Devianz
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2010
- Messages
- 470
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Yeah.... someone like UK with 13 times your GDP in terms of nominal and 5 times in terms of PPP are struggling to maintain ONE modern carrier group.
Pakistan Navy Should Create it own Independent Air wing
- Thread starter Super Falcon
- Start date
Yeah.... someone like UK with 13 times your GDP in terms of nominal and 5 times in terms of PPP are struggling to maintain ONE modern carrier group.
rockstarIN
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2010
- Messages
- 6,168
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
I'm sure you have been motivated by the movie 'Saving private Ryan' and the Normady Landing scenes. Aren't you?
rockstarIN
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2010
- Messages
- 6,168
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
I totally agree with you all point except the bold part.
Navy is very important for Pakistan, the first thing IN will do to impose a navel blockade to their Karachi port, and the half war is won, oil ships can't reach in that case. You need to accompany your oil tankers all the way once you are at war else will be attacked.
Remember Mr. Sharif's statement that they left with only 6 days fuel during the Kargil war.
Contrarian
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2006
- Messages
- 11,571
- Reaction score
- 4
Building a Navy is a very expensive affair. Most of it is capex-its hard for the Pakistani economy to sustain a big Navy-consequently power projection is out of question.
Muhammad-Bin-Qasim
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2010
- Messages
- 2,051
- Reaction score
- 0
Yeah.... someone like UK with 13 times your GDP in terms of nominal and 5 times in terms of PPP are struggling to maintain ONE modern carrier group.
No you are right actually... and of course with the current Capitalist setup and corrupt government within both Pakistan and the UK, building or keeping a decent Navy is out of question... I m obviously not talking about such a possibility within the current establishment/system...
Muhammad-Bin-Qasim
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2010
- Messages
- 2,051
- Reaction score
- 0
I'm sure you have been motivated by the movie 'Saving private Ryan' and the Normady Landing scenes. Aren't you?
No... I m talking fact on ground... All is fair in love and war
A naval force isnt just for wartime power.. otherwise many have advocated PN switching to smaller strike craft and abandon the larger vessels.
There is a peacetime role for larger ships to act alongside the merchant navy and control blue water movement. Smuggling, terrorism.. all of these factor into the decision to buy larger ships.
And yes.. they are NOT cheap. And.. we Do NOT have the money.. if leadership was the deciding factor in money related matters you would think Bill Clinton was one of the best US presidents ever... while actually it was the 90's technological boom that was responsible for the prosperity...the same was with Calvin Coolidge during the 20's.. it later transpired that Coolidge was a corrupt man.. and like our ex-gen.. only a few truly profited after his fall.
Also.. multiple macro economic indicators and multiple institutions.. both foreign and domestic cant be all wrong to lament Pakistan's economy.
You may be alluding to money that resides in private coffers of Pakistani elite.
That does not help Pakistan's own Forex accounts..
Unless you wish for another "Qarz utaro , Mulk Sanwaro scheme".
What possible gain could Pakistan have by landing troops in India..??
Provided whatever expense we put into landing craft..and their escorts give us.
There are spec ops teams that are trained to go deep into enemy territory and disrupt operations in the rear.. but that is the end of the need for an offensive capability in the south.
Back in the early nineties with the Taliban in power.. our military planners had looked into the Idea of being blockaded through the sea and still receive fuel and supplies from a "friendly" Afghanistan(how the oil got into Afghanistan in the first place..I cant say). With the current situation there was another alternative.. which was to build a pipeline to China's own fuel reserves.. but that never got off the discussion rooms.
Right now.. in the most likely naval scenario.. Pakistan will lose Karachi to a blockade fairly quickly.. But it may be able to use the coast to its advantage and control either Gwadar or Ormara for oil supplies... a factor the Indian planners have been looking into.. hence the covert support for the Baloch insurgents.
The Naval air wing operates aircraft that are very maritime ops specific..operating patrol aircraft and helicopters to defend from a specific threat.
As far as the need for a separate fighter wing for the Navy.. there isnt one, the Karachi VPA3 sq is already dedicated to naval support and is on the beck and call of the navy, the other aircraft too if not dedicated to strike missions in the south..will be available.. makes no sense to have PAF pilots, trained by the PAF...inducted by the PAF.. to be wearing a different uniform just for the heck of it..nor does it make sense to take the aircraft out of the maintenance cycle the PAF keeps into another branch and create administrative issues.
If the whole object of such a proposal is to compete with India..
then keep in mind these figures.
Indian Coastline: 7517 km(EEZ: 2,305,143 km2)
Pakistan Coastilne: 1050 Km(EEZ:201,520 km2)
Disputed naval regions by India.
Sir-Creek--with Pakistan
Bengal Enclaves --with Bangladesh
String of pearls(not a dispute..but a BIG concern)-- with China.
India has a need for such a large and well built naval arm..and..she can afford it.
Money doesn't grow on trees.. it comes from economic prosperity..something that does not change overnight with new leadership..
Otherwise.. Obama would not have had a sudden "change" in hair color.
There is a peacetime role for larger ships to act alongside the merchant navy and control blue water movement. Smuggling, terrorism.. all of these factor into the decision to buy larger ships.
And yes.. they are NOT cheap. And.. we Do NOT have the money.. if leadership was the deciding factor in money related matters you would think Bill Clinton was one of the best US presidents ever... while actually it was the 90's technological boom that was responsible for the prosperity...the same was with Calvin Coolidge during the 20's.. it later transpired that Coolidge was a corrupt man.. and like our ex-gen.. only a few truly profited after his fall.
Also.. multiple macro economic indicators and multiple institutions.. both foreign and domestic cant be all wrong to lament Pakistan's economy.
You may be alluding to money that resides in private coffers of Pakistani elite.
That does not help Pakistan's own Forex accounts..
Unless you wish for another "Qarz utaro , Mulk Sanwaro scheme".
What possible gain could Pakistan have by landing troops in India..??
Provided whatever expense we put into landing craft..and their escorts give us.
There are spec ops teams that are trained to go deep into enemy territory and disrupt operations in the rear.. but that is the end of the need for an offensive capability in the south.
Back in the early nineties with the Taliban in power.. our military planners had looked into the Idea of being blockaded through the sea and still receive fuel and supplies from a "friendly" Afghanistan(how the oil got into Afghanistan in the first place..I cant say). With the current situation there was another alternative.. which was to build a pipeline to China's own fuel reserves.. but that never got off the discussion rooms.
Right now.. in the most likely naval scenario.. Pakistan will lose Karachi to a blockade fairly quickly.. But it may be able to use the coast to its advantage and control either Gwadar or Ormara for oil supplies... a factor the Indian planners have been looking into.. hence the covert support for the Baloch insurgents.
The Naval air wing operates aircraft that are very maritime ops specific..operating patrol aircraft and helicopters to defend from a specific threat.
As far as the need for a separate fighter wing for the Navy.. there isnt one, the Karachi VPA3 sq is already dedicated to naval support and is on the beck and call of the navy, the other aircraft too if not dedicated to strike missions in the south..will be available.. makes no sense to have PAF pilots, trained by the PAF...inducted by the PAF.. to be wearing a different uniform just for the heck of it..nor does it make sense to take the aircraft out of the maintenance cycle the PAF keeps into another branch and create administrative issues.
If the whole object of such a proposal is to compete with India..
then keep in mind these figures.
Indian Coastline: 7517 km(EEZ: 2,305,143 km2)
Pakistan Coastilne: 1050 Km(EEZ:201,520 km2)
Disputed naval regions by India.
Sir-Creek--with Pakistan
Bengal Enclaves --with Bangladesh
String of pearls(not a dispute..but a BIG concern)-- with China.
India has a need for such a large and well built naval arm..and..she can afford it.
Money doesn't grow on trees.. it comes from economic prosperity..something that does not change overnight with new leadership..
Otherwise.. Obama would not have had a sudden "change" in hair color.
Muhammad-Bin-Qasim
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2010
- Messages
- 2,051
- Reaction score
- 0
Yaar... You are stuck way too much thinking inside the box... Do you realize that the idea about taking over India is not just a Zaid Hamid proposal... You need troops to land in any country which you want to take over... It goes way beyond some soldiers sent into the enemies rear to disrupt operations... We will require a sizable Navy to cripple Indian naval power... If the current Pakistani fleet is unable to do this, then perhaps a hit and run approach can be utilized... If we remain focussed on defending Karachi only and becoming happy with that, eventually we may not even be able to do that in time of war...
As for economy... You are right... changing leadership achieves nothing e.g Obama... but then who is talking about changing leadership only...
As for economy... You are right... changing leadership achieves nothing e.g Obama... but then who is talking about changing leadership only...
And you mon ami are thinking in fantasy..
I am telling you what is realistically possible based on what I know..and what you are proposing will be considered suicide by any military man.
However if you are alluding to the Ghazwa-e-Hind philosophy of taking down India..
Then I take my leave from this debate.
I am telling you what is realistically possible based on what I know..and what you are proposing will be considered suicide by any military man.
However if you are alluding to the Ghazwa-e-Hind philosophy of taking down India..
Then I take my leave from this debate.
Muhammad-Bin-Qasim
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2010
- Messages
- 2,051
- Reaction score
- 0
Santro my friend... Remember this... there was a time when people thought that going to the moon was mere fantasy... and there was a time when America had no rocket technology at all... so before anyone got ballistic, there was an operation paper clip... Obviously it would be suicide if it achieves nothing except the death of our soldiers... and my comment was in no way an order for a suicide run... but India we have to take... there is no ifs ands or buts about this... the best strategy should of course be discussed here...
Storm Force
BANNED
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2009
- Messages
- 5,100
- Reaction score
- -66
- Country
- Location
Mohammed Bin.
You talk of Pakistan Power Projection and landing Marines on Indian Shores Like Pakistan is a Super power.
Why spend $10 billion on a Navy to carry out a Shore Landing when you can fly accross with Para trooprs or Walk accross the Border. For $1 bilion.
India is next door NOT 5000 MILES ACCROSS the Sea.
The reason India has 2 carriers planned and large amphibous ships like the Trenton is because Indian territory includes islands hundreds of miles away from the main land like Andaman * Nicobar etc. These are usee to power project into South East Asia.
India also needs a POWERFUL navy cause it imports & exports 5 times wat Pakistan does and as you mentioned India has a massive coastline.
India needs and is planning a HUGE NAVY.
THE majority OF INDIAS planned $100 billion modernisation pland between 2010-2020 IS EITHER AIR FORCE OR NAVY not Army
You talk of Pakistan Power Projection and landing Marines on Indian Shores Like Pakistan is a Super power.
Why spend $10 billion on a Navy to carry out a Shore Landing when you can fly accross with Para trooprs or Walk accross the Border. For $1 bilion.
India is next door NOT 5000 MILES ACCROSS the Sea.
The reason India has 2 carriers planned and large amphibous ships like the Trenton is because Indian territory includes islands hundreds of miles away from the main land like Andaman * Nicobar etc. These are usee to power project into South East Asia.
India also needs a POWERFUL navy cause it imports & exports 5 times wat Pakistan does and as you mentioned India has a massive coastline.
India needs and is planning a HUGE NAVY.
THE majority OF INDIAS planned $100 billion modernisation pland between 2010-2020 IS EITHER AIR FORCE OR NAVY not Army
prototype
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2010
- Messages
- 2,672
- Reaction score
- 0
@ Mohammed Bin.
I think u r probably talking about a navy to conquer Indian shores,which even does not have destroyers and LPD's in its fleet.
Quite opposite ur enemy consist of a navy which had strategic reach to every part of IOR.
How exactly u think PN(a navy created for the only purpose of defense of Pakistani shores) can conquer Indian shores.
If I am right PN cannot even have not the ability to damage our supply routes.
And this gap is widening with every passing yr
I think u r probably talking about a navy to conquer Indian shores,which even does not have destroyers and LPD's in its fleet.
Quite opposite ur enemy consist of a navy which had strategic reach to every part of IOR.
How exactly u think PN(a navy created for the only purpose of defense of Pakistani shores) can conquer Indian shores.
If I am right PN cannot even have not the ability to damage our supply routes.
And this gap is widening with every passing yr
Kinetic
BANNED
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2010
- Messages
- 11,200
- Reaction score
- -33
As Muhammad-Bin-Qasim said, if like Zaid Hamid Pakista wants to take over India than they need such capabilities like large amphibious warships. India has a vast shore specially east and south-western coasts where troops can land from large Pakistani amphibious ships backed by air wing. These areas are thousands of km away from Pakistan. So powerful amphibious capability is must to take over India.
LEGENDARY WARRIOR
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2010
- Messages
- 1,514
- Reaction score
- 0
I totally agree with you. Navy really needs to enhance its air strike capability. But still I think that the options you gave are still expensive as we are already spending too much on War Against Terror.
But I did heard an info that Pak Navy made a deal with Germany for Nuclear submarines but it was delayed due to some reason.
I would encourage Pak Navy to go for that.. .
Similar threads
