Thursday, February 05, 2015

China selling Argentina "export" Type 056 Corvette.


via MercoPress
Argentine reports indicate the agreement to be signed in Beijing could cover co-production in Argentina of the Norinco VN1 wheeled armored personnel carrier (APC) and co-operation in building a new ice-breaker, naval tugboats, mobile hospitals, and new warships for the Argentine Navy.
In late 2014 the Argentine government reportedly accepted a Chinese offer to meet its long-standing requirement for a new class of offshore patrol vessel. Over the last decade Argentina has considered purchasing designs from Brazil, Germany, and Spain, but China has reportedly succeeded in selling a more capable warship: a version of the China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation's (CSIC) P18 export corvette.
Somewhat controversially, this vessel will be known as the Malvinas class, after the Argentine name for the Falkland Islands. Two P18N corvettes were sold to Nigeria in 2012 for 42 million dollars each. The 'Malvinas class' version is in the range of 50 million dollars.
The operative words here are "Chinese offer".

The interaction between China and Argentina bears watching...especially if you're British and have an interest in military affairs.

22 comments :

  1. Doesn't really change anything, nice but not disruptive.
    Its probably a thoroughly decent ship, but, it outguns the Falklands class patrol ship, which isn't a new thing, its no match for the significantly bigger T23 or T45 and has no capability against the astutes.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Truth be told this might allow the Argentinian Navy to actually do some of those policing tasks generally expected of Navies in this day and age. Besides if it becomes a problem...cough Belgrano cough....too soon?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dont see a single reason why Brits should even break a sweat - their island are protected and unless Argentina (country constantly balancing on the edge of default) gets Chinese J-31, new and potent missiles and actually manages to up the combat readiness and expertise, these ships pose no threat.

    If however they do even dare to touch it, I hope Brits bang on it real hard this time - dont pussy around, sink their entire naval fleet, bomb their ports if need and destroy them militiarily as much as possible.
    Force them to go as neutral.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. With their token fleet I doubt it, Falklands time navy was 3 to 4 times bigger and stronger than it is today and they still had a hard time. Like most latin american militaries, Argentine wastes its money on social programs and corruption, but if it started an actual rearment program with china as a backer, it could reclaim the falklands in no time. Royal navy its shipless (not only my opinion but of several british organizations like save the royal navy or the think tank RUSI) it has to few frigates, its destroyers are low ammo, high tech floating AA batteries (the last time I checked they hadnt installed any cruise missiles on them) they have no carriers and its being said their Astute Subs are ridden with problems. Tell me then how are they going to destroy their ports and their military as much as possible, only if the US decides to step in.

      Delete
    2. "Tell me then how are they going to destroy their ports and their military"
      With the 64 brand-new Block IV Tomahawks (plus any they have left from previous buys) the RN has maybe?
      Along with the 4 Trafalgar subs to fire them even if the 2 Astute do have bugs

      Delete
    3. The RN also has an irrational loathing of smaller and/or 'lower technology' ships which contributes towards their shortfall of hulls, when in reality there are some very good examples of smaller or 'lower tech' ships like the absalon class support ship, or CMNs C-sword 90, or the Skjold-class patrol boats, even those chinese frigates are very nice for the money.

      And mike, 64 tomahawks is insufficent to cripple a country with an integrated air-defence system, in such a case it is likely that the majority of missiles would be intercepted. It is also unaceptable to require the presence of your entire navy to protect one island.

      Delete
    4. I don't think its enough to cripple the whole of Argentina - I do think it should be enough to stop them being bloody stupid, (integrated air-defence have they got one? - how about firing them over Chile first? )

      When they have an air force with modern air superiority fighters,enough refuelling for them and lift capacity to actually put boots on the Falklands - then I'll worry

      Delete
    5. @no
      The 13 Type 23s are very capable platforms, especially now they will be rearmed with 48 Sea Ceptor canisters, the Type 26s will be even more formidable, it's confirmed they will have 24 Mk 41 strike length cells and 48 Sea Ceptor, the Type 45s are obviously one of the most advanced and capable AAW platforms in any fleet, they are light on missiles because the Aster 15 can't be quad-packed, however the MoD have also confirmed that Sea Ceptor (which can be quad-packed) will "compliment" the Aster missiles on the T45s. All the major teething problems with the Astutes have been resolved, for example the first three boats have all achived the minimum speed requirement, which was one of the last major hurdles. Astute and Ambush are in service, and Artful will follow in the next few months, four more A - boats are in build to replace the last four Trafalgars. The Astutes also have nearly twice the weapons stowage capacity of the Trafalgars eg 38 TLAMs and Spearfish heavyweight torpedoes. QE is being fitted out, and PoW is already half assembled at No 1 dock in Rosyth. The UK will be back in the carrier business with in five years.
      The first UK F-35B squadron 617 Dambusters will stand up at RAF Marham in 2018, along with an OCU unit with five aircraft, the second UK F-35 squadron will be 809 NAS the "Immortals", and a third RAF or FAA squadron will follow. A lot of the stories in the tabloids that people quote as if they were fact, are utter nonsense.

      Delete
  4. China will help economically troubled countries and made them their market for chinese products and military... they did this all over the world. they need new markets to absorb their products..

    ReplyDelete
  5. Strange how no one is really commenting about the ship itself. Regarding the ship it doesn't look very impressive, or technologically sophisticated but I am very much in favour of this sort of configuration for smaller ships, the 76mm cannon at the front could theoretically provide a CiWS capability to supplement the rear CiWS station and if upgraded with a sino-variant of the vulcano munition could become a very versatile weapon, and it poses both Asuw and ASW capabilities.

    It is very similar in terms of weapon systems (even if the chines poses inferrior variants of the same class of weapons) to the CMN C-Sword 90 or the Victory class corvettes. Interestingly through the use of land and sea-based drones and small SAM systems like CAMM such corvettes could approach the capabilities of some of the largest and most expensive frigates, whilst costing significantly less.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. China already knows Argentina is an economic "basket case" of America. A semi-low/high tech corvette is a test to everyone (including Argentina). China would like to know how well can Argentina can maintain and operate this ship before anything more complicated can be considered.

      UK should be worried. But it's not because of a tiny corvette. Think of what can happen if China starts giving Argentina more sophisticated ships than this.

      Delete
    2. well the Brit military blogs that I follow are admittedly not into breaking news but i haven't seen any comment on this. one is talking about bridges and the other two nothing. thats disturbing but it might be more a style thing than not paying attention. but to your point. you could be spot on or you could see something more sinister. this could be an act to further divide the US from one of its allies. who knows but it bears watching.

      Delete
    3. Some of the Argentinian military already knows that aside from funding issue within UK, the main "weakness" to UK's reaction to another Falklands invasion is time.

      How many days did it take UK to send their fleet from UK to the vicinity of the Falklands?

      I've responded to an earlier thread about the same topic: For some reasons, China "sells" Argentina Type 52A (and/or 52B)? Give Argentina the time of 18 months to train and familiarize themselves of the systems And this is just surface ships. What if China sells one or two subs?

      Argentina doesn't need to send a division of soldiers to the Falklands. Send a few Btn and then position the ships & subs north or north east of the Falklands to the possible "alley". UK cannot risk losing Harriers and/or F35 (don't want to debate about the F35).

      Argentina "wins" if it can damage the carrier or sink/damage/cripple a third of the escorts or two of the troop-laden transports.

      Again, the above scenario hinges entirely on the Argentinians able to maintain, support and operate the equipment.

      What do you think?

      Delete
    4. I think they need aircover for ISR to detect British Fleet movements, and provide targeting soloutions for the ASMs, as a minimum. If they started getting chinese AWACs and patrol planes, as well as long-range cruise missiles we would know the UK is in big trouble.

      Regarding those ships, they are I believe unsophisticated for two reasons:
      1.) The type of ship, they are a cheap corvete sized ship, a ship which often doesn't have very sophisticated sensors because of size and cost constraints, as well as the fact that the weaponry required to fully utilize such sensors is not equipped.
      2.) Chinese weapon systems are not as advanced, that cannon does not compete with oto melara 76mm and vulcano munition, nor that CIWS with RIM116 or CAMM. And the torpedoes are probably not as good either.

      Nethertheless still I believe sufficent to cause great deal of trouble if required!

      Delete
    5. Mark
      If Argentina tried to block the royal navy in the deep Atlantic it would be a slaughter.

      A corvette with a bow sonar and a couple of light torpedo tubes is not a threat the a nuclear submarine in the deep. Submarines get battleship names for a reason.

      Either you have a serious asw capability, either your own SSNs, or a fleet of specialist sub hunters, you run or you die.

      It tried that last time, its two best asw escorts didn't even realise belgrano was gone! Never mind spot the submarine in time to attack it.

      Jacobite
      These could cause trouble, the onsite patrol vessel with its pop gun could be harassed no end, but, if it simply encourages the UK to deploy a few more ships? Or Max out the airbase? To what end?
      What if it REALLY backfires and the UK starts its own provocation campaign.
      You're the head of the Argentine air force, you have a fleet of barely functional Skyhawks.
      Your radar spots 16 typhoons loaded for bear coming right at you. They cross the 12nm border in to your airspace, circle the government buildings a few times, then fly home.

      What are you going to do? Try and shoot them down? Suicide
      Try and escort them? Far far faster than you.

      A lot of these strategies only work if England is really really stupid, which to be fair we frequently are, but if we pick that day to be sneaky....

      Delete
    6. Right now the Argentinians can do jackshit about the Falklands, their economy is a ruin and its fleet and air force it’s full of undermanned junk. But still....

      I have read how the Type 45 are getting a lot of upgrades and if they continue everything is going to be all right, the classic "we are still a world power mentality" but in my opinion it misses the point. Even if the UK ships get all those upgrades (and that’s a big IF we know how bureaucracies work) the RN would still need more ships to properly conduct expeditionary warfare on its own.

      Your own staff has admitted the fact the RN is cut to the bone, the Lord West of Spithead claimed you can only permanently deploy six ships "If something crops up we will be in a bit of a pickle." The same line of thought is shared by your Think Tank RUSI.

      So answer me this if you were so kind to do so:

      - How are you going to defend the islands if the Argentinians start rearming themselves (that’s a bigger IF) with Chinese diesel subs, ships, planes and all the kit? With only six ships? What if one or two get sunk? It’s not improbable since the last time you were there, you lost twice as much.
      - What if they decide to attack your shipping lanes, your country is dependent on the sea for survival. Some Argentinean subs operating near the coast of Brazil and in the Atlantic are going to severely hamper your economy. The range of the subs is limited but they are going to find friendly port in most Latin American countries. Unless you increase your number of hulls by a lot, according to your own think tank and your Lord you can’t conduct warfare and protect your shipments.

      Which take me to my last point, During the Falklands war you had thrice the ships in your navy, hell you had more ships on the islands that the ones you have operational today; Also the Argentinians didn’t expected war, their decision was politically motivated and the junta truly believed that the UK would not respond. Also I have to mention the fact that most of the Argentinian professional land forces were in the Chilean border at the time, you fought against barely trained conscripts and you still had a rough time.
      Now imagine the same scenario with less ships, operational problems like the ones you had in Libya; running out of ammo, ups.. And a better equipped, not conscripted Argentinean army, which is something that could pretty well be if they put their heads to work.

      At last, I don’t think the Che’s are going to do anything, their country is a ruin and they don’t have the money to invest in their military. Also don’t take this as an anti-British rant, since the navy of my country is in the same sorry state, likely worst. But we must face reality, our armed forces are just home defense forces and US auxiliaries. Conducting expeditionary attacks on our own is difficult, Libya showed us why.

      Delete
    7. If Argentina started sinking merchant ships we would nuke B.A....

      But in the more probable 'what if they rearm', well we would too. The idea that Argentina can buy and absorb a new air force and fleet quicker than the UK can dig in is baffling.
      Redendant runways, armour, area air defences.

      Delete
    8. @no

      Lord West is obviously a strong supporter of the RN, and is always making the case for a larger RN, however the point about six frigates is slightly misleading, as it assumes that all of the other T23s and T45s, excluding those in refit, would be tired down on standing tasks, for example: Caribbean/North Atlantic patrol, two on the Gulf patrol task, the Fleet Ready Escort, Towed Array Sonar escort, plus various training exercises, obviously in a major crisis ships would be withdrawn from these tasks as they were in '82. That is the advantage the RN has over the Marine National, the RN still has 19 high-end escorts, where as France only has a dozen, the rest being light frigates or corvettes, that could not defend themselves in a high threat environment. And of course a T45 is a quantom leap in capability over a Type 42, the UK Defence Select Committee said that five Type 42s would be needed to give a task force the same level of protection as one Type 45 armed with Sea Viper.
      A wartime deployment of a QEC CBG would include two Type 45s and four Type 23/26s, but the maximum effort would probably be four of six Type 45s (three were deployed last Summer) and
      7-8 of 13 Type 23s.
      The story about the RAF running out of munitions during Op Ellamy (Libyan intervention) is more tabloid nonsense, they just make shit up on a slow news day.

      The Falklands can be reinforced with in 48-72 hours with a full squadron of Typhoons and a spearhead infantry battalion, and with in a week a full brigade can be airlifted down there by
      C-17s, C-130s & A400Ms supported by the new A330 Voyagers (more of which are entering service). RAF Mount Pleasant is the game changer for Falklands defence, it has hardened hangars, Rapier SAM battery, air and surface wave radars, and space for a full air wing. It's defences are being strengthened as well, the Rapier battery will be replaced by the much more capable CAMM (L), and a new air defence system has been ordered by the MoD.
      If the Argentine armed forces became more capable, then the UK would tailor the forces on the
      Falklands accordingly. But the Argentine military has pretty much been stuck in a time warp since '82, so they are not going to become a significant threat anytime soon. Just from a naval perspective, compared to '82, they have no carrier, no amphibs, the four MEKO 360 frigates and 9 MEKO 140 class corvettes suffer from lack of maintenance, lack of spare parts, lack of training, and are completely unarmed due to all their munitions having expired, and the three SSKs rarely put to sea. The only operational aircraft the Argentine Air Force has is 26 A-4AR Fightinghawks, and obviously Argentine pilots would have to be suicidal to go up against even a flight of Typhoons, if a full squadron were deployed (and another A330) they could fly over Buenos Aires at will, do a a flypast over Kirchner's Presidental "palace". Hell they could even send the Red Arrows trailing red, white and blue smoke, for all the Argentines could do about it.

      Delete
    9. Edit -

      The ground-based air defence system on the Falklands will be replaced with a new
      BMC4I (Battle Management, Command, Control, Communications, Computers & Intelligence) system, and a new missile (CAMM L) and radar.

      Delete
    10. Could you tailor your budget to an increasing argentine threat? I mean you could sure,your MOD and military staff is going to argue about it, but its politically viable? you know how burdensome some european politicians can be, especially leftist ones and their welfare supporters. Rearment could go noticed but not cared about, Morocco has been rearming like crazy and my country hasnt done shit, we have a less violent recent history with them, but still, you know what I mean.

      But your point is pretty valid, right know the argentinians cant do nothing but scream and cry. Their country is in the crapper, and like all latin american armies (with the exception of chile) moral is low due to extreme corruption.

      Delete
    11. @no

      It would take a hell of a lot of investment in the Argentine armed forces before the UK needed to ramp up defence spending. The UK defence budget is not exactly small now at around $60 billion,
      it's more a question of how it's divided up. By contrast the Argentine Gov are at the level of possibly trading beef and Soya beans for a dozen Russian Su-24s, that would be of limited use anyway. Of course the Argies could buy Chinese aircraft, but even then the UKAF are already geared towards force projection, that is their core business, so the kit is already there. It would just be a question of deploying it and reinforcing the Falkland's garrison.

      If needs be the RAF can deploy a Expeditionary Air Wing of around 30 Typhoons and Tornado GR4s, supported by A330 Vogagers, E-3D Sentry, Sentinel R1s (ISTAR) & Air Seeker Sig intel aircarft, the Royal Navy can deploy the Response Force Task Group which would include the Commado carrier HMS Ocean, 1-2 LPDs, 2-3 LSDs (with 3 Commando Brigade embarked), 2 Type 45s, 3-4 Type 23s, 2 TLAM capable SSNs, an aviation support ship/auxiliary helo carrier, 2 mine-hunters/patrol ships, plus RFA tankers, Replenishment and support vessels. (The RFTG will of course include a QEC carrier in the future as well). As i mentioned previously an Army brigade can be deployed to the Falklands within a week by C-17, C-130s & the new A400Ms that are entering service. Also worth adding that the British Army can still deploy a division sized force of around 30,000 personnel overseas for a one off major operation.

      The above would be in response to a major crisis, but a modest increase to the garrison on the Falklands would not be that expensive, it's already happening to some degree, with the new air defence system on order, and the number of troops deployed seems to have increased by around 300. Beyond that if the Argentines did significantly increase defence spending (which they will not be able to do anytime soon), then the Typhoon flight could be increased to 8 aircraft or a full squadron, a full battalion of infantry could be based at MPA, and a second Guardship (inaddition to HMS Clyde) could be based at Mare Harbour, perhaps armed with Sea Ceptor. There are three new Batch two River class covettes/OPVs under construction at Rosyth, and it is expected that one or more will be forward deployed, perhaps in the Caribbean, Gib or Falkands.
      There is always a T23 or T45 on patrol in the South Atlantic as well, plus an Ice patrol ship and RFA auxiliary.
      A larger military presence on the islands would be more expensive, but it would be off set partly by Falklands oil revenue, as the Falkland's Gov have said they will be able to contribute more econimically to their own defence

      ,

      Delete
  6. Are they fitting it with a glass bottom, so they can do a fleet review?

    Dave

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.