Nishan_101
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2007
- Messages
- 3,826
- Reaction score
- -18
As we all should know that Carriers require a battle group of At least 1/2 Destroyer, 2/4 Frigates, N-Sub. logistics vessel, jet fuel vessel and Oil tanker vessel.
Why doesn't Pakistan build an aircraft carrier?
- Thread starter KashifAsrar
- Start date
- Status
Edevelop
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2007
- Messages
- 14,735
- Reaction score
- 23
- Country
- Location
Well i think as soon as China ends its production, Pakistan could then access help from China.
If we are dead serious about this plan, i'm guessing it would be after 2020..
India just started to build one, the pictures of IAC-1 were out, but still it will take more than one to master the ability to build carriers. Hopefully by the time IAC-2 comes out we will have a better base for manufacturing AC because currently the shipyard in Mumbai doesn't seem like the place to build an AC.
As for Pakistan, its up to the navy, if they fee like they need an AC, then they can probably buy one or lease one (though it would be a little hard to get hands on an AC since there aren't many around). As for building one, the big question is, if the Pakistani shipyard have the technology, and the infrastructure to build one. Because even with India, it was a pain to get the right grade of steel.
Armstrong
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 19,390
- Reaction score
- 94
- Country
- Location
If the WWF figures that went before my eyes aren't incorrect Pakistan's coastline is around 1050 Kms (250km for Sindh and 800km for Balochistan); I'm not sure that we'd ever need an air-craft carrier to protect a coast that small with a sea of that size. Unless of course we want to project ourselves elsewhere, which I most certainly doubt that we have either the desire or the capability to. So in all honesty about a dozen improved F-22Ps, around half a dozen to a dozen Subs, a handful of Type 54Bs, some ground-based radar coverage (I keep going back to Australia's Jindalee Radar System though I'm sure we can't afford it), a decent SAM system, a further development of the Jalat Class missile boats, more and possibly improved Azmats along with a dedicated air-wing of perhaps 2 squadrons of JF-17s equipped with the C-802s if not some newer variant - should form the bulk of our acquisitions for the next 20 or so years !
Yes, but the AC is pretty old and close to decommissioning, and that is why India is buying a refitted Russian carrier and building one on its own.
KingMamba
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- May 23, 2012
- Messages
- 12,546
- Reaction score
- 7
- Country
- Location
Although I don't really think the PN needs an AC definantly an upgrade as they are really neglected compared to AF and PA I think just some nuclear submarine as some second strike capability and more destroyers and frigates when we have the cash what do you think?
So two AC then why do you suppose you need 2 where do you reckon they will be deployed? And what is the timeframe for self development?
I think Armstrong pretty much nailed it AC are not necesscary for PN unless our foreign policy changes to something more outward in the upcoming future.
Edevelop
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2007
- Messages
- 14,735
- Reaction score
- 23
- Country
- Location
I believe we don't have enough funds to go for AC now
But we definitely need one in the FUTURE.
- The U.S and EU is starting to become our enemy and ports like Karachi and Gwadar is in China and Russia's strategic interest for access and to use it for trade all around the world....
But we definitely need one in the FUTURE.
- The U.S and EU is starting to become our enemy and ports like Karachi and Gwadar is in China and Russia's strategic interest for access and to use it for trade all around the world....
Armstrong
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 19,390
- Reaction score
- 94
- Country
- Location
Oye laalay ! Pray tell me why do we need one in the FUTURE ? And if you're somehow suggesting that our Aircraft Carrier armed with JF-17s or even J-15s is going to take on the US and the EU and still come out well and alive then I feel like smacking some sense into you
!And it goes without saying that with an economy like ours we'd first be unable to build an Aircraft carrier or even acquire it and if we ever did we'd most certainly not be able to use it or any of our other assets in a confrontation with the United States because the after-effects of that would be far too devastating then just a few billion dollars worth of an Aircraft Carrier resting peacefully on the floor of the Arabian Sea !
USAHawk785
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2012
- Messages
- 912
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
Pakistan cannot sustain the cost of 1 aircraft carrier, Pakistan is not a naval power. Let us be realistic. It would be to their strategic advantage to put more emphasis in air and ground forces. In regards to the sea, the Indian Navy would crush the PN in a full fledge war. So, the hypothetical scenario of PN acquiring a carrier is nill. Besides, the PN does not have the ability to defend such a carrier from IN strategic attacks in case of war. Trust me, the first thing the IN would target first would be the carrier.
manofwar
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2012
- Messages
- 1,151
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Our long term plan is 6 Carrier groups...
The two carriers will be deployed in Arabian Sea and the bay of Bengal, and Viraat will be transfered to the southern command which is a training facility presently.........but it will grow to be a proper command with firepower once Vishal is commisioned.........
The time period for IAC 1 is 2014 completion(late 2013) and trials and early 2015 commisioning. IAC 2 will be completed by 2018 and commisioned by 2019....this is the revised scheduled, and is "fixed in iron"(sic)
On the subject: A helicopter carrier like Dokdo would serve the PN much better...........and it isn't very expensive either......just around $300 million...
USAHawk785
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2012
- Messages
- 912
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
Oye laalay ! Pray tell me why do we need one in the FUTURE ? And if you're somehow suggesting that our Aircraft Carrier armed with JF-17s or even J-15s is going to take on the US and the EU and still come out well and alive then I feel like smacking some sense into you
And it goes without saying that with an economy like ours we'd first be unable to build an Aircraft carrier or even acquire it and if we ever did we'd most certainly not be able to use it or any of our other assets in a confrontation with the United States because the after-effects of that would be far too devastating then just a few billion dollars worth of an Aircraft Carrier resting peacefully on the floor of the Arabian Sea !
A very wise post.
Edevelop
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2007
- Messages
- 14,735
- Reaction score
- 23
- Country
- Location
Oye laalay ! Pray tell me why do we need one in the FUTURE ? And if you're somehow suggesting that our Aircraft Carrier armed with JF-17s or even J-15s is going to take on the US and the EU and still come out well and alive then I feel like smacking some sense into you
And it goes without saying that with an economy like ours we'd first be unable to build an Aircraft carrier or even acquire it and if we ever did we'd most certainly not be able to use it or any of our other assets in a confrontation with the United States because the after-effects of that would be far too devastating then just a few billion dollars worth of an Aircraft Carrier resting peacefully on the floor of the Arabian Sea !
Please tell me why weak armed countries like Thailand and Spain have it?
Their so called 'enemies' are bordered !
BTW who said it costs billions?
You can get a small one (27,079 tonnes) from spain for 360 million euros...about 448 million dollars = half the price of 18 F-16 we purchased from U.S
Arguably, Pakistan has the best strategic location in all of Asia. What can be resting peacefully when our Navy has always been weak sitting like ducks and it was one of the reasons why we lost East Pakistan and faced blockade. Who knows anything else can get wrong maybe countering western corporations that want our resources from Balochistan or countering pirate terrorists, or maybe to attack India's south to divert attention to attack their bases. We need one
Armstrong
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 19,390
- Reaction score
- 94
- Country
- Location
Please tell me why weak armed countries like Thailand and Spain have it?
Their so called 'enemies' are bordered !
BTW who said it costs billions?
You can get a small one (27,079 tonnes) from spain for 360 million euros...about 448 million dollars = half the price of 18 F-16 we purchased from U.S
Arguably, Pakistan has the best strategic location in all of Asia. What can be resting peacefully when our Navy has always been weak and it was one of the reasons why we lost East Pakistan and faced blockade. Before anything else gets wrong maybe countering western corporations that want our resources or countering pirate terrorists, we need 1 these things to protect our region.
From what I've heard the Thai carrier isn't as much a 'carrier' as it needs to be 'carried' ! But I won't comment on that further for I do not know much about it or the Thai Armed Forces. With respect to the Spanish carrier and I assume that your talking about the new Juan Carlos class LHD : I dunno how much it costs but I'm sure the price-tag that you mentioned doesn't include the 30 complement of Harrier 2s or F-35s its supposed to carry; now even if we were to replace either of those two birds with a JF-17 I'm sure even a Naval variant of the JF is going to cost well above its blk 2/3 variant so lets say by conservative estimates it costs around $50m a unit. That means an Aircraft carrier armed with a full contingent of 30 JF-17s is going to cost around ($448m + $50m x 30) $1.948b. Throw in the cost of equipping the LHD with supplies, refreshing its stores of ammunition for whatever armament it carries and then equipping the JF-17s with their own arms and ammunition, and I think it would not be unfair to assume that the figure rises to well over the $2b mark ! And this is without considering the fact that each of the Juan Carlos 1s is protected by 6 Santa Marias which means we're going to allocate some boats for its protection too and I think the F-22Ps wouldn't cut it and we might need to splash some more cash on something bigger and better armed ! We'd even need to acquire some logistical boats too and perhaps even acquire some additional capital ships to fill-up for the ones that were diverted to the 'Carrier Group' ! Now I'm no naval expert (far from it) so I might be talking complete nonsense but I don't think that the cost to Pakistan for operating a Carrier is going to be the initial $448m paid for the boat alone.....I would assume that this would rise exponentially to a much larger amount ! And for a country like Pakistan with our already scarce resources even more scarce - We'd be foOked if we splash an obscene amount of money on one of these Aircraft Carriers especially when our whole Naval Philosophy, to the best of my knowledge, revolves around denying India the opportunity to blockade our ports ! Consequently I think more C-802 armed platforms with a good radar, a dedicated Naval Wing, much better SAMs for our land and sea-based assets and replenishing our Submarine fleet would bring much greater value-for-money then an 'Aircraft Carrier' !
P.S We lost East Pakistan because our assets from here till there were separated by more than a 1000 miles ! And our submarine Ghazi, from what I've heard, successfully prevented that blockade before it sunk under mysterious circumstances so perhaps better, quieter subs along with some good surface fleet might make more sense !
- Status
Similar threads
