Naval Blockade of Pakistan

[sigatoka]

During the Kargil conflict; India using its superior naval capabilities was able to severly restrict Pakistan's ability to import Petroleum.

This was because Pak. was over reliant on Karachi which is close to India. The development of Gwadar with Chinese help has reduced pressure on the Pak. navy to prevent blockade of Karachi. Even if
India were to take great risks to blockade Karachi, it would gain very little unless it could simultaneously blockade Gwadar as well. This whie possible is improbable due to distance between Gwadar and India and hungry mirages with excocet missiles ready to swoop down on Indian vessels as they cross Pak. waters.

I would argue that Pak. needs to do 2 moe things to furher reduce the effectivness of india's blockade threat. Neither strategy calls for more vessels or planes.

Firstly Pak. must create a strategic petroleum reserve modelled on the U.S. reserves. The reserves must hold enough petroleum to meet the needs of Pak. armed forces for at least two weeks. While setting up the reserves would be expensive, once set up the only cost would be forgone interst that the govt. could have earned. The situation would be like keeping money in a non-interest bank. The benefit would be the fact that the effectivness of blockade would be reduced.


Secodly Pak. must improve the highway connecting to Iran and speeding up the time it takes border officials to check and approve goods in transit. By improving land trade with Iran, naval blockade would be less effective because land trade would pick up the slack.

While the most direct action to reduce India's naval threat would be to purchase vessels and planes, it is not always the most cost effective option. As Gwadar port has shown and I am confident a strategic petroleum reserve and better highway with Iran will show that indirect action can be more cost effective and should be considered.

 

[Sharjeel]

you are right about the strategic reserve. but i would rather have a strategic buffer which would result in some mony aswell...thus it would sort of pay for itself and also its expansion but i am not sure if this is already on drawing board or already made but i heard something about this being built in gwader.. in regards to the road to Iran Pakistan is trying its best to improve the capacity of all roads which are vital for trade.

Indian Navy blockade is even more dificult in light of the recent cruise missile acquisition. which at the moment has a rang of 500km but in future they plan to increase it to 1000km (built by PAK...Babur)

 

[miroslav]

Originally posted by Yahya@Dec 1 2005, 07:01 PM
which at the moment has a rang of 500km but in future they plan to increase it to 1000km (built by PAK...Babur)

[post=4159]Quoted post[/post]​

You want me to Prove that Babur is made with Chinese Help??? Atleast 50% of it's technical componants.

Indian Navy blockade is even more dificult in light of the recent cruise missile acquisition.

Why don't you think Barrak atleast once????

India is developing it further with Israeli help.

Gwadar is said to be used for the commercial use and not for military use. Not to forget that considering Pakistan's good relationship with the gulf countries PAK will keep getting the oil via Gwadar.

But the heart of PN is Karachi and in war PN has to bring it's major ships/subs and assets more near to Karachi to fight against the IN otherwise instead of going to Gwadar to hunt the PN; the IN will keep striking in Karachi port and the city.

This whie possible is improbable due to distance between Gwadar and India and hungry mirages with excocet missiles ready to swoop down on Indian vessels as they cross Pak. waters.

First give link that PN/PAF has procured air launched exocets.

Secondly while considering hungry mirages also consider the more blood thirsty MiG-29K of IN (by 2007) and recntly upgraded Harriers by Israeli avionics and BVR Derby AA missiles.

Secodly Pak. must improve the highway connecting to Iran and speeding up the time it takes border officials to check and approve goods in transit. By improving land trade with Iran, naval blockade would be less effective because land trade would pick up the slack.

Indo-Iran has an agreement that IN can use it's waters and ports anytime. Not to forget this fact as well.

Miro

 

[ISI2003]

this very question came up during a us military exercise known as milliumum challenge

in this exercise american ships (much more powerful than india's ships)

try to blockade a hypothtical nation (of the military capability of israel)

the hypothetical nationwas the red team

the gernal of red team knew he would have to face an amercian fleet and loaded small ships (patrol boats) with antiship cruise missiles, while loading other small boats with explosives

he sent the explosives laden ships to do suicide missions, the anti-ship cruise missiles ships got close enoug and launched a barrage of alot of missiles (in the tens, probably 20-30; so probably 10 ships to do this)

by doing this he sunk 14 ships!!!

this is a case en point, if pakistan can acquire the stealthy chinese patrol craft (at least 10), load it with advanced anti-ship missiles, and use them to launch against an indian blockade force, it will decemate india's ability to attack pakistan

and these 10 ships should only cost $1 billion at most, but provide the navy with the ability to launch stealthjy large scale barragfes against an idnian fleet trying to blocakde or attack pakistan

 

[miroslav]

Originally posted by ISI2003@Dec 1 2005, 09:34 PM
this very question came up during a us military exercise known as milliumum challenge

in this exercise american ships (much more powerful than india's ships)

try to blockade a hypothtical nation (of the military capability of israel)

the hypothetical nationwas the red team

the gernal of red team knew he would have to face an amercian fleet and loaded small ships (patrol boats) with antiship cruise missiles, while loading other small boats with explosives

he sent the explosives laden ships to do suicide missions, the anti-ship cruise missiles ships got close enoug and launched a barrage of alot of missiles (in the tens, probably 20-30; so probably 10 ships to do this)

by doing this he sunk 14 ships!!!

this is a case en point, if pakistan can acquire the stealthy chinese patrol craft (at least 10), load it with advanced anti-ship missiles, and use them to launch against an indian blockade force, it will decemate india's ability to attack pakistan

and these 10 ships should only cost $1 billion at most, but provide the navy with the ability to launch stealthjy large scale barragfes against an idnian fleet trying to blocakde or attack pakistan

[post=4168]Quoted post[/post]​

Are you aware of the whole Indian and Pakistani Naval fleets?????

Especially the Indian Stealth Arsenal???

Thanks,

Miro

 

[EagleEyes]

Its about blocking the port of Karachi. I dont think it will be possible when PN will be leaded by 4~ Agosta-Bs plus 2-3 More coming in the future, and dont forget the ability to build more Agosta's by the time India gets its scorpenes Pakistan will be building more of its Agosta's.

I think it will be very interesting war, when naval version of Babur will be developed, 11 P-3C Orions capable of firing cruise missiles. Plus F-22ps with Perry Class, and others. (No its not one of those dreams, it is possible.)

Plus: ISI not a bad idea, we can strengthen more of our patrol & maritime fleet. Below is some information regarding small boats, and our ability to make them indegniously.

Regards,
Ahsan F.

Sabqat (Huangfeng/Osa-I) class missile boats
TITLE : HUANGFEN CLASS (FAST ATTACK CRAFT - MISSILE) (PCFG)
ACTIVE : 4
HULLS :

AZMAT P 1025 DEHSHAT 1026 HIMMAT P 1027 QUWWAT P 1028

DISPLACEMENT, tons : 171 standard; 205 full load
DIMENSIONS, ft (m) : 126.6 x 24.9 x 8.9 (38.6 x 7.6 x 2.7)
MAIN MACHINERY : 3 Type 42-160 diesels; 12,000 hp(m) (8.8 MW) sustained; 3 shafts
SPEED, knots : 35.
RANGE, miles : 800 at 30 kt
COMPLEMENT : 28
MISSILES : SSM: 4 HY-2; active radar or IR homing to 80 km (43.2 n miles) at 0.9 Mach; warhead 513 kg.
GUNS : 4 Norinco 25 mm/80 (2 twin); 270 rds/min to 3 km (1.6 n miles); weight of shell 0.34 kg.
RADARS : Surface search/target indication: Square Tie; I-band.
COMMENT : Transferred from China April 1984. Chinese version of the Soviet `Osa II' class.

DISP.STANDARD (tonnes) :173.0
DISP.FULL LOAD (tonnes) :208.0
LENGTH (m) : 38.60
BEAM (m) : 7.6
DRAUGHT (m) :2.7
SPEED (knots) : 35.0
RANGE (nm) : 800.0

JALALAT 
Written by http://www.pakistaniforces.com   
Monday, 17 October 2005 

JALALAT (HEGU) CLASS (FAST ATTACK CRAFT - MISSILE (PCFG)
ACTIVE : 4
HULLS :
HAIBAT P 1021 JALALAT P 1022 JURAT P 1023 SHUJAAT P 1024
DISPLACEMENT, tons : 68 standard; 79.2 full load
DIMENSIONS, ft (m) : 88.6 x 20.7 x 4.3 (27 x 6.3 x 1.3)
MAIN MACHINERY : 4 Type L-12V-180 diesels; 4,800 hp(m) (3.53 MW); 4 shafts
SPEED, knots : 37.5.
RANGE, miles : 400 at 30 kt
COMPLEMENT : 17 (2 officers)
MISSILES : SSM: 2 SY 1; active radar or IR homing to 45 km (24.3 n miles) at 0.9 Mach; warhead 513 kg.
GUNS : 2 Norinco 25 mm/80 (twin); 270 rds/min to 3 km (1.6 n miles); weight of shell 0.34 kg.
RADARS : Surface search: Square Tie; I-band.

COMMENT : Two transferred in May and two in October 1981. Steel hull version of `Komar' class.

DISP.STANDARD (tonnes) :69.0
DISP.FULL LOAD (tonnes) :80.4
LENGTH (m) : 27.00
BEAM (m) : 6.3
DRAUGHT (m) :1.3
SPEED (knots) : 37.5
RANGE (nm) : 400.0

(Hoku) class inshore missile boats

DISPLACEMENT, tons : 68 standard; 79.2 full load
DIMENSIONS, ft (m) : 88.6 x 20.7 x 4.3 (27 x 6.3 x 1.3) (28.6 m - `Hema' class)
MAIN MACHINERY : 4 Type L-12V-180 diesels; 4,800 hp(m) (3.53 MW); 4 shafts
SPEED, knots : 37.5.
RANGE, miles : 400 at 30 kt
COMPLEMENT : 17 (2 officers)

MISSILES : SSM: 2 SY-1 (CSS-N-1 Scrubbrush); inertial cruise; active radar homing to 45 km (24.3 n miles) at 0.9 Mach; warhead 513 kg.
GUNS : 2 USSR 25 mm/60 (twin) (4 (2 twin) in `Hema' class); 85° elevation; 270 rds/min to 3 km (1.6 n miles) anti-aircraft; weight of shell 0.34 kg.
RADARS : Surface search: Square Tie; I-band; range 73 km (40 n miles) or limits of radar horizon.
IFF: High pole A.

PROGRAMME : The Komars delivered from the USSR in the 1960s have been deleted. They were followed by a building programme of 10 a year (probably now stopped) of the `Hegu' class, a Chinese variant of the Komar with a steel hull instead of wooden. Pennant numbers; 1100 and 3100 series as some of the `Huangfen' class.
MODERNISATION : Plans to replace the missiles with C-801 have been shelved although a few may be fitted.
STRUCTURE : The chief external difference is the siting of the launchers clear of the bridge and further inboard, eliminating sponsons and use of pole instead of lattice mast. A hydrofoil variant, the `Hema' class, has a semi-submerged foil forward. The extra 6 ft length allows for the mounting of a second twin 25 mm abaft the missile launchers.
OPERATIONAL : At least 25 are in reserve and overall numbers are declining. Half are based in the North Sea Fleet, remainder split between East and South.
SALES : Four to Pakistan, 1981; four to Bangladesh, February 1983 and one more in 1992; six to Egypt, 1984.

DISP.STANDARD (tonnes) :69.0
DISP.FULL LOAD (tonnes) :80.4
LENGTH (m) : 27.00
BEAM (m) : 6.3
DRAUGHT (m) :1.3
SPEED (knots) : 37.5
RANGE (nm) : 400.0

SHANGHAI II CLASS (FAST ATTACK CRAFT - GUN) (PCF)

ACTIVE : 2
HULLS :

PISHIN P 145 BAHAWALPUR P 149

DISPLACEMENT, tons : 113 standard; 131 full load
DIMENSIONS, ft (m) : 127.3 x 17.7 x 5.6 (38.8 x 5.4 x 1.7)
MAIN MACHINERY : 2 Type L12-180 diesels; 2,400 hp(m) (1.76 MW) (forward); 2 Type 12-D-6 diesels; 1,820 hp(m) (1.34 MW) (aft); 4 shafts
SPEED, knots : 30.
RANGE, miles : 700 at 16.5 kt
COMPLEMENT : 34
GUNS : 4 - 37 mm/63 (2 twin). 4 - 25 mm/80 (2 twin).
DEPTH CHARGES : 2 projectors; 8 weapons.
MINES : Fitted with mine rails for approx 10 mines.
RADARS : Surface search: Skin Head; I-band.

COMMENT : Acquired from China between 1972 and 1976. Four were transferred to the Maritime Security Agency, and six others have been used for spares to keep both these and two of the MSA craft operational.

DISP.STANDARD (tonnes) :114.0
DISP.FULL LOAD (tonnes) :133.0
LENGTH (m) : 38.80
BEAM (m) : 5.4
DRAUGHT (m) :1.7
SPEED (knots) : 30.0
RANGE (nm) : 700.0

TOWN CLASS (LARGE PATROL CRAFT) (PC)

ACTIVE : 1
HULLS :

RAJSHAHI P 140

DISPLACEMENT, tons : 115 standard; 143 full load
DIMENSIONS, ft (m) : 107 x 20 x 6.9 (32.6 x 6.1 x 2.1)
MAIN MACHINERY : 2 MTU 12V 538 diesels; 3,400 hp(m) (2.5 MW); 2 shafts
SPEED, knots : 24
COMPLEMENT : 19
GUNS : 2 Bofors 40 mm/70. 2 - 12.7 mm MGs.
RADARS : Surface search: Pot Head; I-band.

COMMENT : The last survivor in Pakistan of a class of four built by Brooke Marine in 1965. Steel hull and aluminium superstructure.

DISP.STANDARD (tonnes) :116.0
DISP.FULL LOAD (tonnes) :145.0
LENGTH (m) : 32.60
BEAM (m) : 6.1
DRAUGHT (m) :2.1
SPEED (knots) : 24.0

LARKANA CLASS (LARGE PATROL CRAFT) (PC

ACTIVE : 1
HULLS :

LARKANA P 157

DISPLACEMENT, tons : 180 full load
DIMENSIONS, ft (m) : 128 x 22 x 5.4 (39 x 6.7 x 1.7)
MAIN MACHINERY : 2 diesels; 5,000 hp(m) (3.68 MW); 2 shafts
SPEED, knots : 23
COMPLEMENT : 25 (3 officers)
GUNS : 2 - 37 mm/63 (twin). 4 - 25 mm/60 (2 twin).
DEPTH CHARGES : 2 Mk 64 launchers.
RADARS : Surface search: I-band.

COMMENT : Ordered in 1991 and started building in October 1992. Has replaced the last of the `Hainan' class. More may be built.

DISP.FULL LOAD (tonnes) :182.0
LENGTH (m) : 39.00
BEAM (m) : 6.7
DRAUGHT (m) :1.7
SPEED (knots) : 23.0

Its not a bad idea, but the idea should be kept on the side line rather than in the ground for an option attack right now, what needs to be done is strengthen our surface fleet plus choosing a capable submarine choice to enhance the capability of PN.

 

[Isa]

Does pakistan produce oil... i think we do.. but since it is a low quantity we should only use it as a reserve.. what do you think?

Originally posted by miroslav@Dec 1 2005, 11:38 AM
Are you aware of the whole Indian and Pakistani Naval fleets?????

Especially the Indian Stealth Arsenal???

Thanks,

Miro

[post=4171]Quoted post[/post]​

Can you elaborate????!

 

[Kaiser]

Originally posted by isawazirzada@Dec 1 2005, 09:31 PM
Does pakistan produce oil... i think we do.. but since it is a low quantity we should only use it as a reserve.. what do you think?
Can you elaborate????! :reading1:

[post=4190]Quoted post[/post]​

Pakistan hasnt yet taped into the major oil reserves in Bolishistan,I read somewhere that it is estimated that Pakistan in Hiden reserves has around 1 trillion barrels of Reserves.Not only that but pakistan has a Gas reserve of 400 barrels.

 

[ISI2003]

you can say my idea is crap, but it's not my idea

its an idea actually used by a us marine gneral, and it sunk 14 ships

how much more proof do you need?

 

[sigatoka]

All the information about the Babur suggests it is a Land attack cruise missile Yahya. I have never seen anything about it being used to attack seaborne targets. If I am incorrect please provide links about Babur's ability to attack sea targets.

Miroslav I seriously doubt your claim that Babur was developed with Chinese help. I dont think the Chinese have any dedicated land attack cruise missile. And if we even for a moment assumed that it was built with Chinese help, So what? It wouldn't change its capabilities would it?


Ok Miroslav the link for air launched exocets. http://www.paktribune.com/exclusive/exclus...tails.php?id=77

"AM - 39:

The air-launched Exocet AM-39 anti-ship missiles are carried by the PAF's Mirage VPA3 of No. 8 Maritime Squardon for maritime strike. They can also be carried by the Atlantic aircraft and Sea King helicopter of the Navy. The range is from 40 to 75 km. The missile weighs about 655 Kg. with a 165 Kg. warhead. It can fly at just under Mach 1 at about 2-3 m above water."

The fact that Mig-29K or Harriers are more bloodthirsty is irrelevant. It is not Pakistan that will be sending surface vessels to blockade Indian ports but rather Indian surface vessels will be blockading Pakistani ones. Therefore Pakistani planes will find it much easier in target acquisition than their Indian counterparts because of distance.

Miroslav bangladesh could give Pakitan the right to use ports and its waters but in a conflict such agreement would be useless. Pakistani vessels would not be allowed to travel to Bangladesh. Why do u assume that Indian vessels will be allowed to cross Pakistani waters to reach Gwadar port and Iran??

Miroslav what sacred about Karachi?? Why will Pakistan receive its imports from Karachi when it has been blockaded since Gwadar has been developed?

A "strategic reserve" is different from a reserve. A strategic reserve is when petroleum is refined and stored in large underground silos so it can quickly be used by military. A "reserve" is the quantity of petroleum or Gas underground all over the nations border that is extractable under current economic conditions. Therefore while Canada has more petroleum under its ground than Saudi Arabia its "reserves" are much less because its petroleum is so expensive to extract that a lot of it is just not economically viable.

Yahya what is a strategic buffer?

 

[Sharjeel]

Originally posted by miroslav@Dec 1 2005, 04:27 PM
You want me to Prove that Babur is made with Chinese Help??? Atleast 50% of it's technical componants.

[post=4167]Quoted post[/post]​

china does not have a terrain following cruisemissile technology. nor does the babur look anything like their cruise missiles. nor is china advanced enough in cruise missile development.

now let us talk about yakhont.

in reagrds to gwader...in addition to Pakistan Navys base it will also serve the PLAN. and some other countries are also interested including USN which doesnt want PLAN presence thus is pushing to establish USN base there...

 

[miroslav]

in reagrds to gwader...in addition to Pakistan Navys base it will also serve the PLAN. and some other countries are also interested including USN which doesnt want PLAN presence thus is pushing to establish USN base there...

Why you (and your countrymen) always bring PLAN and USN in between??

Can't you navy protect it's coast at her own???

Look it at this way.

in 1971 USN was supopose to help the PN with their 7th Fleet.

USSR came into their way.

Let's assume that PLAN will come into the active help of PN but then this time USN itself will stop the PLAN.

Not b'coz US has some love or affection towards India but definately they don't want China apparently PLAN to make/increase their infulence in the Arabian Sea and/or The Indian Ocean.

Miro

 

[ISI2003]

the chinese have a land atack cruise missile, it has a 3000km range (reverse engineered russian kh-55), and from the this missile the chinese have developed thier missile

http://www.sinodefence.com/missile/nuclear/cruisemissile.asp

http://mil.jschina.com.cn/WALLPAPER/ddaa2/...04194439_45.jpg

 

[sigatoka]

But isn't KH-55 cruise missiles deployed on Tupolev bombers by Russia?? I dont think China has Tupolev bombers, what aircraft are they deploying that Missile on?

If Im not mistaken KH-55 cruise missile is supersonic? The Babur is not.

 

[Sharjeel]

Originally posted by sigatoka@Dec 3 2005, 05:18 AM
But isn't KH-55 cruise missiles deployed on Tupolev bombers by Russia?? I dont think China has Tupolev bombers, what aircraft are they deploying that Missile on?

If Im not mistaken KH-55 cruise missile is supersonic? The Babur is not.

[post=4234]Quoted post[/post]​

there is also a distinct difrence between the two both from inside and outside.

<div class='bbimg'>

</div>this is the KH55

in regards to reverse engineering a missile...its all BS..its imposible to reverse engineer their programing&#33;. and a cruise missile is 90% programing 10% mechanicle.