上采用的是 远程超视距导弹攻击，力求在最远的距离上对敌发起攻击，以保证自身编队的安全，同时也增加了敌方发现来袭导 弹的距离和反应时间，因此，更要强调反舰导弹一次齐射的数量。
此外，航母战斗群在接收舰载机、海上补给及高海况下作战能力下降时，2208艇编队还可利用自身航行性能的 特点，采用多集群在多方向对其进行偷袭攻击，同样可对其构成致命打击。为解决2208艇远海作战时自持力有 限的问题，可在编队中加入1到2艘综合补给船，以对编队中的2208艇群进行随时的物资及弹药补给，保证其 长时间在远海持续作战的需求。

　　■ 结 语

　　对于2208艇作战使用的问题，本文只是做了些很肤浅的分析，并不能代表2208艇在作战使用中的真正 内容。但有一点可以确定，那就是任何忽视2208艇存在的对手，都将在未来战场上付出惨重的代 价。

[antiterror13]

sunburns ? ... you must be kidding ?

HY-2 is a better choice

[MIGleader]

R U kidding me??!!

the hy-2 only has a 100km range at best. Thats inferior to the sunburn0's 120and the yj-83's 200. not to mention the hy-2 is subsonic.

[DPRKPTboat]

R U kidding me??!!

the hy-2 only has a 100km range at best. Thats inferior to the sunburn0's 120and the yj-83's 200. not to mention the hy-2 is subsonic.

I agree. The HY series is dead in my opinion. It is probably the worst Chinese anti-ship system. Its antiquated, the kind of thing North Korea would use. It is pretty much a waste of space to the PLAN, and by 2008 it should have been completely replaced by the YJ series and advanced Russian missiles. Those HYs would be mincemeat for any U.S. defence system. If the Chinese have fitted it to the 2208, they've made a big mistake and have wasted a lot of money.

[waveguide]

I agree. The HY series is dead in my opinion. It is probably the worst Chinese anti-ship system. Its antiquated, the kind of thing North Korea would use. It is pretty much a waste of space to the PLAN, and by 2008 it should have been completely replaced by the YJ series and advanced Russian missiles. Those HYs would be mincemeat for any U.S. defence system. If the Chinese have fitted it to the 2208, they've made a big mistake and have wasted a lot of money.


Can't you see that it's merely a joke?

The guy who mentioned HY-2 above must be indicating that Sunburn is way too heavy for such a tiny missle ship. A single Sunburn is as heavy as 4t according to my knowledge, not including the launchers. Is it possible for the 250t to carry up to 4 Sunburns at all?

[DPRKPTboat]

Can't you see that it's merely a joke?

The guy who mentioned HY-2 above must be indicating that Sunburn is way too heavy for such a tiny missle ship. A single Sunburn is as heavy as 40t according to my knowledge, not including the lunch devices. Is it possible for the 250t to carry up to 4 Sunburns at all?

Sorry, I have a reputation for being a serious person. Well, I did think of that when I opened the thread, which was why I put a question mark on the Sunburn. As I said, I think the missile that they're placing on that thing will deinetly be supersonic and very advanced. And the SS-N-22 is the most advanced and fastest missile the PLAN has.

[Gollevainen]

Now i can sure you, it's not Moskit...My Weyrs flottentachbocken has a good line drawing and it gives me quite good assumption just how big missiles can be fitted on the boat. Moskit is just too long (never mentioning the weight...) to be fitted on the hangars. My best quess is the C-803 or the "stings" fitted in 052C class DDGs...

[tphuang]

Sorry, I have a reputation for being a serious person. Well, I did think of that when I opened the thread, which was why I put a question mark on the Sunburn. As I said, I think the missile that they're placing on that thing will deinetly be supersonic and very advanced. And the SS-N-22 is the most advanced and fastest missile the PLAN has.
agree with Golly here, the SS-N-22 simply is too huge to fit on such a small boat, unless you want it to tip over. Each sunburn is 4 tonnes. The upgraded ones might be even heavier. The launchers for them can't be light either. You are looking at 50 tonnes just for anti-shipping on a 250 tonne boat, not good.

Also, it is not the most advanced missile in PLAN. YJ-62 is. It has much better range and equals in warhead despite being much smaller. I'd imagine a smaller missile like that would have better manuverability too.

[MIGleader]

Whats the point of having a 200+km range on the missle if the FAC's radar cannot see that far? With such a small craft, I'd expect the radar to only range at most 150-180km. Thus, the supersonic yj-83 would be ideal. It's faster than the yj-62, but has the same range when operating on the FAC.

[tphuang]

Whats the point of having a 200+km range on the missle if the FAC's radar cannot see that far? With such a small craft, I'd expect the radar to only range at most 150-180km. Thus, the supersonic yj-83 would be ideal. It's faster than the yj-62, but has the same range when operating on the FAC.
i doubt they have radars big enough to even fully utilize the maximum range of YJ-83. They probably will have like some kind of datalinking between Y-8 or the destroyers and the FACs to tell it where the targets are and then once they are launched, they are probably guided by Y-8 or helicopters too.

[waveguide]

i guess it could be a smaller, and thus comparatively more stealthy missle, the rectangle langcher is fitting for c803 to be put in, but too small for sunburn.

besides, the missile should have an adequate range for the "hit and run" tactic. during a typical attack, the FAC may receive signals from KJ-2000 AWACS Aircraft, or sattelite perhaps, to insure a silence attack. if the missile is small and long-ranged, it could enjoy a bigger possibility to launch the missile and withdraw to a safe circle guaranteed by land-based fighters before the missle is to be detected.

[Eurofighter]

tphuang mentioned that the article claims that the FAC can carry up to 8 yj-83 missles? is this really possible? from a rational point of view it would make sense, since if one FAC 'only' carries 4 missles (and given other constraints like their limited combat endurance), it wouldn't make them very fearsome opponents, would it?

and does anybody has an idea how much of these FAC will be build?sinodefence doesn't say much on this one except that the PLAAF already have build 3 of these FACs...

[tphuang]

tphuang mentioned that the article claims that the FAC can carry up to 8 yj-83 missles? is this really possible? from a rational point of view it would make sense, since if one FAC 'only' carries 4 missles (and given other constraints like their limited combat endurance), it wouldn't make them very fearsome opponents, would it?

and does anybody has an idea how much of these FAC will be build?sinodefence doesn't say much on this one except that the PLAAF already have build 3 of these FACs...
I question that too actually. I thought it would only have 4, but YJ-83s are quite light, so maybe it's possible. I believe we saw a picture recently of the 4 type 22s althogether (2208-2211).

[waveguide]

I question that too actually. I thought it would only have 4, but YJ-83s are quite light, so maybe it's possible. I believe we saw a picture recently of the 4 type 22s althogether (2208-2211).

not so, i suppose. simply because each of the two lanuchers are rectangle.

[DPRKPTboat]

I agree with tphuang - YJ-83 is probably the most likely canditate. Its supersonic, its cheap to produce and its one of China's most widely used anti-ship systems. But I still think theres a pssibility we could be seeing a new missile here.

[big toothbrush]

Whats the point of having a 200+km range on the missle if the FAC's radar cannot see that far? With such a small craft, I'd expect the radar to only range at most 150-180km. Thus, the supersonic yj-83 would be ideal. It's faster than the yj-62, but has the same range when operating on the FAC.

due to their altitude, the sensors that fit on FACs could detect surface targets at most 30km far away. the 22xx would only be able to guide short range ASMs such as YJ-71 within missiles' full range if there is not datalinks support. as for as i know, the CEC capability to cover ASMs' track is not difficult for chinese navy.

anybody's seen this before? any thought?
http://img2.ziling.com/uploadfile/2006-3/20063188511523166.jpg

[SteelBird]

due to their altitude, the sensors that fit on FACs could detect surface targets at most 30km far away. the 22xx would only be able to guide short range ASMs such as YJ-71 within missiles' full range if there is not datalinks support. as for as i know, the CEC capability to cover ASMs' track is not difficult for chinese navy.

anybody's seen this before? any thought?


According to the image, I think 2208 possibly can carry 8 AShM.

I don't PLAN will operate 2208 alone, there must be some datalinks, so it would not be very important that how far the sensor on the 2208 can detect.

[Finn McCool]

I think it will be yj-83. I assume that the PLAN wants to save money and keep production in-country. Why would they make a whole new missle when they have one right there. Plus if you have multiple catamarans all firing their missles at a relatively vunerable target ( like a DD or two) you don't need they absolute best technology out there to score a hit.

[vincelee]

tooth brush, the picture you posted is the MM38/40 Exocet.

[DPRKPTboat]

tooth brush, the picture you posted is the MM38/40 Exocet.

Even though it is the wrong missile, that image does give us some idea of what the interior of the 2208 launchers would look like. Now it all seems to make sense. Those big launchers could fit 4 YJ-83s, so the boat would be carrying a total of 8 missiles. That would suppourt my theory that this thing is intended to deliver a rapid knockout punch and then retreat quickly. Imagine a U.S. CBG cruising along slowly through the Taiwan straight. It may contains destoryers and Cruisers protecting the Carrier. Then suddenly a small flotilla of 2208s, undected by the group's radars, speeds towards the group, launches a volley of YJ-83 missiles, and then retreats rapidly at high speed before the enemy can react. By the time the missiles have hit, the catamarans are well out of range, leaving several ships sinking or badly damaged, which leaves the carrier (YJ-8s would not sink an American aircraft carrier) as a sitting duck for air or sub attack. It would be like naval guerilla tactics - hit and run. And it could prove a nightmare for any navy that opposes the PLAN.

[big toothbrush]

tooth brush, the picture you posted is the MM38/40 Exocet.

no. it's yj-62.

Imagine a U.S. CBG cruising along slowly through the Taiwan straight. It may contains destoryers and Cruisers protecting the Carrier. Then suddenly a small flotilla of 2208s, undected by the group's radars, speeds towards the group, launches a volley of YJ-83 missiles, and then retreats rapidly at high speed before the enemy can react. By the time the missiles have hit, the catamarans are well out of range, leaving several ships sinking or badly damaged, which leaves the carrier (YJ-8s would not sink an American aircraft carrier) as a sitting duck for air or sub attack. It would be like naval guerilla tactics - hit and run. And it could prove a nightmare for any navy that opposes the PLAN.

no buddy, things are not going to be like this.

1 U.S. CBG would not get into chinese land-based planes' range for sure, say nothing of taiwan strait where is only 200km away from china mainlan.

2 22xx can't shoot over-horizon targets without datalinks support. if china can't control sky above battlefield, AWACS and other sensors flatform would be unavailable. then 22xxs have to rely on its own sensors to track ASM, the maximal range is less than 30km. if china can control the sky, then planes with ASMs are much effective than 22xxs.

so FAC like 22xxs are not prepared for advanced enemies, but for some small navies arround china.

[DPRKPTboat]

no buddy, things are not going to be like this.

1 U.S. CBG would not get into chinese land-based planes' range for sure, say nothing of taiwan strait where is only 200km away from china mainlan.

2 22xx can't shoot over-horizon targets without datalinks support. if china can't control sky above battlefield, AWACS and other sensors flatform would be unavailable. then 22xxs have to rely on its own sensors to track ASM, the maximal range is less than 30km. if china can control the sky, then planes with ASMs are much effective than 22xxs.

so FAC like 22xxs are not prepared for advanced enemies, but for some small navies arround china.

Who says that the 2208s need aircraft? This thing is cleary built with stealthy features. So it must be designed to sneak up close to its target. As far as U.S. radar is concerned, the catamaran appears no bigger than a seabird on the surface of the water. As for the 2208s sensors having a max range of 30km, we don't know enough about the sensors and weapons onboard this thing to assume what they are capable of. For all we know, the catamaran's sensors could be much more powerful. And since it is a stealth unit (one of few stealth units China posseses) it could easily get within 30km of its target if it needed to. Then all it has to do is feed the coordinates into the missiles guidance computer, launch the missile and make a fast escape. And since it is faster than the ships in a U.S. CBG, they would not be able to catch it. As for the comment that it is not designed for an advanced enemy - well yes, but only if it faces its enemies toe to toe. And that would be a ludecrous tactic against a U.S. CBG. If it uses hit and run tactics, then it is a different story. History has taught us that an indirect, rapid hit and run attack by a weak force is much more devestating than a direct, conventional attack by a strong force. In a head on conventional battle, The PLAN cannot match the U.S. navy: the Chinese commanders know that. That is why they are building the catamarans. I believe that Chinese tactics against the U.S. in the event of war will be, as Mao Zedong said: "Retreat when the enemy attacks, raid when the enemy camps, attack when the enemy tires, pursue when the enemy retreats." That is what the 2208 seems to be designed for. I believe that it is possible to wreak havoc for a U.S. CBG using these tactics; don't forget, battleship fleets were considered invincible, and we believed torpedo boats would not last a minute. But during the seond world war, torpedo boats caused devestation for battleships, using indirect hit and run tactics. I believe the Chinese will do the same thing to Carrier battle groups using with this thing.:china:

[big toothbrush]

we don't know 22xx sensors' informations, but we do know those sensors are not fit on a high altitude. the surface of earth is curvilinear while the radar waves go straight. there is big dead angle besides radar's detective area. even much larger combat ships like DDG and FFG which have much more powerful sensors still can't deal with over-horizon targets by themselves. some AWACS or at least copters are needed for targets' informations transfer and missiles' track. nobody can shoot over-horizon targets without air-based sensors and datalinks, 22xx is not exception.

about the RCS of this boat, it won't be more stealthy than a blowhole of SSK. the radar of S-3 can track submarines' blowhole or periscope more than 50km away, what about a much obvious target like FACs? USN CBG also has E-2 AWACS which can detect RCS=5 targets 200km away. no matter how stealthy it is, there is no surface ship that can approach USN CBG within 500km without being detected. once detected, it means destroyed. no matter how fast the FAC is, USN CBG's F-18s are faster, the harpoons carried by them are even faster. before FAC has chance to launch missiles to strike CBG, it has to suffer massive missiles strike from CBG planes.

any tactic only when be based on a certain level's system cooperation, it would be useful. otherwise it's air castle. if hope just use FACs to break CBG's defence, that's not tactic, but suicide.

[DPRKPTboat]

O.K. whatever, the FAC may need aircraft to relay target information, but it doesn't have to be a whole air fleet. You would probably only need one KJ-2000 or Y-8J Skymaster with fighter escort to send target info. And it could do that from a long way away, out of reach from enemy aircraft. Don't forget, the Argentines were able to use their P-2 Neptunes to guide their Super Etendards to our ships during the Falklands war right under our noses, and we never found out about that until the end of the war. I see no reason why the Chinese could not pull this off. And it doesn't take a genius to realise that even a small number of YJ-8s could cause severe damage. And I think this thing is perfectly capable of penetrating the carrier's defences - if the Carrier does launch its aircraft to pursue it, the catamarans could always lure the F-18s towards the main fleet or the Chinese coast so they are in the range of Chinese SAMs or fighters. (Remenber that this is the Taiwan straight, close to the mainland coast, where the 2208 is mostly designed to operate). I'm still convinced that his thing could prove to be a lethal weapon system. I refuse to believe that those CBGs are invinvcible. And everyone knows that the U.S. miltary's achilles heel is surprise or hit and run guerilla attacks. And the 2208 seems to be best suited for those sorts of tactics.

[MIGleader]

Big toothbrush, the 2208 facs will most likely travel in packs. They all have an ak-630, which is capable of shooting down an E-2 that is hunting for them. Not to mention that there might be other chinese warships in the region patrolling.

[vincelee]

that's definitely a french cannister.

[big toothbrush]

O.K. whatever, the FAC may need aircraft to relay target information, but it doesn't have to be a whole air fleet. You would probably only need one KJ-2000 or Y-8J Skymaster with fighter escort to send target info. And it could do that from a long way away, out of reach from enemy aircraft. Don't forget, the Argentines were able to use their P-2 Neptunes to guide their Super Etendards to our ships during the Falklands war right under our noses, and we never found out about that until the end of the war. I see no reason why the Chinese could not pull this off. And it doesn't take a genius to realise that even a small number of YJ-8s could cause severe damage. And I think this thing is perfectly capable of penetrating the carrier's defences - if the Carrier does launch its aircraft to pursue it, the catamarans could always lure the F-18s towards the main fleet or the Chinese coast so they are in the range of Chinese SAMs or fighters. (Remenber that this is the Taiwan straight, close to the mainland coast, where the 2208 is mostly designed to operate). I'm still convinced that his thing could prove to be a lethal weapon system. I refuse to believe that those CBGs are invinvcible. And everyone knows that the U.S. miltary's achilles heel is surprise or hit and run guerilla attacks. And the 2208 seems to be best suited for those sorts of tactics.

the argentines could do that is because RN didin't have basic early warning capability. they didn't have AWACS but have to rely on harrier's patrol. in fleet, harriers' number was very limited. the british could 't afford 24 hour partol.

argentines could use low frequency radar to find out when the british harriers are not in patrol. this radar is a huge land-based radar with over-horizon detection capability. ionosphere can reflect more than 80% of this radar's waves. and these long wavelengh radar waves can go through air alomost without being power reduced. so argentines could use this radar to watch RN fleet 600km away. but the accuracy is to bad, it's far from enough to guide missiles. once the argentines know that RN harriers are not in patrol, they will send planes to approach RN fleet to get more exact informations. that's not strange why RN could not find these planes.

RN got more experience during this war. after that, they did rebuild some sea king as AEW copters. argentines can no longer use this tactic any more.

the USN is another situation. they have extremely integrated early warning capability. with 4 professional AWACS and other several dozen planes, USN CBG early warning net can easily cover within 500km area. and those planes don't have to stay above CBG fleet, they could be sent out. this will increase early warning range.

if china can't get air superior, to send any AWACS out is suicide. if china can get, then we don't need FACs like 22xx to attack CBG. fighters and their ASMs are much more effective. US CBG will not get into chinese fighters' range. if you hope 22xx can engage with them in taiwan strait, that's just your wishful thinking. if US CBG really get into chinese planes' range, why don't use fighters to deal with them? there is no point bother to use FACs. fighters' speed is 10 times more than FACs' they are more suitable to fight guerrilla.


Big toothbrush, the 2208 facs will most likely travel in packs. They all have an ak-630, which is capable of shooting down an E-2 that is hunting for them. Not to mention that there might be other chinese warships in the region patrolling.

you are kidding, right? E-2 can detect 22xx more than 200km away(don't think that 22xx's RCS will less than 5 sq.m.) why would it get into ak630's range. even if it get into this range, E-2's patrol altitude is more than 10000m, which is far bigger than ak630's maximal range. ak630 will never have the chance. if china can't control the sky, the other warships will have the same fate as 22xxs', air striked by massive harpoons.


that's definitely a french cannister.

notice that it's showed in a chinese official TV programm and it said that this missile is a chinese new generation ASM. i don't think that will have any thing to do with the MM40. it's more likely to be YJ62.

[vincelee]

that's a ps, or CCTV intentionally did not air footages of the real missile housing chamber. When CDF comes on again, I'll try to find the original.

well, not from CDF, but from google.

http://www.hellas.org/military/army/images/exocet-1.jpg

that should be the origin of the picture.

now I think it's certain that I'm right.

http://timawa.net/images/modernization-mis/mm40_b.jpg

[big toothbrush]

that's a ps, or CCTV intentionally did not air footages of the real missile housing chamber. When CDF comes on again, I'll try to find the original.

really? but looks not like psed. the background ship is 052 lvhu class. any professional photoshop users here? please show this pic's code parameter.


well, not from CDF, but from google.

http://www.hellas.org/military/army/images/exocet-1.jpg

that should be the origin of the picture.

not this one. the view angle of missile is different. please try to find another one.

this time looks like real psed. any one can show the first photo's code?

[vincelee]

I KNOW THE ANGLE IS DIFFERENT. I'M NOT BLIND, NOR STUPID. but THAT is the platform. And do note the second picture.

[big toothbrush]

i know. it could be psed. thanks for your input.

[Gollevainen]

anybody's seen this before? any thought?
http://img2.ziling.com/uploadfile/2006-3/20063188511523166.jpg

and compare it to the french launcher....
http://macsnavylinks.ca/jdv5.jpg

we can clearly point out the differences...unless anyone could provide a picture of the missile launchers of the new HORIZON class FFGs??

[DPRKPTboat]

if china can't get air superior, to send any AWACS out is suicide. if china can get, then we don't need FACs like 22xx to attack CBG. fighters and their ASMs are much more effective. US CBG will not get into chinese fighters' range. if you hope 22xx can engage with them in taiwan strait, that's just your wishful thinking. if US CBG really get into chinese planes' range, why don't use fighters to deal with them? there is no point bother to use FACs. fighters' speed is 10 times more than FACs' they are more suitable to fight guerrilla.

Actually, using aircraft is more of a direct attack, since they can be detecetd by radar. China doesn't posses any stealth aricraft. I think its more likely that Chinese bombers would be detcted by AWACS than the catamarans. And they would make mincemeat for Aegis destroyers. Now that would be suicide.
And it would also be suicide for the USN to send AWACS chasing the FACs. As MiGleader said, the FACs would not be the only chinese warships out there. Once the catamarans have launched their missiles, they can speed back to an escort fleet of air defence destroyers, which will protect them from air attack. This fleet would be hodden outside enemy radar range. And they will probably be 051Cs (thuis ship will have been mass produced by this time) so their long range SAMs should hold off any enemy aircraft that gets to close.
The intention of an FAC attack is to harass the enemy, not destroy him completely in a direct sea battle. These boats would speed stealthily to a target, fire the missiles from a long way, then quickly retreat.
Getting back to the topic, that photo does look different from the pictures of the french exocet launchers, bui it doesn't look like the 2208 launcher. If it was, it would be covered by radar cross section features and covered. This one looks like some unstealthy steel frame, the knid of thing you'd expect to see on a Luda.

http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/littoral/22081.asp

http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/littoral/22082.asp

http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/littoral/22085.asp

http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/littoral/22083.asp

Compare the launchers on this to that photo. Spot the difference? That launcher was definetly already fixed to a ship, since you cna see an exercise going on in the background. But whatever ship it is, I don't think its the catamaran.

[vincelee]

I'm going to say this one last time:

these are exocet launching cannisters.

[big toothbrush]

Actually, using aircraft is more of a direct attack, since they can be detecetd by radar. China doesn't posses any stealth aricraft. I think its more likely that Chinese bombers would be detcted by AWACS than the catamarans. And they would make mincemeat for Aegis destroyers. Now that would be suicide.
And it would also be suicide for the USN to send AWACS chasing the FACs. As MiGleader said, the FACs would not be the only chinese warships out there. Once the catamarans have launched their missiles, they can speed back to an escort fleet of air defence destroyers, which will protect them from air attack. This fleet would be hodden outside enemy radar range. And they will probably be 051Cs (thuis ship will have been mass produced by this time) so their long range SAMs should hold off any enemy aircraft that gets to close.
The intention of an FAC attack is to harass the enemy, not destroy him completely in a direct sea battle. These boats would speed stealthily to a target, fire the missiles from a long way, then quickly retreat.


if china could control the sky, there would be no US planes could work normally. without AWACS support, how could their aegis find the over-horizon targets? they only have ship-based radars that are available then. chinese planes just need to fly low altitude trajectory and approach US CBG through their radar dead angle, then spy-1 radar only can detect them within 50km. our planes could launch ASMs more than 50km away easily. we can shoot them, they can't even find us. it would be suicide for the US CBG indeed.

by the way. even with E-2 support, SM-2 still can't hit over-horizon targets. because it's a semi-active tracked missile. SM-2 doesn't have active seeker. it only can be illuminated by SPG-62, which is ship-based fire control radar. no air-based flatform can instead SPG-62 to do this job. US new generation SM-6 is active tracked, but it still can't hit over-horizon targets without AWACS and datalinks.

i'm surprised that you expect 22xxs could launch their missiles in a battle with CBG. they would mostly be tracked 600km away and destroyed 500km away. i realy don't see these boats would have chance to approach CBG close enough for missile launching. as for other chinese ships. even 051C and 052C come together, they would have the same fate as 22xx. the reason is same as how chinese planes rape aegis ships. conclusion, who controls sky, who wins the war.

[MIGleader]

the argentines could do that is because RN didin't have basic early warning capability. they didn't have AWACS but have to rely on harrier's patrol. in fleet, harriers' number was very limited. the british could 't afford 24 hour partol.

argentines could use low frequency radar to find out when the british harriers are not in patrol. this radar is a huge land-based radar with over-horizon detection capability. ionosphere can reflect more than 80% of this radar's waves. and these long wavelengh radar waves can go through air alomost without being power reduced. so argentines could use this radar to watch RN fleet 600km away. but the accuracy is to bad, it's far from enough to guide missiles. once the argentines know that RN harriers are not in patrol, they will send planes to approach RN fleet to get more exact informations. that's not strange why RN could not find these planes.

RN got more experience during this war. after that, they did rebuild some sea king as AEW copters. argentines can no longer use this tactic any more.

the USN is another situation. they have extremely integrated early warning capability. with 4 professional AWACS and other several dozen planes, USN CBG early warning net can easily cover within 500km area. and those planes don't have to stay above CBG fleet, they could be sent out. this will increase early warning range.

if china can't get air superior, to send any AWACS out is suicide. if china can get, then we don't need FACs like 22xx to attack CBG. fighters and their ASMs are much more effective. US CBG will not get into chinese fighters' range. if you hope 22xx can engage with them in taiwan strait, that's just your wishful thinking. if US CBG really get into chinese planes' range, why don't use fighters to deal with them? there is no point bother to use FACs. fighters' speed is 10 times more than FACs' they are more suitable to fight guerrilla.




you are kidding, right? E-2 can detect 22xx more than 200km away(don't think that 22xx's RCS will less than 5 sq.m.) why would it get into ak630's range. even if it get into this range, E-2's patrol altitude is more than 10000m, which is far bigger than ak630's maximal range. ak630 will never have the chance. if china can't control the sky, the other warships will have the same fate as 22xxs', air striked by massive harpoons.




notice that it's showed in a chinese official TV programm and it said that this missile is a chinese new generation ASM. i don't think that will have any thing to do with the MM40. it's more likely to be YJ62.

Back to the point as where whoever controls the skies, who ever wins. If china has two dozen su-30s flying, and half a dozen dstroyers in the region, dont you think thats what the CSG's radar operators would be looking at? The operators wouldnt be trying to search out obscure dots on the radar. If some destroyers can use stealth to look like tugboats, I dont see why the 2208 catamaran cannot make itself look like a very small fishing boat, maybe even life raft.

If there are su-30s in the sky, most of the f-18s in a carrier strike group would be sent to destroy them. When the f-18s come too close to the mainland though, they fall under the envolope of s-300 fire. With no fighters, a CSG is powerless to destroy even the smallest of vessels. Last time I chcked, the Harpoon has range of 130 km, while the yj-83 had a range of 200.

[swimmerXC]

big toothbrush, I'am going to say this once to you.
PLEASE STOP POSTING ONE-LINERS!
Do you realize how many of your post I had do merge in this thread alone?

[big toothbrush]

Back to the point as where whoever controls the skies, who ever wins. If china has two dozen su-30s flying, and half a dozen dstroyers in the region, dont you think thats what the CSG's radar operators would be looking at? The operators wouldnt be trying to search out obscure dots on the radar. If some destroyers can use stealth to look like tugboats, I dont see why the 2208 catamaran cannot make itself look like a very small fishing boat, maybe even life raft.

the example you gave is cooperation between su-30s, destroyers and 22xxs. this makes sense now. modern warfare are based upon system cooperation. different weapons need to work together. in this system, AWACS is extremely important. because for to destroy targets, you have to get targets informations at the first; to transfer informations from sensors units to other units, you will need AWACS keeping direct datalink contact with different units in real time. without AWACS, talking about C4I is a joke. unfortunately, AWACS can't perform in sky area where is controled by enemy. so who wins the war is still dicided by who controls the sky.


If there are su-30s in the sky, most of the f-18s in a carrier strike group would be sent to destroy them. When the f-18s come too close to the mainland though, they fall under the envolope of s-300 fire. With no fighters, a CSG is powerless to destroy even the smallest of vessels. Last time I chcked, the Harpoon has range of 130 km, while the yj-83 had a range of 200.

i don't think US CVBG would ever get into chinese planes' range. the land-based planes are superior than ship-based planes on both quality and quantity. american carrier will stay at least 1500km away from china mainland. the su-30s vs f-18s is unlikely going to happen.

[waveguide]

i don't think US CVBG would ever get into chinese planes' range. the land-based planes are superior than ship-based planes on both quality and quantity. american carrier will stay at least 1500km away from china mainland. the su-30s vs f-18s is unlikely going to happen.

i don't think they'd stay that far away. if so, why is it happened that two Su-27 met two F-14 over East Sea in 1996 during the missle cricis?

[big toothbrush]

they got that close in 1996 is because they wanna show their power and determination. if war would ever happen, they don't have to be that close but still have the ability to stop beijing's military actions toward taiwan.

[DPRKPTboat]

You'll have probably seen these photos, but they're good shots so I'm posting them anyway. I found them on Jeff Head's site. I hope he dosen't mind.

http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/5571/planfac221112dk.jpg

http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/443/planfac221015tn.jpg

http://img459.imageshack.us/img459/8681/planfac220916eq.jpg

http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/5540/planfac220829jl.jpg

http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/3448/planfac220816sd.jpg

Am I the only one to notice that the first of class, 2208, is the only one to have been painted in the camoflage scheme? The others are just painted standard grey. Are they going to be painted in thes same scheme as the first, or are they just going to stay as they are? I don't see why only one would be painted like that. Logically, the others should follow suit. And I wonder what is the point of painting them like that when battleship-grey is adequate camo in ocean conditions. By the way, who managed to take these? These are some brilliant shots.:)

[MIGleader]

The camo scheme is similar to the pattern the chinese mariens use on their uniforms. It must be particualrly well suited for tawan strait waters.

[New2u]

those pictures u posted are really old. Here is some new ones to keep you up to date.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v621/ultra89/ROSE/post-12-1142010121.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v621/ultra89/ROSE/2.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v621/ultra89/ROSE/post-12-1141991792.jpg

And this is a picture of the 5th FAC to be build. :china:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v621/ultra89/ROSE/3.jpg

[Nethappy]

I am not a expert in ship.. but this is my point of view
Well in any case if they really wanna make the 2208 useful.... they should give it
the YJ-62 with datalink.

A Destoryers - Frigates fleet... pretending to close into the CBG with load of Air support. Letting a rumor out dat the Sub force going to attacking. Pushing in enough for the destory to gather firing data and gather all the attention of the CBG, but without really making a challenge. Then muti- pack of the 2208 can come in unnoticed in different direction and let of it load.
In this case the 2208 dun even need a firing-control radar.

[big toothbrush]

the 22xxs do have datalink antennas. but it doesn't mean they can use datalink if they want in any time. AWACS and other planes hardly survive when enemy control the sky. informations from satellites are always hours dated. without basic informations, 22xxs even don't know where is enemy fleet, what's enemies' speed, direction. how could they come in unnoticed in different direction? whatever tactics is going to be done, we should clearly know both enemy's and our informations at the first. so the most important is the ability to get informations and share these informations with every unit immediately.

[DPRKPTboat]

Thanks for those great pics, New2U. I think they awnsered my question about the camoflage - they are all being painted. Someone should put those on the SDF article about this thing. And now there a fifth catamaran? I never heard about that. That should also be updated to the 2208 article.
About the camoflage; as MiG leader pinted out, it is the sme camo used by the PLA marines. i wonder if this thing is going to be operated by them. But as he also said, that camo fits well in shallow waters like the Taiwan strait, so its pretty clear what the marines and the catamaran are intended for. I repeat ny third question - who took these? I'm surprised anyuone could get that close to these things without being arrested, unless they are from a newspaper or something.

[DPRKPTboat]

Thanks for those great pics, New2U. I think they awnsered my question about the camoflage - they are all being painted. Someone should put those on the SDF article about this thing. And now theres a fifth catamaran? I never heard about that. That should also be updated to the 2208 article.
About the camoflage; as MiG leader pinted out, it is the sme camo used by the PLA marines. i wonder if this thing is going to be operated by them. But as he also said, that camo fits well in shallow waters like the Taiwan strait, so its pretty clear what the marines and the catamaran are intended for. I repeat ny third question - who took these? I'm surprised anyuone could get that close to these things without being arrested, unless they are from a newspaper or something.

[big toothbrush]

a guy on warsky forum said that he took these pics from window in his home.

[MIGleader]

I'll believe that. The PLAN has been widely publicizing images of the new FAC in testings. But they have yet to release any official information. They havnt even said the boat uses an ak-630,which is very evident to any viewer. Perhaps they want romanticize the boat in the eyes of the Chinese public as some kind of new, advanced super weapon.

[Gollevainen]

anybody's seen this before? any thought?
http://img2.ziling.com/uploadfile/2006-3/20063188511523166.jpg

I just couldnt sleep my nigths of before this was solved...
Orginnally I pasted wrong picture of wrong missile system, from wrong ship...

Here's Primauguet and looking it missiles (im afraid I cannot find any closer wiev) you clearly see that the launcher is the same as in the 'mystery' picture, just like Vincelee anticipated. My orginal 'proof' was from douple launcher, not quintable launcher....

http://www.netmarine.net/bat/fregates/primaug/photo01.jpg

[planeman]

anybody's seen this before? any thought?
http://img2.ziling.com/uploadfile/2006-3/20063188511523166.jpg
I am pretty sure that launcher isn't on a 2208 class FAC. There are handrails clearly visible along the side which confirm that we are seeing the exterior of the launcher, whereas the 2208's have the launchers covered for stealth reasons.

[planeman]

Ok, I’ve done some crude analysis to determine just how big the launchers are:
http://i2.tinypic.com/t06xz5.jpg
If the guy walking is a real shorty, then we could be looking at a missile length of 25 feet, then again if he is tall, it could be say 30 feet. I’ve plumbed for the middle with an estimated missile length of say 27 feet – but 30 feet (9.14m) is about the max.

Possible missiles:
YJ-62 = 6.1m = possible
SS-N-22 Sunburn (”Moskit”) = 9.38m = unlikely – extremely tight fit
YJ-8/82 = 6.4m = possible
YJ-7 = 2.5m = possible

Ok, that didn’t get us very far but I think it is wise to say that the launchers are slightly too short to accommodate the Sunburn.

My money is on the YJ-62.

[MIGleader]

Would you please measure the width and depth of these laucnhers aswell? Im hoping we can trim our list of missles down even firther.

[planeman]

Well, it looks to be 6ft tall and probably square, so you could fit a quad launcher of any missile that is less than say 2ft~2.5ft diameter with fins (folded).

The Moskit is almost certainly too big for that launcher although only just.

Another factor is blast venting on launch. There is a small hatch/pannel on the side of the launcher which may be a blast door, but i'd bet that it vents out the bottom of the boat between the hulls. That would mean that the launch tubes would have to be somewhat shorter than the 9m max, but then most anti-ship missiles are around the 6m mark plus a launch booster, so it's quite possible. If it does blast straight out the back, then it'll fry anyone standing on the rear deck, lol.
http://i2.tinypic.com/t71qww.jpg



Going back to the mystery tubes, I'm going in with VinceLee here, it's French made MM40 Exocet. Can't identify the exact platform but these missiles are used by Taiwan among others. Other users include France, Argentina, Greece, ~EDIT~, South Africa and Saudi Arabia.
http://i2.tinypic.com/t71w0z.jpg

If France has sold China MM40 then we would have heard about it.

[Gollevainen]

chhörm...Finland never used exocets, never did and never will...

[tphuang]

well, this is not exactly missiles for 2208, but this is news on type 22. I figured that we might as well make this the dedicated thread for type 22 FACs.

Don't worry about the Chinese part. It seems to be just your usual Chinese rant, but the more curious part is the location. It seems to be indicating a shipyard in Guangxi is starting to build type 22 (news, since previous type 22s have all been built in Shanghai, Qiuxin shipyard) Or maybe it's saying that type 22s are joining service there. Or maybe they are saying the Guangxi shipyard already built them? Not to clear for me. Anyhow, the reason I'm posting this is because type 22 seems to be in some mass production mode now. I'm not sure if Qiuxin is building anything other than type 22 for PLAN. But if it is, that would suggest this shift would free up Qiuxin to concentrate on larger designs. If not, then you are simply seeing the proliferation of the type 22 design. Either way, it's a good news to see that more shipyards in China capable of building military grade ships for PLAN.
http://mil.qianlong.com/4919/2006/04/12/2420@3113112.htm

据国防科工委网站报道，2006年3月27日至28日，国防科工委副秘书长陈根甫在广西国防科工办主任江新 成、航天科工集团公司总经理助理兼二院院长谢良贵、船舶工业集团公司副总工程师陈金海、航天科技集团公司计 划部副部长朱家正等陪同下，深入到广西的军工企业进行调研。
在船舶工业集团434厂，
陈根甫参观了在建产品生产能力建设项目，并出席了新产品下水仪式。陈根甫希望工厂继续再接再厉、按时间节点 保质保量完成后续的军品生产任务。
3月29日至30日，陈根甫在广东国防科工办主任温国辉、船舶工业集团公司发展计划部主任郭锡文、中船广州 管理局书记胡国良、常务副局长余宝山的陪同下，先后到文冲船厂、黄埔船厂、广船国际和龙穴造船基地进行调研 。

　　陈根甫一行在广东调研期间，深入到生产车间、船坞码头、技术中心、基地建设，认真听取了各企业有关工作 情况的汇报。陈根甫在分析了国防科技工业面临的形势和任务后强调指出，要全力以赴确保重点任务如期完工，重 点抓质量、安全、配套，提供优质、合格装备

http://images.qianlong.com/mmsource/images/2006/04/12/jstyj06041245.jpg
http://images.qianlong.com/mmsource/images/2006/04/12/jstyj06041246.jpg

after reading the title of the article
又一艘新艇在广西柳州西江造船厂下水(图)
it seems to indicate that this FAC is getting launched. So yeah, more type 22s than just the 4 in Shanghai.

[Haegun]

Stealthiness and powerful sensors work against eachother. Using the sensors would eliminate the stealth. Also, the radar on the 2208 is pretty low from the waterline, also reducing range.

[AssassinsMace]

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.

[swimmerXC]

I noticed this thread was missing (or too lazy to search) :o
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....

[tphuang]

I noticed this thread was missing (or too lazy to search) :o
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.

[swimmerXC]

49
http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/1143/4980106cjs7.jpg
50
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9066/5092606afl8.jpg

[planeman]

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?

[planeman]

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:
http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/7720/type022lenwq0.gif

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.

[crobato]

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?

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]

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 ?

[chicket9]

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.

[antiterror13]

does anyone know the price of C-803/YJ83, Harpoon (latest block), Exocet (latest) and SS-N-25 ?

I heard the price of latest Harpoon is $1M.... is it true ? .. seems very expensive to me

[crobato]

It makes sense to me if the missile is a member of the YJ-8X family but not the YJ-83 itself. Let me repeat this. For coastal use, an active radar guided missile like the YJ-83 would have problems. Ditto with all radar guided AshMs, including Harpoons and Exocets. There is a lot more clutter from the coasts, beach and shallow ocean floor than you do with the open sea. A missile can easily be drawn to the wrong target, like an islet. China's coastline is among the rockiest in the world, and would be as challenging to radar guided AshMs as they would in Norway's.

Your missile has to be pretty smart, literally using SAR or ISAR for target identification either by database inside the missile or sending the images back for verification on the launching ship. Which I think isn't very efficient. Better to use a different seeker principle, like infrared, infrared imaging or TV-optical. You send the images back to the launching ship for verification and target locking. That is why AshMs intended for more coastal use has a different seeker principle. Check missiles out like the Dolphin. Or China's own C-701---this missile shows that China is fully aware of such situation and has the means to cope with it.

I would think the missile on the Type 22 would be a combination of radar guided YJ-83s for open ocean targets, and something based on the YJ-83 but instead of a radar seeker, it uses an EO-TV seeker that would have better discrimination against targets near the coast, or even against land targets. The case of the C-802 in Lebanon shows a typical result what you can expect with radar guided antiship missiles having problems discriminating the right targets near the coast.

[planeman]

Interestring points Crobato. Worth noting that Norways latest super-SSM is IIR guided.

TV-optical seekers are very expensive -a simple webcam type camera is way too low definition, short sighted and subject to glare etc. And datafeeding the images to the launch platform requires a high-frequency connection, whereas radar datafeed is far lower volume (and thus lower frequency can work) - the higher the frequency the more tempting/likely it is to be jamed by the enemy. And unless you can rely on third party datalink connections, the data-links must be line of sight - not a problem for an aircraft but more of a problem warship trying to hide behind an island...

[crobato]

Coastal missiles need not sea skim. Obviously they may hit a rock or something. They have to fly up from an altitude so the the targets can be found and targeted, then dive to attack. Remember the target may be another ship hiding behind a rock. That also takes care of LOS with the datalink.

[adeptitus]

does anyone know the price of C-803/YJ83, Harpoon (latest block), Exocet (latest) and SS-N-25 ?

I heard the price of latest Harpoon is $1M.... is it true ? .. seems very expensive to me

For Harpoons, the US acquisition cost is about $500k per missile in 1997 dollars. For 2006 export (GM-84), the price is approx. $1.6 million each with launch container and support software/hardware.

The latest Exocet MM40 block 3 has ~180 km range. So far we haven't seen any export orders for those, so we'd have to wait on the unit price.

As for SS-N-25 pricing, India navy ordered 98 x 3M-24E's in 1992, of which 80 were delivered by 2000. You can prolly look up what India paid for those.

[ying1978]

:coffee:

http://img105.imagevenue.com/loc600/th_06134_022_122_600lo.jpg (http://img105.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=06134_022_122_600lo.jpg)

[tphuang]

new pictures of 022s from HD
http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/4357/022nov29xm9.jpg
http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/4672/022nov292gj3.jpg
notice different camos

[tphuang]

More Iran related than anything else, but I highlighted an important text. I didn't realize China exported type 22s already.

By Tony Capaccio
Nov. 29 (Bloomberg) -- Iran's 10-day war games this month
were aimed at intimidating U.S. allies in the region and
dissuading them from cooperating in a potential strike against
the Tehran government, American military officials and analysts
have concluded.
The Gulf of Oman exercises were the third this year and the
most provocative, the analysts said. Volleys of short-range
missiles suggested Iran could overwhelm missile defenses such as
those of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. New anti-ship missiles and
practice attacks on barges showed an ability to disrupt oil
traffic, and Iran's first firing in a war game of a new missile
showed a potential to strike Israel.
The games were ``designed to intimidate the smaller nations
in the region in a way that I haven't quite seen before,'' Army
General John Abizaid, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East,
said in a Nov. 15 interview.
Analysts say Iran's intent was to gain leverage in the
dispute over its nuclear program and to remind the world that, if
attacked, it is capable of a broad, sustained response that would
roil world oil markets, set back U.S. efforts to stabilize Iraq
and potentially drag the region into a wider war.
Michael Eisenstadt, an Iran expert with the Washington
Institute for Near East Policy, said Iran has often tried to use
war games ``to intimidate, but the context and the extent of the
missile firings'' is much different from past exercises.
The message to the region ``is don't even think once about
assisting in a preventive strike,'' Eisenstadt said.
Iran has defied international calls to suspend its nuclear
program, and the United Nations said the nation last month
doubled its capacity to produce enriched uranium. Iran says the
fuel is needed to generate electricity. The U.S. suspects the
program is a precursor to building nuclear weapons.

Wider War

Eisenstadt said the exercises, which ended Nov. 9,
reinforced a message Iran sent several months earlier through
Hezbollah, the radical Shiite Muslim group it supports in
Lebanon, in its war with Israel.
During the war, Hezbollah struck an Israeli ship with a
guided missile obtained from Iran and fired almost 4,000 Iranian-
supplied short-range missiles into Israel -- a demonstration of
Iran's firepower and ability to widen any war against it,
Eisenstadt said.
Retired Air Force Colonel Sam Gardiner, who has conducted
U.S. war games on Iran, said that if Iran were attacked,
Hezbollah would immediately attack Israel. ``That's almost a
certainty,'' he said.

`Don't Lose Iraq'

Kenneth Pollack, a Middle East senior fellow at the
Brookings Institution in Washington, said Iran and its surrogates
could take a toll on U.S. facilities in the Middle East and
seriously undermine efforts to secure and stabilize Iraq. ``We
don't want to lose Iraq in the course of taking down Iran's
nuclear program,'' Pollack said.
President Bush will travel to Amman, Jordan, for a closed
meeting tonight with Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to
propose ways to accelerate the transfer of security
responsibility to the Iraqis.
Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr pledged this year that he'd
turn his militia on U.S. forces in Iraq if Iran, which also has a
Shiite Muslim majority, is attacked.
Iran's armed forces include 398,000 regular troops, about
120,000 of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps created under
the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who founded the Islamic
republic in 1979, and about 2 million reserves.

`Come After Us'

Most of the army is arrayed along the Iraq border and is
capable of sustained guerrilla warfare. Abizaid, 55, said these
ground forces have been practicing guerrilla tactics on the
assumption the U.S. would invade.
``We shouldn't ever underestimate Iranian military power,''
Abizaid told reporters in Washington in September. Iran has ``the
most powerful military force in the region except for the United
States, but the mismatch between our military power and their
power is very, very substantial.''
Pollack said that, while Iran's military lacks modern
communications, country-wide integrated air defenses and modern
aircraft, it would use what it has in unconventional ways that
could prove effective in the short run. ``They are going to come
after us in the Persian Gulf,'' he said.
In the war games, analysts said, Iran fired at least three
different anti-ship missiles near the 33-mile Strait of Hormuz,
through which an estimated 25 percent of the world's oil traffic
flows.
The U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence estimates that the
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which conducted the war games,
has as many as 1,000 boats up to 60 feet long with long-range
torpedoes and anti-ship cruise missiles, as well as five high-
speed Chinese catamarans armed with long-range missiles.

Tactics

U.S. Central Command officials estimate Iran may have up to
5,000 naval mines deployable by planes, boats and submarines.
``An attack could include over 100 boats in coordinated
groups of 20 to 30 approaching simultaneously from multiple
axes,'' the Office of Naval Intelligence said in an assessment
before the war games.
Iran used such tactics in late 1987 and early 1988 against
U.S. ships and U.S.-flagged tankers in the Persian Gulf after the
President Ronald Reagan's administration sided with Iraq in its
war with the Islamic republic.
Since then, Iran has developed an extensive network of bases
and communications on the small islands in the Strait.

Russian Weapons

In addition, Iran last week started taking delivery of 30
Russian-made, short-range air-defense missile systems that it
purchased in December 2005, according to the Russian news service
Interfax. The U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency said these systems
would ``significantly enhance'' Iran's ability to prevent U.S.
planes from protecting ships in the Persian Gulf.
The war games -- coupled with Iran's refusal to halt its
nuclear program and its president's insistent calls for Israel's
destruction -- prompted Israel's Deputy Defense Minister Efraim
Sneh to say Iran must be stopped. Preemptive military action
should be a last resort, ``but even the last resort is sometimes
the only resort,'' he told reporters in Jerusalem.

Shahab-3

Israel's reaction was in part prompted by the firing of the
Shahab-3, Iran's new medium-range missile. It has an estimated
range of 800 miles (1,300 kilometers), enough to hit Tel Aviv,
said the Office of Naval Intelligence. The missile is believed to
carry a new cluster munition warhead that might be a threat to
military formations, bases and civilians.
The war games were ``not merely exercises to train military
personnel,'' said Yiftah S. Shapir, a military analyst with the
Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies in Tel Aviv. ``They were
carefully geared for their political purpose.''

[AssassinsMace]

Interesting if true, but the media tends to always get that type of information wrong. Just like the other week some news source said China's next military exercises with Russia was going to include China's newest fighter, the FC-1. More likely it's J-10s not FC-1s.

[SteelBird]

The 022s are in their testing stage and PLAN doesnt even operate it yet (if i'm not wrong). How can they export it? Reports wrong?

[planeman]

The U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence estimates that the
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which conducted the war games,
has as many as 1,000 boats up to 60 feet long with long-range
torpedoes and anti-ship cruise missiles, as well as five high-
speed Chinese catamarans armed with long-range missiles.

No, that quote is close to right as Iran does employ Chinese made high speed catmarans, though the number is probably closer to 10 than 5 and they are armed with short range missiles, probably C-702s. BUT, they aren't Type-022s, they are "China Cat" and at least one is not fitted for missiles at all. :coffee:

[tphuang]

No, that quote is close to right as Iran does employ Chinese made high speed catmarans, though the number is probably closer to 10 than 5 and they are armed with short range missiles, probably C-702s. BUT, they aren't Type-022s, they are "China Cat" and at least one is not fitted for missiles at all. :coffee:

i was thinking about that, but then didn't think they qualify the long range missile statement.

[SteelBird]

No, that quote is close to right as Iran does employ Chinese made high speed catmarans, though the number is probably closer to 10 than 5 and they are armed with short range missiles, probably C-702s. BUT, they aren't Type-022s, they are "China Cat" and at least one is not fitted for missiles at all. :coffee:

That makes sense if it's not the type 022s. Would you please provide some links about the "China Cat" ?

[crobato]

I just had a thought that the Type 22 FAC can be modified to fit MLRS into those missile tunnels. This can be useful for bombardment of onshore defenses.

[ying1978]

notice the window edge:

http://img11.imagevenue.com/loc408/th_52428_10_422_e42fd49684deb5f_122_408lo.jpg (http://img11.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=52428_10_422_e42fd49684deb5f_122_408 lo.jpg)

http://img141.imagevenue.com/loc575/th_52433_10_422_d70ea712fda6634_122_575lo.jpg (http://img141.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=52433_10_422_d70ea712fda6634_122_575 lo.jpg)

[planeman]

notice the window edge:

http://img11.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=52428_10_422_e42fd49684deb5f_122_408 lo.jpgYes, some of us had already caught on to the radar absorbing structures around the windows but it's great to see it from the inside. These deatails would not be cost-efficient if the rest of the boat's stealth wasn't to a VERY high degree hence my assessment that the Type-022 is at the stealthy end of stealth warships. :coffee: