# China's new 'carrier killer' for Pakistan's JF-17 Thunder fighter



## Saifullah Sani

*CM-400AKG missile is China's new 'carrier killer': Russian media*
*






The CM-400AKG supersonic cruise missile designed by Aviation Industry Corporation of China — an export version of China's YJ-12 anti-ship missile — can be used successfully against India's aircraft carrier when launched by Pakistan's JF-17 Thunder fighter, reports the Moscow-based Russian Military Analysis website.*

The CM-400AKG was demonstrated to the public for the first time during the Zhuhai airshow last year. The YJ-12 was originally designed to be used against multiple targets including US aircraft carriers with a combat range of 500 kilometers and can be carried by various platforms such as bombers like the H-6 and JH-7, fighter jets such as the J-11B, J-15, J-16 and Su-30MKK and Type 052D destroyers. However, the range of the CM-400AKG has been reduced to 250 kilometers to meet export restrictions of the international Missile Technology Control Regime.

The missile can be launched when the aircraft reaches speeds of between 750 and 800 kilometers an hour, the report said. The speed of the Chinese supersonic cruise missile is between mach 3.5 to mach 4. It can be equipped with high-explosive and armor-piercing warheads. Insiders said that the missile was designed for the FC-1 Xiaolong also known as JF-17 Thunder, a fighter jointly developed by China and Pakistan.

The Indian navy currently has two aircraft carriers in service, a Russian-built INS Vikramaditya and a British-built INS Viraat, while two domestic Vikrant-class vessels are still in construction. Anti-ship cruise missiles such as the YJ-12 and CM-400AKG are thus crucial for both China and Pakistan to compete against their common enemy in the Indian Ocean region, the report said.

CM-400AKG missile is China's new 'carrier killer': Russian media｜Politics｜News｜WantChinaTimes.com

Reactions: Like Like:
19


----------



## feilong

This missile baby will be pakistan new toys to do the job on the INDIA, we will selling many of this baby to Pakistan. Hope you guys finished the job well.

Reactions: Like Like:
25


----------



## gslv mk3

This would not even reach Indian AC-the JF 17 carrying this one would not cross the ' Mig Screen '.
Carrier killer?? lol

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## bloo

For Pete's sake, its just a very high speed AShM, I still don't see how people call it impervious to missile defense and what not.


----------



## rockstarIN

bloo said:


> For Pete's sake, its just a very high speed AShM, I still don't see how people call it impervious to missile defense and what not.


Coz 1 is equal to 10 when it reaches pak handd. Thats their theory.

Reactions: Like Like:
18


----------



## Rashid Mahmood

The indian carrier will be stationed some 3000 kms away from the Pakistani shore, so out of the range of a JF-17...

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## gslv mk3

Rashid Mahmood said:


> The indian carrier will be stationed some 3000 kms away from the Pakistani shore, so out of the range of a JF-17...





Rashid Mahmood said:


> The indian carrier will be stationed some 3000 kms away from the Pakistani shore, so out of the range of a JF-17...





Rashid Mahmood said:


> The indian carrier will be stationed some 3000 kms away from the Pakistani shore, so out of the range of a JF-17...



And you think JF 17 wil penetrate ADs of all other ships in the CBG & evade detection from the AEW aircraft and Vikys radar?

And the JF 17 would be intercepted by Mig 29 Ks long before it can come in range of vikramaditya.

Heck the Zhuk ME radar on the mig will see JF 17 before it can see the mig,and would fire a BVRAAM.

game over .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Water Car Engineer

Come back when you put a hardpoint on JF-17's back with a NASR on it, otherwise this is a joke.

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## Rashid Mahmood

gslv mk3 said:


> And you think JF 17 wil penetrate ADs of all other ships in the CBG & evade detection from the AEW aircraft and Vikys radar?
> 
> And the JF 17 would be intercepted by Mig 29 Ks long before it can come in range of vikramaditya.
> 
> Heck the Zhuk ME radar on the mig will see JF 17 before it can see the mig,and would fire a BVRAAM.
> 
> game over .



Do you really think that a single JF-17 will come to attack a carrier group.... lol
If your navy also thinks like you, then the job will be more easier than expected......

Reactions: Like Like:
28


----------



## joekrish

Rashid Mahmood said:


> Do you really think that a single JF-17 will come to attack a carrier group.... lol
> If your navy also thinks like you, then the job will be more easier than expected......


We have 24 migs on board plus the CBG's, so......how many JF 17 are you planing to send in.


----------



## Rashid Mahmood

joekrish said:


> We have 24 migs on board plus the CBG's, so......how many JF 17 are you planing to send in.



So all your 24 29Ks will fly to protect the carrier group......

You really don't have any idea of how an attack on a CG is conducted. 
You really need to start reading "How to protect a carrier group for dummies".

Reactions: Like Like:
24


----------



## joekrish

Rashid Mahmood said:


> So all your 24 29Ks will fly to protect the carrier group......
> 
> You really don't have any idea of how an attack on a CG is conducted.
> You really need to start reading "How to protect a carrier group for dummies".


Nobody here mentioned about all 24 taking off, do you ave an answer to my previous post?


----------



## gslv mk3

Rashid Mahmood said:


> Do you really think that a single JF-17 will come to attack a carrier group.... lol
> If your navy also thinks like you, then the job will be more easier than expected......



And you really thing the JF 17 can come close to Vikramaditya-Mig 29 s flying BARCAP and Kamov AEW helis 
The ship itself packs remarkable AD capabilities - Barak 8 missiles,RAN 40 L/ MF STAR radars.

And thats just the AD of the carrier-P 15 A destroyers will lead the CBG and they too have significant AD systems.

And before thinking about that,think how the AKG would be delivered to the Carrier- which is part of a CBG and is located far away from your coast,You would have to face detection and interception from IAF and IN air arm

Well I would say leave all that and dig this- Mig 29 Ks have a combat radius of 850 kg with full internal fuel and can take off with a load of total 5.5 tonnes from Vikramaditya/Vikrant.

And I need not compare the capabilities of mig29 and JF 17....shall I??

@Water Car Engineer

Nice reply mate.

I guess these guys are getting Paranoid of growing capabilities of IN-which is getting 2 40,000 tonne ACs,more SSBNs and SSKs,more stealth frigates,destroyers and corvettes ( that weigh as much as their destroyers).
heck it is a network centric force with itsown dedicated military communication sat...

Carrier Killer missile...lol

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Rashid Mahmood

gslv mk3 said:


> And you really thing the JF 17 can come close to Vikramaditya-Mig 29 s flying BARCAP and Kamov AEW helis
> The ship itself packs remarkable AD capabilities - Barak 8 missiles,RAN 40 L/ MF STAR radars.
> 
> And thats just the AD of the carrier-P 15 A destroyers will lead the CBG and they too have significant AD systems.
> 
> And before thinking about that,think how the AKG would be delivered to the Carrier- which is part of a CBG and is located far away from your coast,You would have to face detection and interception from IAF and IN air arm
> 
> Well I would say leave all that and dig this- Mig 29 Ks have a combat radius of 850 kg with full internal fuel and can take off with a load of total 5.5 tonnes from Vikramaditya/Vikrant.
> 
> And I need not compare the capabilities of mig29 and JF 17....shall I??




Who said 
that the JF-17s will come alone...... 
that JF-17s will engage the 29s in air to air.....

What's the use of a CBG if you want all of the IN & IAF just to defend it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## bloo

Rashid Mahmood said:


> So all your 24 29Ks will fly to protect the carrier group......
> 
> You really don't have any idea of how an attack on a CG is conducted.
> You really need to start reading "How to protect a carrier group for dummies".





Rashid Mahmood said:


> Who said
> that the JF-17s will come alone......
> that JF-17s will engage the 29s in air to air.....
> 
> What's the use of a CBG if you want all of the IN & IAF just to defend it.



You are thoroughly underestimating a CSG's attack capabilities.
The US Navy Aircraft Carriers

BTW JF-17 engaging a MiG is one thing, winning against it is whole another thing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shuntmaster

If China believed that a 100k Ton ship can be sunk by few 100 Kgs of explosives in the 'carrier killers' warhead, then why is it investing so much on aircraft carriers??

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## gslv mk3

Rashid Mahmood said:


> Who said
> that the JF-17s will come alone......
> that JF-17s will engage the 29s in air to air.....
> 
> What's the use of a CBG if you want all of the IN & IAF just to defend it.





Rashid Mahmood said:


> Who said
> that the JF-17s will come alone......
> that JF-17s will engage the 29s in air to air.....
> 
> What's the use of a CBG if you want all of the IN & IAF just to defend it.





Rashid Mahmood said:


> Who said
> that the JF-17s will come alone......
> that JF-17s will engage the 29s in air to air.....
> 
> What's the use of a CBG if you want all of the IN & IAF just to defend it.



Dont turn this thread into a Joke.

Please explain how your JF 17 s carrying AKGs would come close to indian AC and how would they evade detection by the radars on Indian warships/ kamov ka 31 aews / the AC itself.

And explain how it would evade interception from mig 29ks and AD systems of the CBG.

and finally there is barak 8 SAM....to defend against AKg.


----------



## Rashid Mahmood

gslv mk3 said:


> Dont turn this thread into a Joke.
> 
> Please explain how your JF 17 s carrying AKGs would come close to indian AC and how would they evade detection by the radars on Indian warships/ kamov ka 31 aews / the AC itself.
> 
> And explain how it would evade interception from mig 29ks and AD systems of the CBG.
> 
> and finally there is barak 8 SAM....to defend against AKg.




Actually your the one who is joking, who only knows names of a couple of equipment.
How to use them is altogether a different analogy.


----------



## kaykay

Rashid Mahmood said:


> Who said
> that the JF-17s will come alone......
> that JF-17s will engage the 29s in air to air.....
> 
> What's the use of a CBG if you want all of the IN & IAF just to defend it.



Then INS Vikramaditya's main Job would be to divert your airforce attention by creating a second front. Even if you assign 30+ JF-17s for Ins Vikramaditya, Viki's job would be done. Not to forget in next 4 years another Aircraft Carrier is coming and then your airforce surely won't ignore 50+ Fighters on 2 ACs.


----------



## OrionHunter

Oh damn! *Chinese cruise missiles to hit moving targets like ships and ACs?*  Gimme a break! This technology has not even been perfected yet by the US and is only in the testing stages. Probably take a couple of years more to iron out the bugs and make it operational.

*This new seeker employing Electronic Support Measures (ESM) was recently tested with the Raytheon Tomahawk Block IV cruise missile, as part of the weapon’s product improvement program. The new seeker will enable the cruise missile to engage moving or relocatable targets, including ships or mobile surface-to-air missile sites, identified by their unique electromagnetic signature. *

The new seeker can automatically locate and track moving and stationary targets by sensing the electro-magnetic radiation they emit (i.e. radar, communications etc).

*So, according to the Chinese and their fan boys, they've stolen a march over the Americans in missile technology!! That's nuts!* 

I really did fall on my a$$ laughing!!

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Bratva

OrionHunter said:


> Oh damn! *Chinese cruise missiles to hit moving targets like ships and ACs?*  Gimme a break! This technology has not even been perfected yet by the US and is only in the testing stages. Probably take a couple of years more to iron out the bugs and make it operational.
> 
> *This new seeker employing Electronic Support Measures (ESM) was recently tested with the Raytheon Tomahawk Block IV cruise missile, as part of the weapon’s product improvement program. The new seeker will enable the cruise missile to engage moving or relocatable targets, including ships or mobile surface-to-air missile sites, identified by their unique electromagnetic signature. *
> 
> The new seeker can automatically locate and track moving and stationary targets by sensing the electro-magnetic radiation they emit (i.e. radar, communications etc).
> 
> *So, according to the Chinese and their fan boys, they've stolen a march over the Americans in missile technology!! That's nuts!*
> 
> I really did fall on my a$$ laughing!!




For the first time, the AVIC video details claims for the accuracy of each of the CM-400’s three major guidance systems, starting with a 50m (164ft) circular error probable (CEP) for an inertial navigation system coupled with satellite positioning. A weapon's CEP is defined as the 50% probability that it will hit within a given radius of the target’s position.

The accuracy of the CM-400 improves by an order of magnitude - to a CEP of 5m - when an onboard infrared (IR)/TV seeker activates to provide terminal guidance. The list also claims that the CEP of the weapon actually worsens to 5-10m when an IR/TV seeker is supplemented by a passive radar during the terminal phase. It is not clear why the passive radar – identified as occupying the L, S and X bands of the electromagnetic spectrum – would not improve the CM-400’s accuracy.

AVIC lists the 0.4m-diameter missile as having a range of between 54-130nm (100-240km), while carrying either a 150kg blast warhead or 200kg penetration warhead.

DUBAI: China details performance of 'carrier killer' missile for JF-17

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dash

While China makes DF21 for carrier killing, some Pak friend rejoice with this small baby....heights of delusion!!


----------



## OrionHunter

mafiya said:


> For the first time, the AVIC video details claims for the accuracy of each of the CM-400’s three major guidance systems, starting with a 50m (164ft) circular error probable (CEP) for an inertial navigation system coupled with satellite positioning. A weapon's CEP is defined as the 50% probability that it will hit within a given radius of the target’s position.
> 
> The accuracy of the CM-400 improves by an order of magnitude - to a CEP of 5m - when an onboard infrared (IR)/TV seeker activates to provide terminal guidance. The list also claims that the CEP of the weapon actually worsens to 5-10m when an IR/TV seeker is supplemented by a passive radar during the terminal phase. It is not clear why the passive radar – identified as occupying the L, S and X bands of the electromagnetic spectrum – would not improve the CM-400’s accuracy.
> 
> AVIC lists the 0.4m-diameter missile as having a range of between 54-130nm (100-240km), while carrying either a 150kg blast warhead or 200kg penetration warhead.
> 
> DUBAI: China details performance of 'carrier killer' missile for JF-17


Agreed with what you have mentioned. But you missed out the central point of my argument and that is the *kill probability of these missiles on MOVING TARGETS.* Even the Americans haven't perfected this technology so far. Have the Chinese? I doubt it!


----------



## Black Widow

mafiya said:


> For the first time, the AVIC video details claims for the accuracy of each of the CM-400’s three major guidance systems, starting with a 50m (164ft) circular error probable (CEP) for an inertial navigation system coupled with satellite positioning. A weapon's CEP is defined as the 50% probability that it will hit within a given radius of the target’s position.
> 
> The accuracy of the CM-400 improves by an order of magnitude - to a CEP of 5m - when an onboard infrared (IR)/TV seeker activates to provide terminal guidance. The list also claims that the CEP of the weapon actually worsens to 5-10m when an IR/TV seeker is supplemented by a passive radar during the terminal phase. It is not clear why the passive radar – identified as occupying the L, S and X bands of the electromagnetic spectrum – would not improve the CM-400’s accuracy.
> 
> AVIC lists the 0.4m-diameter missile as having a range of between 54-130nm (100-240km), while carrying either a 150kg blast warhead or 200kg penetration warhead.
> 
> DUBAI: China details performance of 'carrier killer' missile for JF-17





Till date I know CEP is defined for fixed target.. CEP for moving Target will be much more than CEP for fixed target..


----------



## Bratva

OrionHunter said:


> Agreed with what you have mentioned. But you missed out the central point of my argument and that is the *kill probability of these missiles on MOVING TARGETS.* Even the Americans haven't perfected this technology so far. Have the Chinese? I doubt it!



*Passive radar* systems (also referred to as *passive coherent location* and *passive covert radar*) encompass a class of radar systems that detect and track objects by processing reflections from non-cooperative sources of illumination in the environment, such as commercial broadcast and communications signals

Capability is there to hit moving targets. No matter how imperfect. Carrier is a big thing. Missile would be able to hit it but how much it would penetrate it. It remains to be seen


----------



## danish_vij

Rashid Mahmood said:


> *Who said
> that the JF-17s will come alone*......


ok so many are u interested to send?? 
20?? 
or 50?  
and then.......evn before u c any mig 29 or any craft of CBG ur jf's will fall prey to bvraam........
and dont live in delusion that if u r launching an attack of CBG u will c the retaliation from CBG only..


Rashid Mahmood said:


> What's the use of a CBG if you want all of the IN & IAF just to defend it.


*what is the use of ur navy if u need ur airforce JF17's to attack IN ?   *

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SrNair

Rashid Mahmood said:


> Who said
> that the JF-17s will come alone......
> that JF-17s will engage the 29s in air to air.....
> 
> What's the use of a CBG if you want all of the IN & IAF just to defend it.




All this will happen when JF-17 and mig-29k has same capability.According to general information Junk Fighter-17 is only a carrier for carrying a bvraam or this carrier killer missile.But mig -29k it is much different game.

INS vikramaditya already have 500km ECM features,they can blind a fighter which is at a distance of 500 km .Now this missile range is 250km so one can assume what is the fate of jf-17 within 250 km range. CBG has its own AD and mig-29k

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xyxmt

feilong said:


> This missile baby will be pakistan new toys to do the job on the INDIA, we will selling many of this baby to Pakistan. Hope you guys finished the job well.



we tried so many time but they are not in the mood to start a war

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SrNair

xyxmt said:


> we tried so many time but they are not in the mood to start a war



India gets mood when we complete the modernization of Army,Navy and Airforce.But at that time
Pakistan mood will be in trouble.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AirRodgers

This is how you attack a badly design India AC.. The India carrier is very limited by its design lol an island almost in the middle of the deck, what morron think that a good AC design. This will hamper(slow) the launch and recovery of the 24 mig 29... If Pakistan send say 24 jf 17 toward the India AC and is detected India will launch the migs to intercept. This will take time because of the limitation of the AC.. By the time the migs are launch and heading toward the 24 jf 17, the Pakistani should turn their fighter back home.. This is when the AC is vulnerable, the mig will chase the jf 17 or return to their AC because their fuel is running dry... About this time if Pakistan send in another group of jf 17 toward the India AC, they be without mig protection. The mig in the air need to land to refuel and because of the badly design of the AC it takes them too long to recover and put up a fully fuel mig to defend the carrier from the incoming jf 17..

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## SrNair

AirRodgers said:


> This is how you attack a badly design India AC.. The India carrier is very limited by its design lol an island almost in the middle of the deck, what morron think that a good AC design. This will hamper(slow) the launch and recovery of the 24 mig 29... If Pakistan send say 24 jf 17 toward the India AC and is detected India will launch the migs to intercept. This will take time because of the limitation of the AC.. By the time the migs are launch and heading toward the 24 jf 17, the Pakistani should turn their fighter back home.. This is when the AC is vulnerable, the mig will chase the jf 17 or return to their AC because their fuel is running dry... About this time if Pakistan send in another group of jf 17 toward the India AC, they be without mig protection. The mig in the air need to land to refuel and because of the badly design of the AC it takes them too long to recover and put up a fully fuel mig to defend the carrier from the incoming jf 17..




I think Indian Navy knows INS vikramaditya capabilities.Afterall they are the operators


----------



## me_itsme

AirRodgers said:


> This is how you attack a badly design India AC.. The India carrier is very limited by its design lol an island almost in the middle of the deck, what morron think that a good AC design. This will hamper(slow) the launch and recovery of the 24 mig 29... If Pakistan send say 24 jf 17 toward the India AC and is detected India will launch the migs to intercept. This will take time because of the limitation of the AC.. By the time the migs are launch and heading toward the 24 jf 17, the Pakistani should turn their fighter back home.. This is when the AC is vulnerable, the mig will chase the jf 17 or return to their AC because their fuel is running dry... About this time if Pakistan send in another group of jf 17 toward the India AC, they be without mig protection. The mig in the air need to land to refuel and because of the badly design of the AC it takes them too long to recover and put up a fully fuel mig to defend the carrier from the incoming jf 17..




You deserve a cookie for that awesomeness of a post.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AirRodgers

me_itsme said:


> You deserve a cookie for that awesomeness of a post.


thank you bro

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Luftwaffe

AirRodgers said:


> By the time the migs are launch and heading toward the 24 jf 17, the Pakistani should turn their fighter back home.. This is when the AC is vulnerable, the mig will chase the jf 17 or return to their AC because their fuel is running dry... About this time if Pakistan send in another group of jf 17 toward the India AC, they be without mig protection. The mig in the air need to land to refuel and because of the badly design of the AC it takes them too long to recover and put up a fully fuel mig to defend the carrier from the incoming jf 17..


 
What makes you think that mig-29s would not have already airborne, there is always CAP in Area.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Luftwaffe

OrionHunter said:


> *So, according to the Chinese and their fan boys, they've stolen a march over the Americans in missile technology!! That's nuts!*


 
You are underestimating the creator/maker. The product is always in some sort of regular tests even after induction even with US Armed Forces.

Not everyone look towards US as their grand father, like hindustan, Or shall "I say so according to hindustanis and their fanboys, they've stolen a march over the americans in missile technology, you are even way behind Chinese, get your act together and think sane dissing, poking fun would lead you no where.

The sheer stupidity and some people's mentality at making fun is they forget that hindustan in 2012-2013 is working on a sub sonic cruise missile where as "inferior China and Pakistan" had them since 2006.

@KRAIT, mate you look fool thanking foolish posts.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sugarcane

Drama Queens, who used to call a missile China Killer are laughing on much smaller term "Carrier Killer" that also coined by Russian media. You guys are never fall short of expectation.


----------



## AirRodgers

there are only 24 mig on the AC if you send most of them to intercept first wave there are only a few left for cap to be able to defend.


----------



## KRAIT

Luftwaffe said:


> @KRAIT, mate you look fool thanking foolish posts.


See buddy, I did it again. 

Fact of the matter is China is behind US in most of the technologies, if not all. Missiles included. 

That also doesn't mean that I don't appreciate their rise in technological advancement.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Luftwaffe

KRAIT said:


> See buddy, I did it again.
> 
> Fact of the matter is China is behind US in most of the technologies, if not all. Missiles included.
> 
> That also doesn't mean that I don't appreciate their rise in technological advancement.


 
"in most" a relief ha. Do understand your hindustani mates poke fun but they should atleast look at their development against Chinese before they throw stones at, don't you think, nobody is saying product could be as excellent as advertised but it has it's plus and minus it is developed surely it would take some time to be perfected if it was not feasible it would not have been developed envisioned at all. If subsonic cruise missile was useless india would have ignored and stop the development of Nirbay or whatever it is called, your pokemon indian members made fun of subsonic cruise missile like Babur and same types, later we came to know india gets into the development of subsonic nirbay CRM, the Thread went blank everyone dispersed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## KRAIT

Luftwaffe said:


> "in most" a relief ha. Do understand your hindustani mates poke fun but they should atleast look at their development against Chinese before they throw stones at, don't you think, nobody is saying product could be as excellent as advertised but it has it's plus and minus it is developed surely it would take some time to be perfected if it was not feasible it would not have been developed envisioned at all. If subsonic cruise missile was useless india would have ignored and stop the development of Nirbay or whatever it is called, your pokemon indian members made fun of subsonic cruise missile like Babur and same types, later we came to know india gets into the development of subsonic nirbay CRM, the Thread went blank everyone dispersed.


Oh come on, you of all, generalizing ? Leave it bro.
I know about their advancements. They have even left US behind in few fields for ex. recently made fastest Supercomputer.
May be I doubt (everyone does) few Pakistan's achievements, but I never had doubts in China's.


----------



## Saturn

xyxmt said:


> we tried so many time but they are not in the mood to start a war


India's unconditional love for TTP and BLA is just a start. Our proxy wars are just hitting the bullseye!

wait for the moment...aapki ye khwaish bhi puri karengey


----------



## Malik Alashter

Any way this missle is a big of threat regardless the capability of jf-17.


----------



## OrionHunter

Luftwaffe said:


> You are underestimating the creator/maker. The product is always in some sort of regular tests even after induction even with US Armed Forces.
> 
> Not everyone look towards US as their grand father, like hindustan, Or shall "I say so according to hindustanis and their fanboys, they've stolen a march over the americans in missile technology, you are even way behind Chinese, get your act together and think sane dissing, poking fun would lead you no where.
> 
> The sheer stupidity and some people's mentality at making fun is they forget that hindustan in 2012-2013 is working on a sub sonic cruise missile where as "inferior China and Pakistan" had them since 2006.
> 
> @KRAIT, mate you look fool thanking foolish posts.


As a so called 'think Tank', is this all you've got? Your argument doesn't wash and makes you look a little silly.


----------



## rcrmj

gslv mk3 said:


> And you think JF 17 wil penetrate ADs of all other ships in the CBG & evade detection from the AEW aircraft and Vikys radar?
> 
> And the JF 17 would be intercepted by Mig 29 Ks long before it can come in range of vikramaditya.
> 
> Heck the Zhuk ME radar on the mig will see JF 17 before it can see the mig,and would fire a BVRAAM.
> 
> game over .



your joke CBG does not have regional air defense capability, and your AW radar is as good as cold war standard

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gslv mk3

rcrmj said:


> your joke CBG does not have regional air defense capability, and your AW radar is as good as cold war standard



Yeah joke CBG-hey this aint that repainted Casino ship from Ukraine troll.....

please elaborate your points


----------



## gslv mk3

Luftwaffe said:


> You are underestimating the creator/maker. The product is always in some sort of regular tests even after induction even with US Armed Forces.
> 
> Not everyone look towards US as their grand father, like hindustan, Or shall "I say so according to hindustanis and their fanboys, they've stolen a march over the americans in missile technology, you are even way behind Chinese, get your act together and think sane dissing, poking fun would lead you no where.
> 
> The sheer stupidity and some people's mentality at making fun is they forget that hindustan in 2012-2013 is working on a sub sonic cruise missile where as "inferior China and Pakistan" had them since 2006.
> 
> @KRAIT, mate you look fool thanking foolish posts.



lol,No one cheerleads for China with Such enthusiasm.And I have observed that you are a very enthusiastic Cheerleader.

You are also very good at making stories-We are ' way behind China? '
FYI we are not far behind,there are many fields like ABM,Quasi Ballistic Missiles we are at par or ahead of China.
And in case of BMs,SLBMs,Supersonic CMs and the like,there isnt much of lag.

Oh you are boasting about test firing of Babur back in 2005?
Sorry , do you know that Supersonic Brahmos was in Service from 2006?
Now dont say Brahmos is Russian,If Pakistan can consider Babur (which uses foreign turbofan) as Pakistani,Brahmos is Indian.

And did you forget that the Same country is on its way to test another longer range Indigenously developed Ramjet powered LRCM next year? Selective Amnesia?
Now where do you stand wrt that technology??No where?

And you forgot that India has its own Scramjet programs,while Co developing Hypersonic Brahmos 2 with Russia? Selective Amnesia again?

Arent you the same member who posted that ' gunship variant of some Chinese euro copter copy would be ' superior ' to Indian LCH....coz it would have gone through mid life upgrade,when LCH is inducted?

Stop being such a cheerleader.
please....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Manindra

AirRodgers said:


> This is how you attack a badly design India AC.. The India carrier is very limited by its design lol an island almost in the middle of the deck, what morron think that a good AC design. This will hamper(slow) the launch and recovery of the 24 mig 29... If Pakistan send say 24 jf 17 toward the India AC and is detected India will launch the migs to intercept. This will take time because of the limitation of the AC.. By the time the migs are launch and heading toward the 24 jf 17, the Pakistani should turn their fighter back home.. This is when the AC is vulnerable, the mig will chase the jf 17 or return to their AC because their fuel is running dry... About this time if Pakistan send in another group of jf 17 toward the India AC, they be without mig protection. The mig in the air need to land to refuel and because of the badly design of the AC it takes them too long to recover and put up a fully fuel mig to defend the carrier from the incoming jf 17..



Do you know mid-flight refueling ?
Do you know how many BVRAAM & WVRAAM a MIG-29K can carry ?
Do you know how many target MIG-29K can track & how many can engage?
10 MIG-29K can butchered 50 JF-17

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## bloo

AirRodgers said:


> This is how you attack a badly design India AC.. The India carrier is very limited by its design lol an island almost in the middle of the deck, what morron think that a good AC design. This will hamper(slow) the launch and recovery of the 24 mig 29... If Pakistan send say 24 jf 17 toward the India AC and is detected India will launch the migs to intercept. This will take time because of the limitation of the AC.. By the time the migs are launch and heading toward the 24 jf 17, the Pakistani should turn their fighter back home.. This is when the AC is vulnerable, the mig will chase the jf 17 or return to their AC because their fuel is running dry... About this time if Pakistan send in another group of jf 17 toward the India AC, they be without mig protection. The mig in the air need to land to refuel and because of the badly design of the AC it takes them too long to recover and put up a fully fuel mig to defend the carrier from the incoming jf 17..



And where did you pull those facts out of? Do give us a source?







> The MiG-29K power plant consisted of two RD-33K by-pass engines with complex digital control system. The maximum thrust was increased to 5,500 kgf, the maximum afterburner thrust reached 8,800 kgf. Unlike the RD-33K turbojet mounted on the MiG-29M, *the shipborne aircraft engines featured an emergency mode, during which a temporary (short time) thrust increase to 9,400 kgf was possible.* Thanks to the emergency mode, an aircraft with the take off weight of 17,700 kg could take off from the first starting position (*in this case the take off run was 105 m*), *and a 22,400-kg heavy plane* could take off from the second starting position (*in this case the take off run amounted to 195 m*).

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## trident2010

All well is good but the question remains how many JF-17 will remain in air by the time they are in the range to fire? Answer --- None

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dilpakistani

trident2010 said:


> All well is good but the question remains how many JF-17 will remain in air by the time they are in the range to fire? Answer --- None


May be. Indian Airforce is not a joke. But if even one remained and took the shot. It would do the damage. Anyway counter weapons are mostly for deterrence purpose. They are not build to go to war but are build to deter it. CM-400 serves this purpose really well.


----------



## ejaz007

Manindra said:


> Do you know mid-flight refueling ?
> Do you know how many BVRAAM & WVRAAM a MIG-29K can carry ?
> Do you know how many target MIG-29K can track & how many can engage?
> 10 MIG-29K can butchered 50 JF-17


 
You under estimate the capabilities of JF-17. 10 Mig 29k shall not be able to shoot down 50 JF-17s rest assured.

By the time 10 Mig-29k's shall takeoff from carrier JF-17's shall be returning from their successful mission.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kaykay

ejaz007 said:


> You under estimate the capabilities of JF-17. 10 Mig 29k shall not be able to shoot down 50 JF-17s rest assured.
> 
> By the time 10 Mig-29k's shall takeoff from carrier JF-17's shall be returning from their successful mission.


Then You are underestimating Viki's EW capabilities. JF-17s can't even detect it on their own as it can blind them with directed energy some 400 KMs away. Your JF-17s can do something only when Viki will come close to your shore(within 200-300 KM which is unlikely) and your JF-17s have AWACS cover otherwise your JF-17s can't do nothing as they won't be even able to detect it let alone fire missiles on it.
PS: I am not even taking Mig-29Ks in the picture. And As I have stated many time, Viki won't be needed to strike your land as it can't do that very well(may be when we have 2-3 CBGs but not before that), rather for blockade purpose and it can do that very well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dilpakistani

kaykay said:


> Then You are underestimating Viki's EW capabilities. JF-17s can't even detect it on their own as it can blind them with directed energy some 400 KMs away. Your JF-17s can do something only when Viki will come close to your shore(within 200-300 KM which is unlikely) and your JF-17s have AWACS cover otherwise your JF-17s can't do nothing as they won't be even able to detect it let alone fire missiles on it.
> PS: I am not even taking Mig-29Ks in the picture. And As I have stated many time, Viki won't be needed to strike your land as it can't do that very well(may be when we have 2-3 CBGs but not before that), rather for blockade purpose and it can do that very well.



Correct. JF-17 can spare its efforts against ACs...It should be left on submarines with Nuclear tipped Babar or Torpedoes. Tactical nukes can reach with 2-300 km of AC.


----------



## trident2010

dilpakistani said:


> Tactical nukes can reach with 2-300 km of AC.



Wrong answer. We are discussing real world scenario not the hypothetical nuclear exchange.


----------



## [Bregs]

Do fighter aircraft have capability to launch a missile capable of destroying an air craft carrier of 44000 tonne capacity ? 100 missile will be required that too by anticipating that AAD of entire CBG including viki is turned off....lol

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kaykay

dilpakistani said:


> Correct. JF-17 can spare its efforts against ACs...It should be left on submarines with Nuclear tipped Babar or Torpedoes. Tactical nukes can reach with 2-300 km of AC.


well submarines are real threat to any Aircraft Carrier but then again there are counter-measures especially Destroyers/Frigates or SSNs with towed sonars with very long range 360' submarine detection. I hope India to seal the deal with germany for the same in near future. Total 16 warships are to be equipped.


----------



## ejaz007

kaykay said:


> Then You are underestimating Viki's EW capabilities. JF-17s can't even detect it on their own as it can blind them with directed energy some 400 KMs away. Your JF-17s can do something only when Viki will come close to your shore(within 200-300 KM which is unlikely) and your JF-17s have AWACS cover otherwise your JF-17s can't do nothing as they won't be even able to detect it let alone fire missiles on it.
> PS: I am not even taking Mig-29Ks in the picture. And As I have stated many time, Viki won't be needed to strike your land as it can't do that very well(may be when we have 2-3 CBGs but not before that), rather for blockade purpose and it can do that very well.



Now you have brought in another factor. First it was just Mig-29k against JF-17s.

What you have claimed will depend a lot on the fact that when JF-17s are detected approaching the aircraft carrier and with how much speed you are able to launch sufficient number of Mig-29k to challenge them. Then their comes the pilot skills, weapons being used and additional protection the attacking force shall be having.

Since you have mentioned Viki then I shall assume that Erieye and F-16 shall also be in the picture. This will only make your job a lot tougher.

Still if it is just Mig-29k and JF-17s even then it won't be a one sided affair.


----------



## ejaz007

[Bregs] said:


> Do fighter aircraft have capability to launch a missile capable of destroying an air craft carrier of 44000 tonne capacity ? 100 missile will be required that too by anticipating that AAD of entire CBG including viki is turned off....lol



Yes the fighters have the capability. Even a single or two missiles can do the job. It depends where the missile hits the ship. If it hits an area where ammunition is stored then secondary explosions due to ships own weapons would be contributing factor.

Then there shall be lots of fuel and other flammable material available that shall render the ship out of service even if not sink her.


----------



## kaykay

ejaz007 said:


> Now you have brought in another factor. First it was just Mig-29k against JF-17s.
> 
> What you have claimed will depend a lot on the fact that when JF-17s are detected approaching the aircraft carrier and with how much speed you are able to launch sufficient number of Mig-29k to challenge them. Then their comes the pilot skills, weapons being used and additional protection the attacking force shall be having.
> 
> Since you have mentioned Viki then I shall assume that Erieye and F-16 shall also be in the picture. This will only make your job a lot tougher.
> 
> Still if it is just Mig-29k and JF-17s even then it won't be a one sided affair.


Well Erieyes will be effective only when Viki will come near your shore (under 300-350 KM) else even they won't do much. But yeah I agree that a single Aircraft Carrier(CBG) won't be able to do much in case of land strike but still it will be able to create a second front and will weaken your position on first front i.e direct IAF vs PAF from land.
PS: though things will change once we have 2 CBGs in next 4 years and ultimately 3 in 10 Years. I am sure you can't ignore 80+ fighters with AEWs support on moving Aircraft Carriers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Manindra

ejaz007 said:


> You under estimate the capabilities of JF-17. 10 Mig 29k shall not be able to shoot down 50 JF-17s rest assured.
> 
> By the time 10 Mig-29k's shall takeoff from carrier JF-17's shall be returning from their successful mission.


 did

With current BVRAAM, WVRAAM, ECM suite , dog fight ability, advance sensors, low RCS of MIG-29K compare to JF-17 I didn't over estimate MIG-29K
Kindly counter with logical conclusion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ejaz007

kaykay said:


> Well Erieyes will be effective only when Viki will come near your shore (under 300-350 KM) else even they won't do much. But yeah I agree that a single Aircraft Carrier(CBG) won't be able to do much in case of land strike but still it will be able to create a second front and will weaken your position on first front i.e direct IAF vs PAF from land.
> PS: though things will change once we have 2 CBGs in next 4 years and ultimately 3 in 10 Years. I am sure you can't ignore 80+ fighters with AEWs support on moving Aircraft Carriers.



PAF has a dedicated squadron for supporting navy therefore they shall not be weakened against IAF. Their assets that shall face IAF do not include squadron that supports navy.

PS: presently you one carrier group therefore the scenario I have predicted is relevant. One you have more than one carrier group then we shall consider emerging scenario. But one problem that shall emerge is that with more carrier groups you shall need more ships protecting them and thus less ships for offensive operations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ejaz007

Manindra said:


> did
> 
> With current BVRAAM, WVRAAM, ECM suite , dog fight ability, advance sensors, low RCS of MIG-29K compare to JF-17 I didn't over estimate MIG-29K
> Kindly counter with logical conclusion.



Here comes the logical answer:

BVRAAM: Since the BVRAAM of both planes have not been actually used against each other so do not know which one shall have better performance. But shall give some advantage to Mig-29k.

WVRAAM: Here in JF-17 shall have some advantage due US AAM with better capabilities.

ECM suite and sensors: I do not have much knowledge of Mig-29k ECM suite. However shall give advantage to Mig-29k.

Do Fight ability: This depends on the pilot training, number of hours flown on the plane and pilots ability to handle the plane. Here I shall give the benefit to JF-17 since it is flying since 2007 while Mig-29k operations from carrier have yet to commence.

Low RCS: Considering that Mig-29k is twin engine, larger in size and does not have extensive stealth technology the advantage shall be with JF-17.


----------



## kaykay

ejaz007 said:


> PAF has a dedicated squadron for supporting navy therefore they shall not be weakened against IAF. Their assets that shall face IAF do not include squadron that supports navy.
> 
> PS: presently you one carrier group therefore the scenario I have predicted is relevant. One you have more than one carrier group then we shall consider emerging scenario. But one problem that shall emerge is that with more carrier groups you shall need more ships protecting them and thus less ships for offensive operations.


If I am not wrong then you have some Mirage-5s assigned for naval support. This means they won't be there for offense purpose but rather for defending your ports. Again as I said somewhere in previous posts, our Main aim with Viki is not to attack your land but rather for blockade purpose and to secure our interests and that we can do very well with that. If we intend to do land strike by CBGs, then that is not possible before Vikrant and then you also have to assign some JF-17s or other fourth generation aircrafts along with Mirage-5s(this was my point).
And as far as number of ships are concerned in future, we have 46 warships under construction/planned in our dockyards including 7 stealth Frigates(), 7 AESA Destroyers(1 ready, 3 under construction), 12 3000 Tons ASW corvette(1 ready, 3 under construction), 6 conventional submarines(all under construction), 4 SSBNs(1 ready, 3 under construction) and many other ships like OSPV, missile boats etc. So even after 3 CBGs our offensive capabilities won't be weakened. Also considering CBG, it alone is a big offensive package with complete punch.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HariPrasad

feilong said:


> This missile baby will be pakistan new toys to do the job on the INDIA, we will selling many of this baby to Pakistan. Hope you guys finished the job well.



Well come baby. Give Pakistan What ever you want. We are least concern about you guys supplying any weapons to Pakistan Except Nuclear weapon (Which you have already done) We know very well the quality of Chinese Weapon. Milk Pakistan with your Junk weapon. It is hardly going to increase any threat to Indian armed forces and it will be exhausting Pakistan Defense budget. Good for us. If it would have been France or American or Russian weapon, it would have forced us to take counter measure.


----------



## HariPrasad

AirRodgers said:


> This is how you attack a badly design India AC.. The India carrier is very limited by its design lol an island almost in the middle of the deck, what morron think that a good AC design. This will hamper(slow) the launch and recovery of the 24 mig 29... If Pakistan send say 24 jf 17 toward the India AC and is detected India will launch the migs to intercept. This will take time because of the limitation of the AC.. By the time the migs are launch and heading toward the 24 jf 17, the Pakistani should turn their fighter back home.. This is when the AC is vulnerable, the mig will chase the jf 17 or return to their AC because their fuel is running dry... About this time if Pakistan send in another group of jf 17 toward the India AC, they be without mig protection. The mig in the air need to land to refuel and because of the badly design of the AC it takes them too long to recover and put up a fully fuel mig to defend the carrier from the incoming jf 17..




See Man Vikky can blind even best planes from a distance of 500 Km. If JF 17 tries to come close. its electronic system will fail and it will fall in sea.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ejaz007

kaykay said:


> If I am not wrong then you have some Mirage-5s assigned for naval support. This means they won't be there for offense purpose but rather for defending your ports. Again as I said somewhere in previous posts, our Main aim with Viki is not to attack your land but rather for blockade purpose and to secure our interests and that we can do very well with that. If we intend to do land strike by CBGs, then that is not possible before Vikrant and then you also have to assign some JF-17s or other fourth generation aircrafts along with Mirage-5s(this was my point).
> And as far as number of ships are concerned in future, we have 46 warships under construction/planned in our dockyards including 7 stealth Frigates(), 7 AESA Destroyers(1 ready, 3 under construction), 12 3000 Tons ASW corvette(1 ready, 3 under construction), 6 conventional submarines(all under construction), 4 SSBNs(1 ready, 3 under construction) and many other ships like OSPV, missile boats etc. So even after 3 CBGs our offensive capabilities won't be weakened. Also considering CBG, it alone is a big offensive package with complete punch.



Mirage Vs shall eventually be replaced by JF-17s.


----------



## bloo

ejaz007 said:


> By the time 10 Mig-29k's shall takeoff from carrier JF-17's shall be returning from their successful mission.



Don't prematurely evaluate, what makes you even say that?
JF-17s will already be detected before they even get in range to fire, MiGs will thus efficiently be deployed.
What do you think the time is for take off of a MiG-29K?


----------



## kaykay

ejaz007 said:


> Mirage Vs shall eventually be replaced by JF-17s.


But unlike the current 12 Mirage-5s, JF-17s would be needed in large numbers. Atleast 30 or so.


----------



## bloo

ejaz007 said:


> Here comes the logical answer:
> 
> BVRAAM: Since the BVRAAM of both planes have not been actually used against each other so do not know which one shall have better performance. But shall give some advantage to Mig-29k.
> 
> WVRAAM: Here in JF-17 shall have some advantage due US AAM with better capabilities.
> 
> ECM suite and sensors: I do not have much knowledge of Mig-29k ECM suite. However shall give advantage to Mig-29k.
> 
> Do Fight ability: This depends on the pilot training, number of hours flown on the plane and pilots ability to handle the plane. Here I shall give the benefit to JF-17 since it is flying since 2007 while Mig-29k operations from carrier have yet to commence.
> 
> Low RCS: Considering that Mig-29k is twin engine, larger in size and does not have extensive stealth technology the advantage shall be with JF-17.



Actually I would put R-27, R-73 or Python-5 against any AIM-9 versions out there. So WVRAAM is debatable.

As for rcs, the radar coating on MiG-29K reduces its RCS by factor of 4-5 as compared to the basic MiG-29.

On top of that a better radar than the JFT, more hardpoints than the JFT, better TWR than JFT, twice the MTOW of JFT.
I heard somewhere that JFT tested some mid air refueling probes, but MiG 29 can both conduct aerial refueling and "buddy" refuel other aircraft.
So I would say the balance tilts in the MiG's favor.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ejaz007

bloo said:


> Don't prematurely evaluate, what makes you even say that?
> JF-17s will already be detected before they even get in range to fire, MiGs will thus efficiently be deployed.
> What do you think the time is for take off of a MiG-29K?



What makes you think they shall be detected that early?

The main point is at what range JF-17s should be detected enabling Indian navy to deploy Mig-29s to intercept them.

As far as I know 24 Mig-29s shall be on the carrier. Even if you launch an aircraft every 30 second you still need around 12 minutes to enable 24 Mig-29s to get air borne. Hell of a long time.


----------



## neehar

Luftwaffe said:


> \
> 
> @KRAIT, mate you look fool thanking foolish posts.


sorry cudnt stop laughing when he thanked u @KRAIT
on topic
im very much skeptical about the speed and its capacity.is this missile even tested??and indian members have a point here.how could the jf-17 s approach the cbg with the more powerful mig-29 s on board with much longer range radars??even if they manage to get near the aircraft it would have its own CBG and CIWS and SAMS for protection.the carrier has capable electronic warfare system aswel tested against the russian awacs succesfully.not as easy as some seem to think.further the CBG will be with in the range of our airforce aswell!!



ejaz007 said:


> What makes you think they shall be detected that early?
> 
> The main point is at what range JF-17s should be detected enabling Indian navy to deploy Mig-29s to intercept them.
> 
> As far as I know 24 Mig-29s shall be on the carrier. Even if you launch an aircraft every 30 second you still need around 12 minutes to enable 24 Mig-29s to get air borne. Hell of a long time.


considering only 3 aircrafts are launched from our carrier ,ur aircrafts will be already with in the range of ours...so by the time ours get in to ur's range dont u think we'd be already succesful??in anycase i think we can get the info regarding ur aircrafts as soon as they take off..that should give us ample time to react.besides donot forget that any action will takeplace with in the range of our airforce aswell!!one more point is the aircraft already carries a ton of missile they wont have enough missiles to protect themselves and even if they are escorted.i dont think it would help much owing to the capabilities of mig-29

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ejaz007

neehar said:


> sorry cudnt stop laughing when he thanked u @KRAIT
> on topic
> im very much skeptical about the speed and its capacity.is this missile even tested??and indian members have a point here.how could the jf-17 s approach the cbg with the more powerful mig-29 s on board with much longer range radars??even if they manage to get near the aircraft it would have its own CBG and CIWS and SAMS for protection.the carrier has capable electronic warfare system aswel tested against the russian awacs succesfully.not as easy as some seem to think.further the CBG will be with in the range of our airforce aswell!!
> 
> 
> considering only 3 aircrafts are launched from our carrier ,ur aircrafts will be already with in the range of ours...so by the time ours get in to ur's range dont u think we'd be already succesful??in anycase i think we can get the info regarding ur aircrafts as soon as they take off..that should give us ample time to react.besides donot forget that any action will takeplace with in the range of our airforce aswell!!one more point is the aircraft already carries a ton of missile they wont have enough missiles to protect themselves and even if they are escorted.i dont think it would help much owing to the capabilities of mig-29



Does your aircraft carrier has any weapons installed on her as of now?


----------



## HariPrasad

ejaz007 said:


> What makes you think they shall be detected that early?
> 
> The main point is at what range JF-17s should be detected enabling Indian navy to deploy Mig-29s to intercept them.
> 
> As far as I know 24 Mig-29s shall be on the carrier. Even if you launch an aircraft every 30 second you still need around 12 minutes to enable 24 Mig-29s to get air borne. Hell of a long time.




Vikky will blind all Pak planes from 500 KM away.


----------



## neehar

ejaz007 said:


> Does your aircraft carrier has any weapons installed on her as of now?


do ur aircrafts have the missile as of now?? even though it donot have any sams or CIWS now its fully protected by a CBG and better still we have a powerful electronic suite enough to blind of an AWAC ..besides as i said any action is going to take place with in the range of our airforce..so if not fulcrums..u need to face flankers!!and thats worse !!


----------



## ejaz007

HariPrasad said:


> Vikky will blind all Pak planes from 500 KM away.



Yes we know. Don't scare us again and again.

Just one thing make sure you blind our planes and not your own by mistake. That would be unfortunate wouldn't it be.



neehar said:


> do ur aircrafts have the missile as of now?? even though it donot have any sams or CIWS now its fully protected by a CBG and better still we have a powerful electronic suite enough to blind of an AWAC ..besides as i said any action is going to take place with in the range of our airforce..so if not fulcrums..u need to face flankers!!and thats worse !!



Yes our fighters have missiles. Both BVR and WVR ones.


----------



## neehar

ejaz007 said:


> Yes we know. Don't scare us again and again.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes our fighters have missiles. Both BVR and WVR ones.



ur BVR and WVR are not any good against an aircraft carrier.i was asking about cm-400akg. combat with an aircraft carrier is all together a different league.first of all i dont find any credible source for the missile let alone u acquiring it.so lets discuss this when ur airforce gets the misslies and when they actually work.


----------



## ejaz007

neehar said:


> ur BVR and WVR are not any good against an aircraft carrier.i was asking about cm-400akg. combat with an aircraft carrier is all together a different league.first of all i dont find any credible source for the missile let alone u acquiring it.so lets discuss this when ur airforce gets the misslies and when they actually work.




Yes we have CM-400 AKG and Exocet Anti ship missiles.


----------



## kaykay

ejaz007 said:


> Yes we have CM-400 AKG and Exocet Anti ship missiles.


Bhai saab It's effective only when Our Viki will come near your shore and your JF-17s have AWACS cover. Else JF-17s radar won't be even able to lock Viki then how come launch missile on it. But then again I also don't think that handful of Mig-29Ks(12-14) will really do anything in case of land strike. Atleast not until there are 25 Mig-29Ks and which is only possible with 2 CBGs.
Having 1 CBG during war time will have only good advantage in case of Maritime strike and CAP as Mig-29Ks will give a full 850 km radius cover and can destroy surface ships in that range from CBG. Enemy Surface ships will find hard to survive against fighters equipped with anti-ship missiles. Not to mention how helpless will be enemy oil tankers and other ships.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Donatello

HariPrasad said:


> Vikky will blind all Pak planes from 500 KM away.


And this story is taken from a Bollywood director/writer?


----------



## neehar

ejaz007 said:


> Yes we have CM-400 AKG and Exocet Anti ship missiles.


the article u quoted mentions that the missile hits target at 4 mach.the very same article mentions that ur airforce describes it a hyper sonic which means >5mach so whats correct??too many contradictions..do u have any footage of the missile being tested either by ur airforce or by china??in any case the article describes that missile can hit "fixed or slow moving" targets..so is it really effective against our carrier???and that too with a range of 250 km??leave hitting the ship can it even track the ship let alone its course??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JOEY TRIBIANI

indian shor machaye gy ab 



joekrish said:


> We have 24 migs on board plus the CBG's, so......how many JF 17 are you planing to send in.


lolz missile hyper sonic ha .. 24 mig take off bhi ni lay paye gy ..aur sach ma kia tumhay pata bhi ha aik AC pay k sy attack kia jata ha ?:?


----------



## HariPrasad

Donatello said:


> And this story is taken from a Bollywood director/writer?





HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Finding it difficult to digest. isn't it??? Not your fault dubby.


Long range air surveillance radars and advanced electronic warfare suite makes the ship capable of maintaining "a surveillance bubble" of over 500 km around the ship.

Antony to commission INS Vikramaditya in Russia | Business Standard


----------



## Patriciagray001

So all your 24 29Ks will fly to protect the carrier group......

You really don't have any idea of how an attack on a CG is conducted. 
You really need to start reading "How to protect a carrier group for dummies".








Freestyle Motocross Gloves


----------



## kaykay

JOEY TRIBIANI said:


> indian shor machaye gy ab
> 
> 
> lolz missile hyper sonic ha .. 24 mig take off bhi ni lay paye gy ..aur sach ma kia tumhay pata bhi ha aik AC pay k sy attack kia jata ha ?:?


O bhai your JF-17 radar can't even detect Viki when its powerful EW suite is on, let alone launch missile on it. See even aircrafts like Su-33, IL-38's radar couldn't detect it a single time as it made them blind some 400 Kms away, when EW suite was on and I am sure Su-33 or IL-38 have much better and powerful radars than JFT.
INS Vikramaditya has might but little protection against air attacks - Indian Express

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## bloo

ejaz007 said:


> What makes you think they shall be detected that early?
> 
> The main point is at what range JF-17s should be detected enabling Indian navy to deploy Mig-29s to intercept them.
> 
> As far as I know 24 Mig-29s shall be on the carrier. Even if you launch an aircraft every 30 second you still need around 12 minutes to enable 24 Mig-29s to get air borne. Hell of a long time.



That is pretty easy.
AEW aircraft usually fly ahead of the CBG, in this case Ka-31 which has a detection rate of 100-200km.
Forget that the frigates, the destroyers and the AC(Vikramaditya-500km) itself have long ranged radars that can detect aircrafts and engage them.

If I am not wrong the current JFTs have a range of 130km which is no where near the MiG's, Ka-31 or Vikramaditya.

You are forgetting that the frigates and destroyers in the CBG will have SAMs.
You are thoroughly underestimating the firepower they have, its not as easy as shoot and scoot like over land.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## joekrish

JOEY TRIBIANI said:


> indian shor machaye gy ab
> 
> 
> lolz missile hyper sonic ha .. 24 mig take off bhi ni lay paye gy ..aur sach ma kia tumhay pata bhi ha aik AC pay k sy attack kia jata ha ?:?


Its an english forum so try and reply in english.
How are you planing to deliver those missiles? Throw it with your hand?


----------



## indiatester

OrionHunter said:


> Oh damn! *Chinese cruise missiles to hit moving targets like ships and ACs?*  Gimme a break! This technology has not even been perfected yet by the US and is only in the testing stages. Probably take a couple of years more to iron out the bugs and make it operational.
> 
> *This new seeker employing Electronic Support Measures (ESM) was recently tested with the Raytheon Tomahawk Block IV cruise missile, as part of the weapon’s product improvement program. The new seeker will enable the cruise missile to engage moving or relocatable targets, including ships or mobile surface-to-air missile sites, identified by their unique electromagnetic signature. *
> 
> The new seeker can automatically locate and track moving and stationary targets by sensing the electro-magnetic radiation they emit (i.e. radar, communications etc).
> 
> *So, according to the Chinese and their fan boys, they've stolen a march over the Americans in missile technology!! That's nuts!*
> 
> I really did fall on my a$$ laughing!!



Pardon my ignorance, but if SAM's and AAM's, ATGM's can hit moving targets (usually much faster), why does it seem so hard for cruise missiles to hit a moving target? Some cruise missiles have the loiter capability too!


----------



## OrionHunter

indiatester said:


> Pardon my ignorance, but if SAM's and AAM's, ATGM's can hit moving targets (usually much faster), why does it seem so hard for cruise missiles to hit a moving target? Some cruise missiles have the loiter capability too!


Very good question. I'll put it in a nutshell. You can't destroy an AC with the usual cruise missile. You'd need a big explosive warhead to do that which means a massive increase in the weight of the missile. Which means maneuvering the missile by its intrinsic guidance systems in the terminal phase from stand off OTH ranges *on a moving target, *which is extremely difficult due to the missile's mass and kinetic energy, unlike the much smaller, lighter and easily maneuverable SAMs, AAMs, ATGMs etc.

The Chinese too are trying to get this technology perfected for their big long range DF series missiles for destroying ACs but have not been successful so far. However, the Americans are getting their Tomahawks equipped with NG explosives to take on moving targets with some new fangled electronic guidance systems to take on small ships and moving land targets. But destroying ACs is another story. You'd require half a dozen such missiles simultaneously to destroy an AC which has its own defensive measures against such attacks as well as the Carrier Strike Group which it is part of.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Basel

In all discussion ppl have forgotten one thing, that is JF-17s will not go alone they will be backed by other systems land, sea and submerged, because sinking an ACC is not a joke and PN is a professional force they know all risks involved.

One think I can tell that when Indian CBG will become a major threat in a conflict Pakistan will take all measures to neutralize it, for that measures have been taken but not publicized. The big issue now is not IN's CBG it our economy due to which we cant acquire or develop desired systems.

For those who think that JF-17s will be using its own radar to strike ACC they are living in fools heaven, for that UAVs are going to be used PN and PAF are inducting them not just for recce they are also to acquire targets, if burraq can carry decent load and data link with other system for relaying target data then trust me IN's CBG will be in deep trouble.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

gslv mk3 said:


> And you really thing the JF 17 can come close to Vikramaditya-Mig 29 s flying BARCAP and Kamov AEW helis
> The ship itself packs remarkable AD capabilities - Barak 8 missiles,RAN 40 L/ MF STAR radars.
> 
> And thats just the AD of the carrier-P 15 A destroyers will lead the CBG and they too have significant AD systems.
> 
> And before thinking about that,think how the AKG would be delivered to the Carrier- which is part of a CBG and is located far away from your coast,You would have to face detection and interception from IAF and IN air arm
> 
> Well I would say leave all that and dig this- Mig 29 Ks have a combat radius of 850 kg with full internal fuel and can take off with a load of total 5.5 tonnes from Vikramaditya/Vikrant.
> 
> And I need not compare the capabilities of mig29 and JF 17....shall I??
> 
> @Water Car Engineer
> 
> Nice reply mate.
> 
> I guess these guys are getting Paranoid of growing capabilities of IN-which is getting 2 40,000 tonne ACs,more SSBNs and SSKs,more stealth frigates,destroyers and corvettes ( that weigh as much as their destroyers).
> heck it is a network centric force with itsown dedicated military communication sat...
> 
> Carrier Killer missile...lol



Lol @BARCAP.. and barak-8 cancelled program (atleast for india)... rest of your post is typical chest thumping..


----------



## TsAr

Without getting into the discussion whether JF-17 fighter can knock Out the Indian Carrier or via versa....

The country which has the most number if Aircraft carriers and and has used them most effectively in a war is USA....A formation containing a Aircraft carrier is referred to as *"carrier strike group"* by the Americans, now what is a CGS : 
*A carrier strike group (CSG) is an operational formation of the United States Navy. It is composed of roughly 7,500 personnel, an aircraft carrier, at least one cruiser, a destroyer squadron of at least two destroyers and/or frigates,[1] and a carrier air wing of 65 to 70 aircraft. A carrier strike group also, on occasion, includes submarines, attached logistics ships and a supply ship.*

For further details kindly google it and read before arguing who is going to knock out who. A single aircarft carrier with 20+ aircraft is not good enough. Its good for India that they have got a Aircraft carrier, but they would need years before they have on hand experience and can effectively deploy them. Meanwhile Pakistan is and will work on countering this threat.

Lets not forget that the Indian Aircraft carrier is not meant alone for Pakistan. The bigger threat and challenge is from China, plus India navy is looking to become a regional force...Live and Let Live...Peace....


----------



## gslv mk3

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> Lol @BARCAP.. and barak-8 cancelled program (atleast for india)... rest of your post is typical chest thumping..



Haha...pdf s genius is here with his bunch of Jokes-'Shaurya is a pure BM ' 'India is largest importer of N reactors' and now he is 'lol'ing at capability ofMig 29 Ks...

Barak 8 is a ' cancelled ' program? Is that another great ' discovery ' by you?

Chest thumping?Dude these are facts,which your military planners take into account - 2 40,000 + tonne Carriers,Stealth Destroyers,Stealth frigates ,SSBN and its own communication sat for NCW,IN is a formidable force.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jf Thunder

gslv mk3 said:


> And you think JF 17 wil penetrate ADs of all other ships in the CBG & evade detection from the AEW aircraft and Vikys radar?
> 
> And the JF 17 would be intercepted by Mig 29 Ks long before it can come in range of vikramaditya.
> 
> Heck the Zhuk ME radar on the mig will see JF 17 before it can see the mig,and would fire a BVRAAM.
> 
> game over .


and you think that a Jf 17 carrying a high tech missile will be going alone to bombard the ships?
there is a DEFENSE TEAM for a reason dude, there are many strategies that can be used just like there are defense strategies there are also attack strategies, and the one which is more thought out is the successful one.


----------



## gslv mk3

Jf Thunder said:


> and you think that a Jf 17 carrying a high tech missile will be going alone to bombard the ships?
> there is a DEFENSE TEAM for a reason dude, there are many strategies that can be used just like there are defense strategies there are also attack strategies, and the one which is more thought out is the successful one.



And you think that the Long Range Tracking radars on ship wont detect that JF 17,let alone other ships,of CBG ( which include Shivalik class frigates and Kolkata / Delhi class destroyers?)

Mig 29s which have got much superior radars than JF would not pick up your acs?

Kamove AEW helis wont pic up the JFs?

And finally,Barak 8 system is a very capable syatem and Israel in inducting it to counter Yakhount missiles of Syria.So CM 400 AKG probabily wont have a chance against it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Indischer

OrionHunter said:


> Very good question. I'll put it in a nutshell. You can't destroy an AC with the usual cruise missile. *You'd need a big explosive warhead to do that which means a massive increase in the weight of the missile. *Which means maneuvering the missile by its intrinsic guidance systems in the terminal phase from stand off OTH ranges on a moving target*, *which is extremely difficult due to the missile's mass and kinetic energy, unlike the much smaller, lighter and easily maneuverable SAMs, AAMs, ATGMs etc.



Might sound like an idiotic question, but here goes: What if many smaller cruise missiles are used to rain on the deck and effectively destroy the runway of an Aircraft Carrier? How easy is it to repair a bombed runway _in-situ_? I've read that a Kamikaze attack on the _USS Franklin_ had sent it out of action for 4 months.


----------



## Jf Thunder

gslv mk3 said:


> And you think that the Long Range Tracking radars on ship wont detect that JF 17,let alone other ships,of CBG ( which include Shivalik class frigates and Kolkata / Delhi class destroyers?)
> 
> Mig 29s which have got much superior radars than JF would not pick up your acs?
> 
> Kamove AEW helis wont pic up the JFs?
> 
> And finally,Barak 8 system is a very capable syatem and Israel in inducting it to counter Yakhount missiles of Syria.So CM 400 AKG probabily wont have a chance against it.


dude, i wasnt talking about ships, i was talking about a defense team of planes ._.
so what you are trying to say is that you will divert your ships, helis, fighters to stop one assault team, well thats good for you, and like i said its called a strategy, no defense mechanism is invincible, if they were then wars would be pointless even your defenses will have a weak point and that is up to our generals to find out, if they are capable of doing that


----------



## Oldman1

Indischer said:


> Might sound like an idiotic question, but here goes: What if many smaller cruise missiles are used to rain on the deck and effectively destroy the runway of an Aircraft Carrier? How easy is it to repair a bombed runway _in-situ_? I've read that a Kamikaze attack on the _USS Franklin_ had sent it out of action for 4 months.



Pretty easy in fact. 4 months is impressive considering the damage the Franklin sustained. Not to mention the shipyards that are already burdened with repairing other ships that were damaged in the war.

For example the USS Enterprise was damaged and claimed to be sunk by the Japanese only to be repaired and kept on killing more Japanese. So its not a good idea to just damage the deck of the ship. And current carriers are pretty tough compare to WW2 carriers which were made of wood. USS America for example took weeks to sink by the U.S. Navy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jf Thunder

dude, as the carries have become stronger so have the missiles, so thet ratio of power is pretty much the same


----------



## Oldman1

Jf Thunder said:


> dude, as the carries have become stronger so have the missiles, so thet ratio of power is pretty much the same



The U.S. Navy tested all kinds of weapons including anti ship missiles with considerable warheads. Still took 2 weeks to sink it. And its just sitting there. No destroyers or any type of countermeasures involved to prevent aircraft or missiles from heading towards it. Not to mention carriers themselves have aircraft to detect any hostiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GURU DUTT

Jf Thunder said:


> and you think that a Jf 17 carrying a high tech missile will be going alone to bombard the ships?
> there is a DEFENSE TEAM for a reason dude, there are many strategies that can be used just like there are defense strategies there are also attack strategies, and the one which is more thought out is the successful one.


well heres a scenario

india and pakistan are at war and indian navy is given the task to block your sea lines

now the question is how

answer is simple a squad of SU-30MKI at baroda lainches a attack on karachi and gadawar and dessimates all the naval ships of PN standing there and the second wave of jags finishes the job

well the things are not that easy but not that difficult aswell for india ause 

1. all of your Air force will be monitored and all your actions will be tracked and followed very closeli by the indian ground based radars which even today scan all pakistani airspace as much as untill the hindukush ranges 

2.All pakistani airforce will be bizzi in fighting and keeping indian iar force at bay where on earth will they be able to spare a squad of your almighty JF17s to diliver there define CM-400 and other so called carrier killers cause 

a. there are at least 12 squads(240) of fighters on owr western border to keep PAF bizzi that includes

2 squads of M2k 
2squads of MIG29
5squads of MKI
3squads of Jaguars

b. besudes this 3 dedicated phalcon AWACS platforms will keep even a better eye on PAF 

c.round the clock Spy SAT cover(both israeli & indian + a few inputs from russian and americans aswell) will keep even a better eye on all you movements

d. every CBG will have at least 1 squad ok Mig 29K + 6 K25 & K31 ASW & AWAC helicopters backed by there own radars and anty aircraft missile systems

3. what about other ships of indian navy do you realli think they will stay away form the party 

well brother thing is there is nothing you can do to take on owr CBGs they are not for you

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

Let me show you something. This is not a carrier but an old U.S. destroyer and how much punishment it took. You have to remember the U.S. warships have been hit by anti-ship missiles before and survived for example USS Stark and Liberty. Even Al Qaeda suicide boat that caused a 40 ft gap in the Cole and still didn't sink it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Jf Thunder

GURU DUTT said:


> well heres a scenario
> 
> india and pakistan are at war and indian navy is given the task to block your sea lines
> 
> now the question is how
> 
> answer is simple a squad of SU-30MKI at baroda lainches a attack on karachi and gadawar and dessimates all the naval ships of PN standing there and the second wave of jags finishes the job
> 
> thread colsed


wow, i am speechless, you have finished us like our army navy and air force was sleeping ._.
well at least you can certainly dream good, i wish you best of luck in your dream wars where you attack us and no one comes to our defense, in my dreams i see a Babur missile fired at your ACC and it sinks along with all the planes ^_^



Oldman1 said:


> The U.S. Navy tested all kinds of weapons including anti ship missiles with considerable warheads. Still took 2 weeks to sink it. And its just sitting there. No destroyers or any type of countermeasures involved to prevent aircraft or missiles from heading towards it. Not to mention carriers themselves have aircraft to detect any hostiles.


 so what you are trying to say is that ACC are invincible, ok then that means we have lost a war even before it began


----------



## Oldman1

Jf Thunder said:


> so what you are trying to say is that ACC are invincible, ok then that means we have lost a war even before it began



Didn't say it was invincible, just really tough to sink it.


----------



## GURU DUTT

Jf Thunder said:


> wow, i am speechless, you have finished us like our army navy and air force was sleeping ._.
> well at least you can certainly dream good, i wish you best of luck in your dream wars where you attack us and no one comes to our defense, in my dreams i see a Babur missile fired at your ACC and it sinks along with all the planes ^_^
> 
> 
> so what you are trying to say is that ACC are invincible, ok then that means we have lost a war even before it began


read again kiddo i edited it for your convenience


----------



## Viper 94

gslv mk3 said:


> And you think JF 17 wil penetrate ADs of all other ships in the CBG & evade detection from the AEW aircraft and Vikys radar?
> 
> And the JF 17 would be intercepted by Mig 29 Ks long before it can come in range of vikramaditya.
> 
> Heck the Zhuk ME radar on the mig will see JF 17 before it can see the mig,and would fire a BVRAAM.
> 
> game over .


you do realize that jf-17 would also carry sd-10 bvr missiles 
or be escorted by f-16s with amraams 
also there will be awacs aircraft continuously communicating with the strike package 
so the game is not over that easily


----------



## Jf Thunder

GURU DUTT said:


> well heres a scenario
> 
> india and pakistan are at war and indian navy is given the task to block your sea lines
> 
> now the question is how
> 
> answer is simple a squad of SU-30MKI at baroda lainches a attack on karachi and gadawar and dessimates all the naval ships of PN standing there and the second wave of jags finishes the job
> 
> well the things are not that easy but not that difficult aswell for india ause
> 
> 1. all of your Air force will be monitored and all your actions will be tracked and followed very closeli by the indian ground based radars which even today scan all pakistani airspace as much as untill the hindukush ranges
> 
> 2.All pakistani airforce will be bizzi in fighting and keeping indian iar force at bay where on earth will they be able to spare a squad of your almighty JF17s to diliver there define CM-400 and other so called carrier killers cause
> 
> a. there are at least 12 squads(240) of fighters on owr western border to keep PAF bizzi that includes
> 
> 2 squads of M2k
> 2squads of MIG29
> 5squads of MKI
> 3squads of Jaguars
> 
> b. besudes this 3 dedicated phalcon AWACS platforms will keep even a better eye on PAF
> 
> c.round the clock Spy SAT cover(both israeli & indian + a few inputs from russian and americans aswell) will keep even a better eye on all you movements
> 
> d. every CBG will have at least 1 squad ok Mig 29K + 6 K25 & K31 ASW & AWAC helicopters backed by there own radars and anty aircraft missile systems
> 
> 3. what about other ships of indian navy do you realli think they will stay away form the party
> 
> well brother thing is there is nothing you can do to take on owr CBGs they are not for you


well i guess we will have to zero down your air force a bit quickly then, no?



Oldman1 said:


> Didn't say it was invincible, just really tough to sink it.


well then lets not sink the ACC then shall we? we will just take out the planes sitting on it


----------



## GURU DUTT

Jf Thunder said:


> well i guess we will have to zero down your air force a bit quickly then, no?


well brother to zero down owr airforce is no way in your capability as of now or in near future why 

well all pakistan has now or in couple of years will be 

F-16 :16 blk 52+ 40 Mlu 
JH17: 60-80 
50 each of mirages & F-7
Total: 216-236
backed by 4 chinese made & 2 eyewire AWACS+3 mid air refeulers

as aginst 

150 Jags+100 MKIs+40 M2K+40 MIG29 ......Total : 330

backed by 6 Mid air refeulers & 3 Phalcon AWACs

not to forget that if you try to be agressive there is a whole armada ofAA batteries backed again by 3D & 4D ASEA based ground & aerostat radars + Spy Sat cover

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## OrionHunter

Indischer said:


> Might sound like an idiotic question, but here goes: What if many smaller cruise missiles are used to rain on the deck and effectively destroy the runway of an Aircraft Carrier? How easy is it to repair a bombed runway _in-situ_? I've read that a Kamikaze attack on the _USS Franklin_ had sent it out of action for 4 months.


Firstly there are no Kamikazis nowadays!! If if they were, AA defences would have shot them out to hell even before they had a chance of coming within 20 miles of the carrier!

Secondly, you must remember that *an AC never operates alone. There is a fully armed Carrier Battle/Strike Group that supports it. These have a huge arsenal of missiles and aircraft to neutralize incoming missiles apart from the anti missile defences integral to the AC.*

Another little known aspect is that carriers are easier to disable than out-rightly sink, since they have thousands of independent watertight compartments. *If a carrier actually were hit by anything less powerful than a nuclear weapon, it could absorb the damage and continue operating in some diminished capacity; it almost certainly would not be sunk. *


----------



## Viper 94

Oldman1 said:


> Let me show you something. This is not a carrier but an old U.S. destroyer and how much punishment it took. You have to remember the U.S. warships have been hit by anti-ship missiles before and survived for example USS Stark and Liberty. Even Al Qaeda suicide boat that caused a 40 ft gap in the Cole and still didn't sink it.


they are not firing any anti ship missile it is an 
AGM-65 Maverick
mainly used against tanks 
considering that the missile is so small 
that damage is substantial, an actual anti ship missile will cause damage orders of magnitude greater that this 
as far uss cole is concerned you cant compare a suicide boat with a missile 
even so the attack killed 17 sailors and injured 39 
the ship was out of service for about 3 years


----------



## Indischer

OrionHunter said:


> Firstly there are no Kamikazis nowadays!! If if they were, AA defences would have shot them out to hell even before they had a chance of coming within 20 miles of the carrier!
> 
> Secondly, you must remember that *an AC never operates alone. There is a fully armed Carrier Battle/Strike Group that supports it. These have a huge arsenal of missiles and aircraft to neutralize incoming missiles apart from the anti missile defences integral to the AC.*
> 
> Another little known aspect is that carriers are easier to disable than out-rightly sink, since they have thousands of independent watertight compartments. *If a carrier actually were hit by anything less powerful than a nuclear weapon, it could absorb the damage and continue operating in some diminished capacity; it almost certainly would not be sunk. *



I quoted the Kamikaze attack only to suggest the effects of limited damage onto the decks of aircraft carriers. I am also aware(in a limited way albeit) of how tightly defended CBGs are. Hence, I was specific about a volley of many cruise missiles (of the Shaurya type, not DF 21s)hitting the deck of an A C. Oldman1 here suggested that any such damage to the deck will be easily repaired in-situ. You too seem to share his views.

What if the aircraft lifts are disabled beyond repair by one or more such hits? I guess there will be more than one lift to ensure redundancy, but aren't such simple factors a major concern during battle? Many modern appraisals seem to paint the Aircraft carriers in negative light due to such concerns.


----------



## gslv mk3

Viper 94 said:


> you do realize that jf-17 would also carry sd-10 bvr missiles
> or be escorted by f-16s with amraams
> also there will be awacs aircraft continuously communicating with the strike package
> so the game is not over that easily



And do you realise that with a longer range radar,the mig would see the JF 17s first?
And F 16s,depends on mood of Americans,you know that?
Continous AWACS coverage?with Erieye/ZDK? Sorry,what is the radar range?
And what about combat radius of JF 17? And that too with CM400 AKG?


----------



## Basel

IN fleet is very formidable and it is very potent too, but PN is not sleeping they are behind in tech and resources but they know who they have to face, and for those ppl who think that they only had satellite coverage and net centric stuff and PN will not have them then they are living in fools heaven because China provides access to stuff that many don't even know.

The disclosed agreement between China and Pakistan regarding space tech n specially chinese beidou navigation satellite system have Indian ppl heard it? do u think it is the only collaboration we had, buddy its tip of the ice berg and many don't know what resources China will provide us in case of conflict with India because China will never want India to standing eye to eye with them as western pawn power against them.


----------



## OrionHunter

Indischer said:


> I quoted the Kamikaze attack only to suggest the effects of limited damage onto the decks of aircraft carriers. I am also aware(in a limited way albeit) of how tightly defended CBGs are. Hence, I was specific about a volley of many cruise missiles (of the Shaurya type, not DF 21s)hitting the deck of an A C. Oldman1 here suggested that any such damage to the deck will be easily repaired in-situ. You too seem to share his views.
> 
> What if the aircraft lifts are disabled beyond repair by one or more such hits? I guess there will be more than one lift to ensure redundancy, but aren't such simple factors a major concern during battle? Many modern appraisals seem to paint the Aircraft carriers in negative light due to such concerns.


I fully agree. No system in this world is damage proof! But what I wanted to stress is that it would be extremely difficult to destroy an AC. Disabling it is slightly easier!


----------



## Basel

> I fully agree. No system in this world is damage proof! But what I wanted to stress is that it would be extremely difficult to destroy an AC. Disabling it is slightly easier!



Destroying ACC may not be PN or any other Navy's task who will face them, the primary job for PN is to keep them far way by sea denial or if war broke out damage them enough so they remain out of service during war.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Viper 94

gslv mk3 said:


> And do you realise that with a longer range radar,the mig would see the JF 17s first?
> And F 16s,depends on mood of Americans,you know that?
> Continous AWACS coverage?with Erieye/ZDK? Sorry,what is the radar range?
> And what about combat radius of JF 17? And that too with CM400 AKG?


it doesnt matter that mig's radar has a longer detection range, jf-17 will also know of any air threats through information given by awacs 
jf-17 may also carry 
BM/KG300G jamming pod 
and sd-10 has a range of 75 -100 km 
r-77 used by mig has similar range 
jf-17 will release the missile 250+ km away out of the range of r-77 missile 
and in 3 mins the missile will reach the target 
jf-17 will be inside pakistan airspace


----------



## GURU DUTT

Viper 94 said:


> it doesnt matter that mig's radar has a longer detection range, jf-17 will also know of any air threats through information given by awacs
> jf-17 may also carry
> BM/KG300G jamming pod
> and sd-10 has a range of 75 -100 km
> r-77 used by mig has similar range
> jf-17 will release the missile 250+ km away out of the range of r-77 missile
> and in 3 mins the missile will reach the target
> jf-17 will be inside pakistan airspace


well buddy thing is even before your JF -17 releases its gods gift to aviation its super duper BVRs do you know that they were /will be all along tracked by indian ground based radars & even before they are in firing position a few BVRs from indian MKIs & MIGs will already be targeting them cause the thread is about CBGs and dont forget indian planes have much superior EW suits and Jammers which can jam all your airborn radars so buddy taking on IAF is not so easy task otherwise PLAAF would have crossed the indian airspace very long time back theres a catch why they are stying away from direct confrontation with IAF ever wondered why 

any way good luck

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## danger007

GURU DUTT said:


> well brother to zero down owr airforce is no way in your capability as of now or in near future why
> 
> well all pakistan has now or in couple of years will be
> 
> F-16 :16 blk 52+ 40 Mlu
> JH17: 60-80
> 50 each of mirages & F-7
> Total: 216-236
> backed by 4 chinese made & 2 eyewire AWACS+3 mid air refeulers
> 
> as aginst
> 
> 150 Jags+100 MKIs+40 M2K+40 MIG29 ......Total : 330
> 
> backed by 6 Mid air refeulers & 3 Phalcon AWACs
> 
> not to forget that if you try to be agressive there is a whole armada ofAA batteries backed again by 3D & 4D ASEA based ground & aerostat radars + Spy Sat cover



Correction we got 160 to 170 MKI... not 100


----------



## Jf Thunder

GURU DUTT said:


> well buddy thing is even before your JF -17 releases its gods gift to aviation its super duper BVRs do you know that they were /will be all along tracked by indian ground based radars & even before they are in firing position a few BVRs from indian MKIs & MIGs will already be targeting them cause the thread is about CBGs and dont forget indian planes have much superior EW suits and Jammers which can jam all your airborn radars so buddy taking on IAF is not so easy task otherwise PLAAF would have crossed the indian airspace very long time back theres a catch why they are stying away from direct confrontation with IAF ever wondered why
> 
> any way good luck


dude, it does not depend on the air craft it depends on the pilot and Alhamdulillah our pilots are world class, remember the war of 1965, Wikipedia says
"During the last days of the war Pakistani aircraft flew over Indian cities and airbases without any response from the opposing side. At the end of the war, India had lost 110 aircraft with 19 damaged, not including those destroyed on the ground at night, against a loss of 16 PAF planes."

and also are for forgetting our two war trophies? the Folland Gnat? and don't forget the fighter we seized on the Runn of Kutch issue? At least our pilots don't surrender planes Alhmadulillah


----------



## GURU DUTT

danger007 said:


> Correction we got 160 to 170 MKI... not 100


well brother i guess 100 are more than enof for PAF to handle rather i guess its an overkill cause one MKI as of now carries almost twice the number of BVRs and while flying inside indian airspace over say amritsar can engage an enemy aircraft as far as sarghoda and its onboard jammers can fry the radars of JF17 or even F-16 and soon it will have an ASEA with even bigger and better cpapbilities while using same ammount of power

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GURU DUTT

Jf Thunder said:


> dude, it does not depend on the air craft it depends on the pilot and Alhamdulillah our pilots are world class, remember the war of 1965, Wikipedia says
> "During the last days of the war Pakistani aircraft flew over Indian cities and airbases without any response from the opposing side. At the end of the war, India had lost 110 aircraft with 19 damaged, not including those destroyed on the ground at night, against a loss of 16 PAF planes."
> 
> and also are for forgetting our two war trophies? the Folland Gnat? and don't forget the fighter we seized on the Runn of Kutch issue? At least our pilots don't surrender planes Alhmadulillah


well brother your confidence is commendable but saying "alhmadulillah" dosent dilutes the threat as it is not 1965 its 2013-2014 almost 50 years and during that time all the parameteres have changed so has the cabilities of your mortal enemy=IAF/India

cause in 1965 big daddy USA was at your full support you got the cutting latest edge tech & training from them then but right now we are getting the same + you cant match us either in numbers , technology or training/inter national exposer of pilots which you once enjoyed and which we have with us thanks to friends like Israel, singapore , japan,france, USA & Russia with whome owr pilots exersize and intaract on regular basis and share the latest tech inputs and owr pilots clock way above 250+ flying hours per annum while you cant even let your pilots fly for more than 150 flying hours per annum 

thing is flying machines , BVRs , Radars , EW suites & training and in all these parameters we are at least a decade ahead of you and have mastered the MKI, M2K & Migs while it will take at least a decade or more for your devine pilots to master JF17 or J10Bs in future

so brother stop living in denial and exploits of people at least two generations back...ask people like mastan khan and DOB they will tell you the ground reality 

as for your F16s well yours are best of blk 52 which can be taken on easily my owr MIGs & M2K alone and are larger in numbers aswell + we have the best inputs from Israelies about all the minute details and takticks to counter your F16s 

so chill buddy and try not to be gressive with us or you know what ground reality is ...dont you

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rajput_Pakistani

GURU DUTT said:


> well brother i guess 100 are more than enof for PAF to handle rather i guess its an overkill cause one MKI as of now carries almost twice the number of BVRs and while flying inside indian airspace over say amritsar can engage an enemy aircraft as far as sarghoda and its onboard jammers can fry the radars of JF17 or even F-16 and soon it will have an ASEA with even bigger and better cpapbilities while using same ammount of power



The most stupid comment on a a purely technical matter.

Can you please elaborate these two points?

*its onboard jammers can fry the radars of JF17 or even F-16*

*and FYI Sargodha is 170KMs from Lahore, now tell me what is the No Escape Zone for R-77? How can your MKI Search, Track and shoot down a plane at such a long range?*

I am expecting a purely technical answer and if you dont have any then like a gentleman take back your idiotic remark. Thanks in advance


----------



## GURU DUTT

Rajput_Pakistani said:


> The most stupid comment on a a purely technical matter.
> 
> Can you please elaborate these two points?
> 
> *its onboard jammers can fry the radars of JF17 or even F-16*
> 
> *and FYI Sargodha is 170KMs from Lahore, now tell me what is the No Escape Zone for R-77? How can your MKI Search, Track and shoot down a plane at such a long range?*
> 
> I am expecting a purely technical answer and if you dont have any then like a gentleman take back your idiotic remark. Thanks in advance



well brother MKIs radar is huge and uses almost twice if not thrice the power & is way way more potent than you ever imagined + its not the R77 alone that you have to worry now there are others aswell in the game now 


well brother your plane wont be in statick place i guess it will be coming at us with Mach 1+ speed

bhai im not a very technical person i know you are going to make fun of it by pointing owt very minute details but nevertheless thing is PAF is no match for IAF now in almost all the parameters of the modern combat scenario ...deal with it and go ask your establishment for these massive delays 

thread is about can JF 17s with its devine pilots and earth shaterring alien teck BVRs & so called "carrier killers" can counter indian CBGs well the answer is no cause to reach the CBG they will need a lot of feul which they ant as of now deu to there limited capabilities and the numeber of obstakels in there path which cannot be ignoared 

and above all we dont need CBGs to block your sea lanes as a couple of P8is and same number of phalcons and a couple of squads of jags and MKIs will do the job for us and that too land based as the farthest pakistani target we need to destroy is 250KMs while owr super sonik cruise missile bhramos has a range of 290 KMs and will detroy any target in its range even before you could track it 

so chill buddy

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## slapshot

Oldman1 said:


> Didn't say it was invincible, just really tough to sink it.


Yep. They are hard to make and harder to sink. During WAR sinking the AC is not required at all, you just need to make sure to paralyze the operation. Even if the missile hits flight deck and puts hold on flight operations that would considered job done. AC are quite a liability that's why they need number of security measures around them.


----------



## Rajput_Pakistani

GURU DUTT said:


> well brother MKIs radar is huge and uses almost twice if not thrice the power & is way way more potent than you ever imagined + its not the R77 alone that you have to worry now there are others aswell in the game now
> 
> 
> well brother your plane wont be in statick place i guess it will be coming at us with Mach 1+ speed
> 
> bhai im not a very technical person i know you are going to make fun of it by pointing owt very minute details but nevertheless thing is PAF is no match for IAF now in almost all the parameters of the modern combat scenario ...deal with it and go ask your establishment for these massive delays
> 
> thread is about can JF 17s with its devine pilots and earth shaterring alien teck BVRs & so called "carrier killers" can counter indian CBGs well the answer is no cause to reach the CBG they will need a lot of feul which they ant as of now deu to there limited capabilities and the numeber of obstakels in there path which cannot be ignoared
> 
> and above all we dont need CBGs to block your sea lanes as a couple of P8is and same number of phalcons and a couple of squads of jags and MKIs will do the job for us and that too land based as the farthest pakistani target we need to destroy is 250KMs while owr super sonik cruise missile bhramos has a range of 290 KMs and will detroy any target in its range even before you could track it
> 
> so chill buddy



I am chill dear. Peace.
I will not point out any thing from your post. I am just saying that patriotism is good thing but on a purely technical issue one needs to be quite accurate. We all are here to share our knowledge and to gain something. Coming back to the topic, we only know some specs of CM-400. No one know the entire details. No one know how, when and under what circumstances PAF will use this weapon. We also dont know what are the counter-measures in place by Indians to prevent such attack. In war the scenarios are very different. How can you say that all the P8-Is and Migs will be there and then when required? How many CM-400 will be fired in a Salvo? Its just a weapon. On the day it will either prove its worth or fail. Its just like that even 16th century gun can klill a man even in 21st century. The question is how and when it will be used. What if the purpose of CM-400 is to just a deterrence? Just to keep Indian naval ships at bay? In the war, when will Indian planners will feel safe enough to station their prize Ship at the coast of Pakistan? So its a huge topic beyond the scope of me, you and many other keyboard intellectuals out here.


----------



## Jf Thunder

GURU DUTT said:


> well brother your confidence is commendable but saying "alhmadulillah" dosent dilutes the threat as it is not 1965 its 2013-2014 almost 50 years and during that time all the parameteres have changed so has the cabilities of your mortal enemy=IAF/India
> 
> cause in 1965 big daddy USA was at your full support you got the cutting latest edge tech & training from them then but right now we are getting the same + you cant match us either in numbers , technology or training/inter national exposer of pilots which you once enjoyed and which we have with us thanks to friends like Israel, singapore , japan,france, USA & Russia with whome owr pilots exersize and intaract on regular basis and share the latest tech inputs and owr pilots clock way above 250+ flying hours per annum while you cant even let your pilots fly for more than 150 flying hours per annum
> 
> thing is flying machines , BVRs , Radars , EW suites & training and in all these parameters we are at least a decade ahead of you and have mastered the MKI, M2K & Migs while it will take at least a decade or more for your devine pilots to master JF17 or J10Bs in future
> 
> so brother stop living in denial and exploits of people at least two generations back...ask people like mastan khan and DOB they will tell you the ground reality
> 
> as for your F16s well yours are best of blk 52 which can be taken on easily my owr MIGs & M2K alone and are larger in numbers aswell + we have the best inputs from Israelies about all the minute details and takticks to counter your F16s
> 
> so chill buddy and try not to be gressive with us or you know what ground reality is ...dont you


well that's what you people said when we went to war in 1965, and and don't flatter yourself, the f 86 saber was a very old plane as compared to yours and you still had your friends even then, and i suppose if something happens this time or we wipe out your air force i presume you will then repeat these sentences by saying that PAF was better trained had better equipment etc so i wish you best of luck in your dreams because that is the only place where you truly win, considering your size and population you should have taken us in 1965, even if all of your people start walking towards us they will run us over. but i wonder what stopped you? and don't forget you are not the only country which is developing we are developing too the ratio is still pretty much the same, but hey? at least we gave you a show of our strength that now you are on your toes? that's gotta be worth something?


----------



## GURU DUTT

Rajput_Pakistani said:


> I am chill dear. Peace.
> I will not point out any thing from your post. I am just saying that patriotism is good thing but on a purely technical issue one needs to be quite accurate. We all are here to share our knowledge and to gain something. Coming back to the topic, we only know some specs of CM-400. No one know the entire details. No one know how, when and under what circumstances PAF will use this weapon. We also dont know what are the counter-measures in place by Indians to prevent such attack. In war the scenarios are very different. How can you say that all the P8-Is and Migs will be there and then when required? How many CM-400 will be fired in a Salvo? Its just a weapon. *On the day it will either prove its worth or fail. Its just like that even 16th century gun can klill a man even in 21st century. The question is how and when it will be used. What if the purpose of CM-400 is to just a deterrence? Just to keep Indian naval ships at bay? In the war, when will Indian planners will feel safe enough to station their prize Ship at the coast of Pakistan? So its a huge topic beyond the scope of me, you and many other keyboard intellectuals out here*.


 thanks brother for a very well written and sane answer im not a warmonger or an so called "intellectual" ....lolzzz im a joke on PDF for stupid spelling mistakes  

you are right that a 16th century gun can kill a man in 21st century but the thing is it will be too bulki and visble and will kill the elemnt of surprize and not to forget the modern man has many aids and changes to survive if ever faced agisnt it unless hes standing in front of firing squad ...now your JF17s and ther carrier killers unforteunatelli have the same dilemma of a soldier carrieng a 16th century gun to modern batle field now your guess is good as mine what are the ods he faces to win the bettle

as for the CM-400 being used as i said before we dont need to bring any of owr warships at least 500 KM near your coastline to block your sea lanes as owr land based assets are good enof to put fear in minds of your navy to come owt in open sea

thats why i said there is no way you could carry those missiles anywhere near owr ships before being gun downed a it will have to carry more feul than wepons and with that its security and chances to survive a counter attack dimnishes very drastically and your enemy will not risk its AWACS to go owt of the pakistani air space into the open seas casue if that happens you will need at least one squad for fighting and one squad for carriendg the merchendise and the biggest catch here is that you dont have the numbers 

so my freind its not just the sea based assets you have to worry even if you send 2 squads of Blk 2 JF17s for the job one land based squad of MKI say one of pune or baroda will be more than enof 

so the thing are odd are almost 2/100 to survive in such a scenario and i dought the heads in PAF will ever take such a risk

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GURU DUTT

Jf Thunder said:


> well that's what you people said when we went to war in 1965, and and don't flatter yourself, the f 86 saber was a very old plane as compared to yours and you still had your friends even then, and i suppose if something happens this time or we wipe out your air force i presume you will then repeat these sentences by saying that PAF was better trained had better equipment etc so i wish you best of luck in your dreams because that is the only place where you truly win, considering your size and population you should have taken us in 1965, even if all of your people start walking towards us they will run us over. but i wonder what stopped you? and don't forget you are not the only country which is developing we are developing too the ratio is still pretty much the same, but hey? at least we gave you a show of our strength that now you are on your toes? that's gotta be worth something?


well buddy unlike pakistani genrals we dint wanted to capture any lands other wise we could have merged bangladesh into india in 1971 itself hope that clears your dought why we spared you 

as for 1965 sirji every war has a benfit to get but did you got why you started the war and every one knows who & whu\y went running to tashkent after USA snubbed pakistan after the war in 1965

thing also here to remeber is that we indians learn and adapt very fast thats why we survived 800 years of muslim rule and stillare living and practising the same relegeon which we did before invadres from central asian countries came 

same thing went into practise as soon as we learned your strenths and weaknesses in pervious wars and even impelemnted it in siachin and kargil and even 26/11 to get most benfits by scarifising a few things and you still are paying the price for the same ..ever wondered why 

now if you try to start a so called "4th war" to take what you think is yurs then just dont forget what we have in store for you right now and more goddies are to follow in future 

so my pakistani freind thing is you cant be agressive with india and get away with it this time as USA (who always saved you) is not by your side any more and its interests in you are getting dileuted by each passing day we will see you when fat lady sings 

till then enjoy buddy


----------



## graphican

Oldman1 said:


> Didn't say it was invincible, just really tough to sink it.



Sir, what if we bring in the matrix of crew survive-ability and potency here? What if Ship's radar system and/or engines are destroyed which I think are within "doable" range as you may term it. In the battle-field, we never 'sink' the tank but making it immobilize-able is its effective 'death'.

What are your thoughts on dis-functional aircraft carrier here? Also if it is war, why cannot carriers be attacked with depleted uranium warheads (ignore knowledge about these types) or even a tactical low-yield nuclear bomb?


----------



## Oldman1

Jf Thunder said:


> well i guess we will have to zero down your air force a bit quickly then, no?
> 
> 
> well then lets not sink the ACC then shall we? we will just take out the planes sitting on it



Chances are the dozens of fighter planes will already be in the air going after who ever is firing the cruise missiles in the first place. Ever considered that? Carriers are offensive platforms as well.



graphican said:


> Sir, what if we bring in the matrix of crew survive-ability and potency here? What if Ship's radar system and/or engines are destroyed which I think are within "doable" range as you may term it. In the battle-field, we never 'sink' the tank but making it immobilize-able is its effective 'death'.
> 
> What are your thoughts on dis-functional aircraft carrier here? Also if it is war, why cannot carriers be attacked with depleted uranium warheads (ignore knowledge about these types) or even a tactical low-yield nuclear bomb?



In other words you just damage a carrier which will be repaired and will come back and killed more enemies. Causing them to regret not sinking them in the first place. And if you use nuclear weapons, you just change the game where the U.S. Navy will unleashed hell.



slapshot said:


> Yep. They are hard to make and harder to sink. During WAR sinking the AC is not required at all, you just need to make sure to paralyze the operation. Even if the missile hits flight deck and puts hold on flight operations that would considered job done. AC are quite a liability that's why they need number of security measures around them.



As I said before carriers can be repaired.
USS Enterprise (CV-6) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

_Enterprise_ suffered most heavily of the American ships; three direct hits and four near misses killed 77, wounded 91, and inflicted serious damage on the carrier. Quick, hard work by damage control parties patched her up so that she was able to return to Hawaii under her own power.
Repaired at Pearl Harbor from 10 September-16 October 1942, _Enterprise_ departed once more for the South Pacific, where with _Hornet_ she formed TF 61. On 26 October, _Enterprise_ scout planes located a Japanese carrier force and the Battle of the Santa Cruz Islands was under way. _Enterprise_ aircraft struck carriers and cruisers during the struggle, while the "Big E" herself underwent intensive attack. Hit twice by bombs, _Enterprise_ lost 44 men and had 75 wounded. Despite serious damage, she continued in action and took on board a large number of planes and crewmen from _Hornet_ when that carrier was sunk. Though the American losses of a carrier and a destroyer were more severe than the Japanese loss of one light cruiser, the battle gained time to reinforce Guadalcanal against the next enemy onslaught, and nearby Henderson Field was therefore secure from the Japanese bombardment. The loss of the _Hornet_ meant _Enterprise_ was now the only functioning (albeit damaged) US carrier in the Pacific Theater. [4]On the flight deck, the crew posted a sign: "_Enterprise_ vs Japan."

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

Viper 94 said:


> they are not firing any anti ship missile it is an
> AGM-65 Maverick
> mainly used against tanks
> considering that the missile is so small
> that damage is substantial, an actual anti ship missile will cause damage orders of magnitude greater that this
> as far uss cole is concerned you cant compare a suicide boat with a missile
> even so the attack killed 17 sailors and injured 39
> the ship was out of service for about 3 years



Oh yes emphasis on the usage of the Maverick missile and ignore the usage of Harpoons and bombs as well. By the way the Cole was out of action for only 14 months. Not 3 years. And there was no urgency to repair it so soon since we were not in a total war compare to lets say WW2 where the Franklin was even more worst shape and was repaired in 4 months.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jf Thunder

GURU DUTT said:


> well buddy unlike pakistani genrals we dint wanted to capture any lands other wise we could have merged bangladesh into india in 1971 itself hope that clears your dought why we spared you
> 
> as for 1965 sirji every war has a benfit to get but did you got why you started the war and every one knows who & whu\y went running to tashkent after USA snubbed pakistan after the war in 1965
> 
> thing also here to remeber is that we indians learn and adapt very fast thats why we survived 800 years of muslim rule and stillare living and practising the same relegeon which we did before invadres from central asian countries came
> 
> same thing went into practise as soon as we learned your strenths and weaknesses in pervious wars and even impelemnted it in siachin and kargil and even 26/11 to get most benfits by scarifising a few things and you still are paying the price for the same ..ever wondered why
> 
> now if you try to start a so called "4th war" to take what you think is yurs then just dont forget what we have in store for you right now and more goddies are to follow in future
> 
> so my pakistani freind thing is you cant be agressive with india and get away with it this time as USA (who always saved you) is not by your side any more and its interests in you are getting dileuted by each passing day we will see you when fat lady sings
> 
> till then enjoy buddy


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

wow that made me laugh real hard in real lol, you "spared" us? lol you were suffering the same consequences of the war as us, and you were eager to end the war just like us lol.
dude, 1965 didn't give you much too chew on also ._. your attack on Lahore and Sialkot were successfully repulsed, and you know what? if you have developed, so have we, do not treat us inferior to yourselves WE ARE A NUCLEAR POWER TOO (Alhamdullillah) so i suggest you keep the thing in capital letters in mind, and here is a quote i stole from a movie
"if you think that we cant protect Pakistan, you can damn welll be sure we will avenge it"


----------



## GURU DUTT

Jf Thunder said:


> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
> 
> wow that made me laugh real hard in real lol, you "spared" us? lol you were suffering the same consequences of the war as us, and you were eager to end the war just like us lol.
> dude, 1965 didn't give you much too chew on also ._. your attack on Lahore and Sialkot were successfully repulsed, and you know what? if you have developed, so have we, do not treat us inferior to yourselves WE ARE A NUCLEAR POWER TOO (Alhamdullillah) so i suggest you keep the thing in capital letters in mind, and here is a quote i stole from a movie
> "if you think that we cant protect Pakistan, you can damn welll be sure we will avenge it"


well good luck then but the thing is we are strong and you are weak not just weak millitarrilly but economicalli and no one trusts your nation and people any where in the world not even in so called "ummah" & china they just use and throw you like USA has been doing with you in last 50 years thing is we dont need to invade or kill you all we have to do is prolong your misery and keep you negaged with non issues rest you will finish for us yourself


----------



## Jf Thunder

Oldman1 said:


> Chances are the dozens of fighter planes will already be in the air going after who ever is firing the cruise missiles in the first place. Ever considered that? Carriers are offensive platforms as well.


why do you people think that we will be sleeping? honestly if we see a dozen planes coming we will be lying there saying "oh look more biridis" we will retaliate by sending in more planes duh.




Oldman1 said:


> In other words you just damage a carrier which will be repaired and will come back and killed more enemies. Causing them to regret not sinking them in the first place. And if you use nuclear weapons, you just change the game where the U.S. Navy will unleashed hell.


yes and if the U.S Navy comes and then the Taliban will come to unleash hell on the US Navy, the US is already suffering due to its current war i seriously doubt it would want to open another battle field, and i highly doubt an Indo Pak war will last long enough to allow so much time so that air craft carrier can come back.
.



GURU DUTT said:


> well good luck then but the thing is we are strong and you are weak not just weak millitarrilly but economicalli and no one trusts your nation and people any where in the world not even in so called "ummah" & china they just use and throw you like USA has been doing with you in last 50 years thing is we dont need to invade or kill you all we have to do is prolong your misery and keep you negaged with non issues rest you will finish for us yourself


finally what was in your heart came to your tongue, so it all comes down to this, India is strong, Pakistan is weak, if we are so weak then why did a few threats in 1981 cause you to get scared and not attack our Kahuta Research Labs?


----------



## Oldman1

Jf Thunder said:


> why do you people think that we will be sleeping? honestly if we see a dozen planes coming we will be lying there saying "oh look more biridis" we will retaliate by sending in more planes duh.
> 
> 
> 
> yes and if the U.S Navy comes and then the Taliban will come to unleash hell on the US Navy, the US is already suffering due to its current war i seriously doubt it would want to open another battle field, and i highly doubt an Indo Pak war will last long enough to allow so much time so that air craft carrier can come back.
> .
> 
> 
> finally what was in your heart came to your tongue, so it all comes down to this, India is strong, Pakistan is weak, if we are so weak then why did a few threats in 1981 cause you to get scared and not attack our Kahuta Research Labs?



And we can send in more planes. We have enough firepower, technology and training to overwhelm the Pakistani Air Force there is no doubt. Actually you would have nothing to launch after destruction of Pakistani Navy and Air Force.

Besides the Afghan war the U.S. Navy hardly has suffered from that conflict since its mostly Marines and Army. If the Indo-Pak war hasn't last long, then God forbid it doesn't happen because most likely millions have been killed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GURU DUTT

Jf Thunder said:


> why do you people think that we will be sleeping? honestly if we see a dozen planes coming we will be lying there saying "oh look more biridis" we will retaliate by sending in more planes duh.
> 
> 
> 
> yes and if the U.S Navy comes and then the Taliban will come to unleash hell on the US Navy, the US is already suffering due to its current war i seriously doubt it would want to open another battle field, and i highly doubt an Indo Pak war will last long enough to allow so much time so that air craft carrier can come back.
> .


look wise guy he is talking about war in open seas thatmeans airplanes fighting in no mans land at least 400+Kms(where CBG will be based) from your coast line

to reach there you need at least 2 squads of JF 17 with at least three 1200 litre feul tanks each so its wepons carrying capacity decreeses big time and there will be no AWACs to complement them while the indian CBG will have at least 6 K 31 heli borne AWACs which will pinpoint you & engage and alert the MIG29Ks way before you get at least 300 KM near the CBG while your planes will be tracked (from land based indian radars)and all owr assets given a go ahead to engage your offensive asstets and will be killed wellbefore you are in any serious position + not to forget those 8 MIG 29s specially kept for this very purpose on indian CBG aart from the other 20 for other pupose 


hope you get the point sir


----------



## Jf Thunder

Oldman1 said:


> And we can send in more planes. We have enough firepower, technology and training to overwhelm the Pakistani Air Force there is no doubt. Actually you would have nothing to launch after destruction of Pakistani Navy and Air Force.
> 
> Besides the Afghan war the U.S. Navy hardly has suffered from that conflict since its mostly Marines and Army. If the Indo-Pak war hasn't last long, then God forbid it doesn't happen because most likely millions have been killed.


you do that, you keep sending in planes and we will keep sending them onto hell, does that sound good? desu ne?


----------



## Oldman1

Jf Thunder said:


> you do that, you keep sending in planes and we will keep sending them onto hell, does that sound good? desu ne?



Just keep thinking that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GURU DUTT

Jf Thunder said:


> finally what was in your heart came to your tongue, so it all comes down to this, India is strong, Pakistan is weak, if we are so weak then why did a few threats in 1981 cause you to get scared and not attack our Kahuta Research Labs?



well its a roumour that is fed to you by your establishment just like USSR wants to invade pakistan for so called 'acsess to warm waters' + at that time cold war was at its peak and we suspected USA & isreal too much as they had given open support to you for war against USSR ..... but the funny part is for a war for which you destroyed your tolrent sufi socio economick culture and adopted whabism and gun culture the off shoots of the same are killing you nation and people while your biggest assets USA is doing on daily basis by drones what india always dreamed of ....now what do you call that

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jf Thunder

GURU DUTT said:


> look wise guy he is talking about war in open seas thatmeans airplanes fighting in no mans land at least 400+Kms(where CBG will be based) from your coast line
> 
> to reach there you need at least 2 squads of JF 17 with at least three 1200 litre feul tanks each so its wepons carrying capacity decreeses big time and there will be no AWACs to complement them while the indian CBG will have at least 6 K 31 heli borne AWACs which will pinpoint you & engage and alert the MIG29Ks way before you get at least 300 KM near the CBG while your planes will be tracked (from land based indian radars)and all owr assets given a go ahead to engage your offensive asstets and will be killed wellbefore you are in any serious position + not to forget those 8 MIG 29s specially kept for this very purpose on indian CBG aart from the other 20 for other pupose
> 
> 
> hope you get the point sir


WHERE ARE THE SENIOR MEMBERS, I suck at understanding technical terms so i will just answer whatever i understood.
we will not take the war to sea, is this better?
well i hope you can prove soon enough that we are weak and you are strong, InshAllah, Allah will help us because without his help we are nothing.



GURU DUTT said:


> well its a roumour that is fed to you by your establishment just like USSR wants to invade pakistan for so called 'acsess to warm waters' + at that time cold war was at its peak and we suspected USA & isreal too much as they had given open support to you for war against USSR ..... but the funny part is for a war for which you destroyed your tolrent sufi socio economick culture and adopted whabism and gun culture the off shoots of the same are killing you nation and people while your biggest assets USA is doing on daily basis by drones what india always dreamed of ....now what do you call that


i call that the incompetence of the Pakistan Government? someone give me a thanks because i seriously deserve some chocolate after typing so much


----------



## graphican

Oldman1 said:


> And if you use nuclear weapons, you just change the game where the U.S. Navy will unleashed hell.



I didn't know USA will be looking to take a side in such a nuclear war. Also if USA gets in, what do you think other country will feel forced to join in? But Keeping USA, Russia and China out of equation for now, its actually good that we have a history event before us where Japanese didn't kill the carrier and got penalized later.

Also my question is rather more basic here. Having a carrier in USA's case against Russia/China (and rest of the world) makes sense as Carrier acts as mobile airbase. But in India-Pakistan equation, we have 1200KM long border already and India has 20s of airbases at varying depths and distances. So the apparent advantage which a carrier may offer is already there in the form of land-bases for the aircraft and having an aircraft career 'acting as 21st airbase' doesn't "reverse or considerably change" the power dynamics.

But a career would eventually act as route blocker for PN but it would have to stay within "safe" area where carrier killer missiles are relatively hard to reach. That means Pakistan will rely more on its submarine fleet and sea-based Babur to launch clandestine attack instead. And as Naval Chief has recently hinted that they are the custodians of 2nd nuclear strike, I am betting on Babur to be the carrier for that and its first target will be floating vehicles before attacking land-targets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jf Thunder

Oldman1 said:


> Just keep thinking that.


i was planing to do that from the start ._.



graphican said:


> I didn't know USA will be looking to take a side in such a nuclear war. Also if USA gets in, what do you think other country will feel forced to join in? But Keeping USA, Russia and China out of equation for now, its actually good that we have a history event before us where Japanese didn't kill the carrier and got penalized later.
> 
> Also my question is rather more basic here. Having a carrier in USA's case against Russia/China (and rest of the world) makes sense as Carrier acts as mobile airbase. But in India-Pakistan equation, we have 1200KM long border already and India has 20s of airbases at varying depths and distances. So the apparent advantage which a carrier may offer is already there in the form of land-bases for the aircraft and having an aircraft career 'acting as 21st airbase' doesn't "reverse or considerably change" the power dynamics.
> 
> But a career would eventually act as route blocker for PN but it would have to stay within "safe" area where carrier killer missiles are relatively hard to reach. That means Pakistan will rely more on its submarine fleet and sea-based Babur to launch clandestine attack instead. And as Naval Chief has recently hinted that they are the custodians of 2nd nuclear strike, I am betting on Babur to be the carrier for that and its first target will be floating vehicles before attacking land-targets.


yay, finally someone to share the burden


----------



## GURU DUTT

Jf Thunder said:


> WHERE ARE THE SENIOR MEMBERS, I suck at understanding technical terms so i will just answer whatever i understood.
> we will not take the war to sea, is this better?
> well i hope you can prove soon enough that we are weak and you are strong, InshAllah, Allah will help us because without his help we are nothing.
> 
> 
> i call that the incompetence of the Pakistan Government? someone give me a thanks because i seriously deserve some chocolate after typing so much


lolzzz do youknow allah also helps onli those who are true to there cause and vitim of agression and above all help themselfs but i guess most of pakistanies believe allah onli helps "muslims" 

hope you got my point sirji


----------



## Jf Thunder

GURU DUTT said:


> lolzzz do youknow allah also helps onli those who are true to there cause and vitim of agression and above all help themselfs but i guess most of pakistanies believe allah onli helps "muslims"
> 
> hope you got my point sirji


well there is point in what you have said, first i should become a good Muslim and then count on help from Allah, look at the bright side, at least you are not an atheist?


----------



## GURU DUTT

graphican said:


> I didn't know USA will be looking to take a side in such a nuclear war. Also if USA gets in, what do you think other country will feel forced to join in? But Keeping USA, Russia and China out of equation for now, its actually good that we have a history event before us where Japanese didn't kill the carrier and got penalized later.
> 
> *Also my question is rather more basic here. Having a carrier in USA's case against Russia/China (and rest of the world) makes sense as Carrier acts as mobile airbase. But in India-Pakistan equation, we have 1200KM long border already and India has 20s of airbases at varying depths and distances. So the apparent advantage which a carrier may offer is already there in the form of land-bases for the aircraft and having an aircraft career 'acting as 21st airbase' doesn't "reverse or considerably change" the power dynamics.
> 
> But a career would eventually act as route blocker for PN but it would have to stay within "safe" area where carrier killer missiles are relatively hard to reach. That means Pakistan will rely more on its submarine fleet and sea-based Babur to launch clandestine attack instead. And as Naval Chief has recently hinted that they are the custodians of 2nd nuclear strike, I am betting on Babur to be the carrier for that and its first target will be floating vehicles before attacking land-targets.*




well thanks for acepting that PAF has to worry more about indian ground based assets more than CBGs or naval armada 

now about CBG well your right so called "carrier kilers" are more of a detternt than a war winner like most pakistanies want to belave 

now about your Subs well bhai each indian CBG has at least 10-12 ASW helies for that purpose while since karachi is not far from pune so a couple of P8is cant be ruled owt and they can take on any number of subs you can ever send to keep IN away form the blockade of karachi & gadawar 

as for babur or raad well brother ever thought of bhramos and ways to counter it 



Jf Thunder said:


> well there is point in what you have said, first i should become a good Muslim and then count on help from Allah, look at the bright side, at least you are not an atheist?


no sir im a staunch hindu and dont beleave in allah at all but since i got my graduation from a muslim collage i do know a few things about islam and muslim thinking about hindus

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

graphican said:


> I didn't know USA will be looking to take a side in such a nuclear war. Also if USA gets in, what do you think other country will feel forced to join in? But Keeping USA, Russia and China out of equation for now, its actually good that we have a history event before us where Japanese didn't kill the carrier and got penalized later.
> 
> Also my question is rather more basic here. Having a carrier in USA's case against Russia/China (and rest of the world) makes sense as Carrier acts as mobile airbase. But in India-Pakistan equation, we have 1200KM long border already and India has 20s of airbases at varying depths and distances. So the apparent advantage which a carrier may offer is already there in the form of land-bases for the aircraft and having an aircraft career 'acting as 21st airbase' doesn't "reverse or considerably change" the power dynamics.
> 
> But a career would eventually act as route blocker for PN but it would have to stay within "safe" area where carrier killer missiles are relatively hard to reach. That means Pakistan will rely more on its submarine fleet and sea-based Babur to launch clandestine attack instead. And as Naval Chief has recently hinted that they are the custodians of 2nd nuclear strike, I am betting on Babur to be the carrier for that and its first target will be floating vehicles before attacking land-targets.



Just responding to a poster, Pakistani I believe that suggested using a nuclear weapon to sink a carrier because it will take hundreds of aircraft and cruise missiles to reach it in the first place. Don't know if hes referring to a U.S. carrier or Indian. But in any case if God forbid there is a war with Pakistan and U.S., I can tell you for a fact it won't be good especially for Pakistan. With long range cruise missles about 1500 km range, as well as stealth cruise missiles and long range bombers. Don't forget the SSGNs and attack boats that can sneak in and launch massive amount of firepower before sending in the carrier groups with its own aircraft and cruise missiles. Don't forget smart decoys, jamming, etc.

Oh and I forgot to mention about the threat of submarines, the U.S. Navy is developing something to counter it. Its really impressive.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Jf Thunder

GURU DUTT said:


> well thanks for acepting that PAF has to worry more about indian ground based assets more than CBGs or naval armada
> 
> now about CBG well your right so called "carrier kilers" are more of a detternt than a war winner like most pakistanies want to belave
> 
> now about your Subs well bhai each indian CBG has at least 10-12 ASW helies for that purpose while since karachi is not far from pune so a couple of P8is cant be ruled owt and they can take on any number of subs you can ever send to keep IN away form the blockade of karachi & gadawar
> 
> as for babur or raad well brother ever thought of bhramos and ways to counter it
> 
> 
> no sir im a staunch hindu and dont beleave in allah at all but since i got my graduation from a muslim collage i do know a few things about islam and muslim thinking about hindus


Hindus are not atheists ._. you should have known that.



Oldman1 said:


> Just responding to a poster, Pakistani I believe that suggested using a nuclear weapon to sink a carrier because it will take hundreds of aircraft and cruise missiles to reach it in the first place. Don't know if hes referring to a U.S. carrier or Indian. But in any case if God forbid there is a war with Pakistan and U.S., I can tell you for a fact it won't be good especially for Pakistan. With long range cruise missles about 1500 km range, as well as stealth cruise missiles and long range bombers. Don't forget the SSGNs and attack boats that can sneak in and launch massive amount of firepower before sending in the carrier groups with its own aircraft and cruise missiles. Don't forget smart decoys, jamming, etc.
> 
> Oh and I forgot to mention about the threat of submarines, the U.S. Navy is developing something to counter it. Its really impressive.


wow such warriors, much technology, such wow, cant counter gorilla warriors, such bad, much shame


----------



## Oldman1

Jf Thunder said:


> Hindus are not atheists ._. you should have known that.
> 
> 
> wow such warriors, much technology, such wow, cant counter gorilla warriors, such bad, much shame



Gulf War 1 is an example. But you know what, if Pakistan can't handle a couple of your so called gorilla warriors in its own territory, what makes you think you can handle the U.S. Navy and Air Force?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GURU DUTT

Jf Thunder said:


> Hindus are not atheists ._. you should have known that.
> 
> 
> wow such warriors, much technology, such wow, cant counter gorilla warriors, such bad, much shame


well who said that im an atheist in the first place 

read again buddy 

about the latter part world today is not what it used to be a century or even during WW2 things have changed and there is a new wave of drone worriers on the horizon and yes they dont feel any shame



Oldman1 said:


> Gulf War 1 is an example. But you know what, if Pakistan can't handle a couple of your so called gorilla warriors in its own territory, what makes you think you can handle the U.S. Navy and Air Force?


well they plan/dream to send those gorilla worriors in dingy boats to defeat indian and US navy ...like they did to kill and massacre guests in 5 star hotels and trin staions in mumbai on 26/11 & new york on 9/11


----------



## graphican

GURU DUTT said:


> well thanks for acepting that PAF has to worry more about indian ground based assets more than CBGs or naval armada



No you misunderstand my point. I am not saying PAF has to worry about ground bases, what I am saying is that India doesn't gain anything by having an aircraft career as it has several times more ground bases than aircraft careers and for Pakistan, magnitude of thread doesn't inclined dramatically because India has an aircraft career with 20 odd aircraft on it. If PAF is ready to handle Indian attack from ground-bases, it is equally well prepared to neutralize jets coming from a sea-based career. So the talk is about equation of threat and aircraft career adding or not adding any significant weight to the equation. Got me yet?



> now about CBG well your right so called "carrier kilers" are more of a detternt than a war winner like most pakistanies want to belave



Why you think they are deterrent only? If you think Indian AC can create blockage of Karachi and Gawadar then Pakistan also thinks that India may do that. Why do you think Pakistan will not use its supersonic and sea-based cruise missiles and prevent this from happening?



> now about your Subs well bhai each indian CBG has at least 10-12 ASW helies for that purpose while since karachi is not far from pune so a couple of P8is cant be ruled owt and they can take on any number of subs you can ever send to keep IN away form the blockade of karachi & gadawar



True, AC will have fleet of air and sea-scanning radars but subs do not need to reach underneath a career to be potent. We have 300KM range for career killer and 1500KM range for Naval Babur. We have good stand-off weapons to neutralize a distantly placed Indian AC. Indian AC defense wouldn't come from preventing a fighter launch a weapon towards it, its defense would depend if it is able to neutralize incoming missile. Now this is where we both can imagine some.



> as for babur or raad well brother ever thought of bhramos and ways to counter it



You are looking to neutralize incoming Career Killer and Cruise Missiles with Brhmos? Mate I thought I am talking to somebody who has at-least some basic understanding about attack and defense. What you are talking here is an attack but what we have been discussion since hours is attack and Indian ability to DEFEND itself from that ATTACK or preventing ATTACK to happen the first place. Duh!


----------



## Jf Thunder

Oldman1 said:


> Gulf War 1 is an example. But you know what, if Pakistan can't handle a couple of your so called gorilla warriors in its own territory, what makes you think you can handle the U.S. Navy and Air Force?


whats gulf war 1? lol sorry i dont know about that
you cant even handle a couple of gorilla warriors?


----------



## Oldman1

Jf Thunder said:


> whats gulf war 1? lol sorry i dont know about that
> you cant even handle a couple of gorilla warriors?



Go study it. Guess you were too young at the time. Anyways hopefully you can prevent more Pakistani deaths from the gorilla warriors. Like bombings in mosques or at markets. How many Pakistanis have been killed lately?


----------



## graphican

Oldman1 said:


> Just responding to a poster, Pakistani I believe that suggested using a nuclear weapon to sink a carrier because it will take hundreds of aircraft and cruise missiles to reach it in the first place. Don't know if hes referring to a U.S. carrier or Indian. But in any case if God forbid there is a war with Pakistan and U.S., I can tell you for a fact it won't be good especially for Pakistan. With long range cruise missles about 1500 km range, as well as stealth cruise missiles and long range bombers. Don't forget the SSGNs and attack boats that can sneak in and launch massive amount of firepower before sending in the carrier groups with its own aircraft and cruise missiles. Don't forget smart decoys, jamming, etc.
> 
> Oh and I forgot to mention about the threat of submarines, the U.S. Navy is developing something to counter it. Its really impressive.



@Oldman1,

Sir, our hatred for USA might be monumental but our stupidity is not. You might find several Indians are jumping around in the forum. We are not talking about sinking USA's Naval fleet but it is about Pakistan India War scenarios. But on side note, when USA knows its career can be sunk, it acts more mindfully than not.

USA would never dare to fondle with a Nuclear country. I didn't with Iran, it didn't with North Korea. Would it do with Pakistan? Ahh.. don't think it is a likelihood. Here in this particular thread we are enjoying our India-Pakistan hatred... so please be around and have fun.


----------



## Oldman1

graphican said:


> @Oldman1,
> 
> Sir, our hatred for USA might be monumental but our stupidity is not. You might find several Indians are jumping around in the forum. We are not talking about sinking USA's Naval fleet but it is about Pakistan India War scenarios. But on side note, when USA knows its career can be sunk, it acts more mindfully than not.
> 
> USA would never dare to fondle with a Nuclear country. I didn't with Iran, it didn't with North Korea. Would it do with Pakistan? Ahh.. don't think it is a likelihood. Here in this particular thread we are enjoying our India-Pakistan hatred... so please be around and have fun.



Sure I'll be around to see the back and forth spewing hate with each other. We are smart enough not to mess with nuclear armed countries. They know it too since they use proxies. And we are still technically at war with North Korea but it hasn't done much except assassinations and sinking a boat, but not doing anything rash like invading South Korea again because of the consequences that could lead to it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GURU DUTT

graphican said:


> No you misunderstand my point. I am not saying PAF has to worry about ground bases, what I am saying is that India doesn't gain anything by having an aircraft career as it has several times more ground bases than aircraft careers and for Pakistan, magnitude of thread doesn't inclined dramatically because India has an aircraft career with 20 odd aircraft on it. If PAF is ready to handle Indian attack from ground-bases, it is equally well prepared to neutralize jets coming from a sea-based career. So the talk is about equation of threat and aircraft career adding or not adding any significant weight to the equation. Got me yet?
> 
> 
> 
> Why you think they are deterrent only? If you think Indian AC can create blockage of Karachi and Gawadar then Pakistan also thinks that India may do that. Why do you think Pakistan will not use its supersonic and sea-based cruise missiles?
> 
> 
> 
> True, AC will have fleet of air and sea-scanning radars but subs do not need to reach underneath a career to be potent. We have 300KM range for career killer and 1500KM range for Naval Babur. We have good stand-off weapons to neutralize a distantly placed Indian AC. Indian AC defense wouldn't come from preventing a fighter launch a weapon towards it, its defense would depend if it is able to neutralize incoming missile. Now this is where we both can imagine some.
> 
> 
> 
> You are looking to neutralize incoming Career Killer and Cruise Missiles with Brhmos? Mate I thought I am talking to somebody who has at-least some basic understanding about attack and defense. What you are talking here is an attack but what we have been discussion since hours is attack and Indian ability to DEFEND itself from that ATTACK or preventing ATTACK to happen the first place.


well buddy i guess you got me wrong i wanted to say that countering indian CBG will be that last thing on PAFs mind as it will have to first counter and dileute the threat posed by indian planes like jags , MKIs , M2Ks & Mig 29s backed by indian ground based  israeli green pine , french, russian and indian radras and huge numbers of AA batteries

as for blocking pakistani sea lanes we dont need to send subs or CBGs(though indian CBG will be escorted by three subs aswell) there as mumbai/pune & baroda airbases (with there jags & MKIs) is very near to your karachi and gadawar naval bases to keep you away from veturing into any fancy stuff u just said

as for ASMs well yes you have babur, raad harpoons but dont forget that we have more and in way large numbers than you ever imagined and all are pointed towards you

as for range of bhramos well we dont need to have more as it does owr job as of now + each MKI as of now carries at least one air launched version of bhramos and in near future will carry 3 and preprations are on to make a lighter one which owr MIG 29 K will be able to carry + we just dont have those but a whole lot of them from many different sources

+ true range of bhramos is very debatable and as of now most on indian naval vessels carry brhamos as there primarry offensive wepon

+ all owr naval ships have there very own defensive and offensive stand off wepons aswell and that too way more advanced and in almost thrice the in numbers as you have and yes bhramos is not to blunt baburs or raads but its a offensive wepon all along and please dont think indians will be sitting ducks to your baburs and raads cause ...khair jane do 

so the bottom line is god forbit if ever we are engaged in such a scenario but if it does we will not need CBG to block you ... Good night sir


----------



## Jf Thunder

Oldman1 said:


> Go study it. Guess you were too young at the time. Anyways hopefully you can prevent more Pakistani deaths from the gorilla warriors. Like bombings in mosques or at markets. How many Pakistanis have been killed lately?


the last time i heard it was 40 000


----------



## gslv mk3

@graphican

There is no anti ship babur.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jf Thunder

gslv mk3 said:


> @graphican
> 
> There is no anti ship babur.


ask the RAW if they are well placed then they will tell you


----------



## gslv mk3

@


Jf Thunder said:


> ask the RAW if they are well placed then they will tell you





Jf Thunder said:


> ask the RAW if they are well placed then they will tell you



Usually bragging,I guess pakistan also has ICBMs & MIRVs....
Ever heard of 'Seekers'??


----------



## Jf Thunder

gslv mk3 said:


> @
> 
> 
> Usually bragging,I guess pakistan also has ICBMs & MIRVs....
> Ever heard of 'Seekers'??


what are ICMs and MIRVs? and what r seekers?


----------



## Viper 94

Oldman1 said:


> Oh yes emphasis on the usage of the Maverick missile and ignore the usage of Harpoons and bombs as well. By the way the Cole was out of action for only 14 months. Not 3 years. And there was no urgency to repair it so soon since we were not in a total war compare to lets say WW2 where the Franklin was even more worst shape and was repaired in 4 months.


cole didnt see action for about 3 years dammit it took 14 months just to repair it 
attack dates 
12 October 2000
date of redeployment 
20 August 2003

and yeah i didnt have time to watch the whole thing 
but as i said harpoon caused a lot more damage than maverick 
the harpoon strike wasnt even necessary after gbu-12 and maverick 
a real ship would have been paralyzed 
also harpoon's speed is around .7 mach 
400 kg CM-400AKG Wrecker will impact a target at a speed of mach 3 
the force of impact will be much greater


----------



## graphican

Oldman1 said:


> Sure I'll be around to see the back and forth spewing hate with each other. We are smart enough not to mess with nuclear armed countries. They know it too since they use proxies. And we are still technically at war with North Korea but it hasn't done much except assassinations and sinking a boat, but not doing anything rash like invading South Korea again because of the consequences that could lead to it.



With that definition sir, USA and Pakistan are also at war


----------



## graphican

GURU DUTT said:


> as for ASMs well yes you have babur, raad harpoons but dont forget that we have more and in way large numbers than you ever imagined and all are pointed towards you



You are iterating the same thing again. I am telling you I will fire a bullet aiming you and you are mentioning that you have several of those and you will aim-back, without considering that what my bullet is going to do with you and in the defense your bullets are not going to help.

India has 2 aircraft careers and if it looses one of them within first few hours of the conflict, you know what would it would mean for India and for us and what we are trying to discuss here is that Pakistan has enough means to make this happen.


----------



## graphican

gslv mk3 said:


> @graphican
> There is no anti ship babur.



There is tube launched version for naval usage but is it for land-attack or naval attack is left to speculations. Its specification are good kept secret.


----------



## gslv mk3

@graphican

Its just a speculation.

And,please buddy,before fantasising about India losing aircraft carrier think how these would be delivered to an aircraft carrier evading AD systems of other ships of CBG,the interception of the migs,detection by the AC s long range tracking radar.

And finally there is Barak 8 ( I guess this would go on Vikrant ) which Israelis think can counter the Yakhont.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GURU DUTT

graphican said:


> You are iterating the same thing again. I am telling you I will fire a bullet aiming you and you are mentioning that you have several of those and you will aim-back, without considering that what my bullet is going to do with you and in the defense your bullets are not going to help.
> 
> India has 2 aircraft careers and if it looses one of them within first few hours of the conflict, you know what would it would mean for India and for us and what we are trying to discuss here is that Pakistan has enough means to make this happen.


well brother thing is we know that your very unpredictable thats the main reason we indians are over cautious and have rehersed it over and over and over again + why do you think that you got the right to fire the first bullet and we will have no defnce shield if ever you gather guts to fire a bullet at us.....

well bro we are indians remeber and we have survived the islamick onslought for more than 800 years and now know most of your manouvering and diversionarry tackitcs and same applies to indian navy 

as for loosing a CBG in "first few hours of conflict" well brother dont worry about that aswell cause bothof owr current CBGs are not so toothless as you think

to rach them you need first to escape the mulitple radar shields of the indian ships , then comes the K31 awac hellies and there extended radar shields, the two subs lurking beneath the surface who escort every CBG + not to forget at least 5 attack MIG29Ks or sea harriers (which are ready round the 24X7X365 days)which are considered to be best sea level fighter planes after super bugs and marien rafales backed again by land based radras(to monitor, track and annalyse all your moves) jags and MKIs which are kept seppratelly for this very same purpose (pakistani air force coming owt to get a shot at owr CBGs)

so buddy if all that was not enof ever thought about the armada of smart UAVs & many small & big indian naval vessels which will first test the waters before the CBG comes in the arena 

so in short you cant divert a huge chunk or your airforce to attack owr CBG to get symbolick moral booster as there are other formidable indian assets already to keep you on your tose cause you niether have the numbers nor the technology for the same 

still good luck

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jf Thunder

GURU DUTT said:


> well brother thing is we know that your very unpredictable thats the main reason we indians are over cautious and have rehersed it over and over and over again + why do you think that you got the right to fire the first bullet and we will have no defnce shield if ever you gather guts to fire a bullet at us.....
> 
> well bro we are indians remeber and we have survived the islamick onslought for more than 800 years and now know most of your manouvering and diversionarry tackitcs and same applies to indian navy
> 
> as for loosing a CBG in "first few hours of conflict" well brother dont worry about that aswell cause bothof owr current CBGs are not so toothless as you think
> 
> to rach them you need first to escape the mulitple radar shields of the indian ships , then comes the K31 awac hellies and there extended radar shields, the two subs lurking beneath the surface who escort every CBG + not to forget at least 5 attack MIG29Ks or sea harriers (which are ready round the 24X7X365 days)which are considered to be best sea level fighter planes after super bugs and marien rafales backed again by land based radras(to monitor, track and annalyse all your moves) jags and MKIs which are kept seppratelly for this very same purpose (pakistani air force coming owt to get a shot at owr CBGs)
> 
> so buddy if all that was not enof ever thought about the armada of smart UAVs & many small & big indian naval vessels which will first test the waters before the CBG comes in the arena
> 
> so in short you cant divert a huge chunk or your airforce to attack owr CBG to get symbolick moral booster as there are other formidable indian assets already to keep you on your tose cause you niether have the numbers nor the technology for the same
> 
> still good luck


i suggest you keep the good luck, you will be needing, we are not so weak as you think, we have some more tricks up our sleeves too, you are not the only ones with awesome things, as for UAVs we also have UAVs, and please don't use technical terms because i am as stupid as a rabbit when it comes to understand technical terms.


----------



## graphican

GURU DUTT said:


> to rach them you need first to escape the mulitple radar shields of the indian ships, then comes the K31 awac hellies and there extended radar shields, the two subs lurking beneath the surface who escort every CBG + not to forget at least 5 attack MIG29Ks or sea harriers (which are ready round the 24X7X365 days)which are considered to be best sea level fighter planes after super bugs and marien rafales backed again by land based radras(to monitor, track and annalyse all your moves) jags and MKIs which are kept seppratelly for this very same purpose (pakistani air force coming owt to get a shot at owr CBGs)



Okay that is the relevant part of your post which I will comment on. 

What is the maximum detection range of Indian AWACS, I consider it 400KM-500KM, and that is for an aircraft flying within the area. If 10 Babur are launched towards Indian Carrier from a distance of 600KM (which have 1500KM range) none of your radars or patrolling jets will be able to "stop" this from happening and this is logically doable. Now let it be submarines or second best harriers, they have nothing to do in this equation as what they could prevent has been done.

For Pakistan to knock your AC down, we need one shot of low-yeild warhead. For India to survive an incoming attack, it would need to neutralize every incoming attack. What if mix of 30 babur and carrier killers are launched together? How many of them do you think you can bring down with air-defense missiles? To be able to survive, you need to be 100% successful in neutralizing every incoming missile but for us, all we need is a 3.3% success. big deal?

As I mentioned, bringing Indian "giant" down will be a medal Pakistan would like to get very early in the war. Mind that our navy is very small as compared to Indian marine power and neutralizing as many Indian marine asserts as possible using air and missile would be one of the priority.


----------



## Janmejay

graphican said:


> Okay that is the relevant part of your post which I will comment on.
> 
> What is the maximum detection range of Indian AWACS, I consider it 400KM-500KM, and that is for an aircraft flying within the area. If 10 Babur are launched towards Indian Carrier from a distance of 600KM (which have 1500KM range) none of your radars or patrolling jets will be able to "stop" this from happening and this is logically doable. Now let it be submarines or second best harriers, they have nothing to do in this equation as what they could prevent has been done.
> 
> For Pakistan to knock your AC down, we need one shot of low-yeild warhead. For India to survive an incoming attack, it would need to neutralize every incoming attack. What if mix of 30 babur and carrier killers are launched together? How many of them do you think you can bring down with air-defense missiles? To be able to survive, you need to be 100% successful in neutralizing every incoming missile but for us, all we need is a 3.3% success. big deal?
> 
> As I mentioned, bringing Indian "giant" down will be a medal Pakistan would like to get very early in the war. Mind that our navy is very small as compared to Indian marine power and neutralizing as many Indian marine asserts as possible using air and missile would be one of the priority.


1-babur cant hit movin targets
2-the aircraft carrier will have barak-8 misslile defence system
3-this aircraft carrier is not for pakistan
4-What do you mean by loe yield warhead,are you saying that you will use nuclear weapons?



Jf Thunder said:


> i suggest you keep the good luck, you will be needing, we are not so weak as you think, we have some more tricks up our sleeves too, you are not the only ones with awesome things, as for UAVs we also have UAVs, and please don't use technical terms because i am as stupid as a rabbit when it comes to understand technical terms.


If you dont understand technichal terms then why are you replying to him?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GURU DUTT

graphican said:


> Okay that is the relevant part of your post which I will comment on.
> 
> What is the maximum detection range of Indian AWACS, I consider it 400KM-500KM, and that is for an aircraft flying within the area. If 10 Babur are launched towards Indian Carrier from a distance of 600KM (which have 1500KM range) none of your radars or patrolling jets will be able to "stop" this from happening and this is logically doable. Now let it be submarines or second best harriers, they have nothing to do in this equation as what they could prevent has been done.
> 
> For Pakistan to knock your AC down, we need one shot of low-yeild warhead. For India to survive an incoming attack, it would need to neutralize every incoming attack. What if mix of 30 babur and carrier killers are launched together? How many of them do you think you can bring down with air-defense missiles? To be able to survive, you need to be 100% successful in neutralizing every incoming missile but for us, all we need is a 3.3% success. big deal?
> 
> As I mentioned, bringing Indian "giant" down will be a medal Pakistan would like to get very early in the war. Mind that our navy is very small as compared to Indian marine power and neutralizing as many Indian marine asserts as possible using air and missile would be one of the priority.


well buddy babur is not an ASM and cant hit a target moving at speeds above even 10 KMPH

now when you will be gearing up to launch your baburs or have launched them they will be instantli picked up by multi layered PESA/ASEA based 3D & 4D radars based near pakistani border with india
and will track/calculate and alert all indian offensive & defensive assets in that area and all the launchers will be taken owt within minutes by batteries of indian land based bharmos as it flies more than twice the speed of sound 

now comes the second part the already alerted indian Naval Armada will take on a barage of your babaurs and other so called "carrier killers" as almost all the ships in CBG have there multi layered radar shields and anty aircraft and anti missle shields cause til you missiles reach anywhere near them they would have changed the postion and come into attck mode and dont forget those CBGs will have there own air arm that will attack and help in taking owt your baburs thru its air to air missiles 

so the odds are pretty high for you and your airforce , navy and missle divisions will also come under attack as soon as they expose there loactions

still good luck brother

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jf Thunder

GURU DUTT said:


> well buddy babur is not an ASM and cant hit a target moving at speeds above even 10 KMPH
> 
> now when you will be gearing up to launch your baburs or have launched them they will be instantli picked up by multi layered PESA/ASEA based 3D & 4D radars based near pakistani border with india
> and will track/calculate and alert all indian offensive & defensive assets in that area and all the launchers will be taken owt within minutes by batteries of indian land based bharmos as it flies more than twice the speed of sound
> 
> now comes the second part the already alerted indian Naval Armada will take on a barage of your babaurs and other so called "carrier killers" as almost all the ships in CBG have there multi layered radar shields and anty aircraft and anti missle shields cause til you missiles reach anywhere near them they would have changed the postion and come into attck mode and dont forget those CBGs will have there own air arm that will attack and help in taking owt your baburs thru its air to air missiles
> 
> so the odds are pretty high for you and your airforce , navy and missle divisions will also come under attack as soon as they expose there loactions
> 
> still good luck brother


still keep the good luck, you will be needing it anyway, how about we fire it from a sub? and while you are defending your ACC, we will just attack you from the ground?


----------



## GURU DUTT

Jf Thunder said:


> still keep the good luck, you will be needing it anyway, how about we fire it from a sub? and while you are defending your ACC, we will just attack you from the ground?


well about the sub ..why do you think we are investing in P8i's + as told earlier each CBG wil be escorted by two to three subs

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jf Thunder

GURU DUTT said:


> well about the sub ..why do you think we are investing in P8i's + as told earlier each CBG wil be escorted by two to three subs


ummmm sure whatever, what if we fire 8 Babur missiles from our subs, 10 from land, 5 Raad missiles from our Jf Thunder and 7 Shaheen missiles from ground from different locations?


----------



## GURU DUTT

Jf Thunder said:


> ummmm sure whatever, what if we fire 8 Babur missiles from our subs, 10 from land, 5 Raad missiles from our Jf Thunder and 7 Shaheen missiles from ground from different locations?


well then look at it this way each each indian CBG consists of 3 frigates , 2 cruisers , 2 destroyers one feul tanker + 1 supplies ship + 2 subs & an ACC

apart from subs & ACC for the obvious reson all other ships have muti layered and multi band ASEA/PESA radars with at least 12 LR sams & equal number of MR sams + twice the number of QRSR sams + multiple CIWS on differnet points + 8-12 sea launched bhramos + at least one ASW heli 

no add & multiply them and then look for chnces ...i guess you will need real good luck to reach ACC

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Janmejay

Jf Thunder said:


> ummmm sure whatever, what if we fire 8 Babur missiles from our subs, 10 from land, 5 Raad missiles from our Jf Thunder and 7 Shaheen missiles from ground from different locations?


lol,are you even aware what are youa are writing...
the babur which you will launch from land cant hit moving targets..
Your jf17 cant reach near AC,how will you hit it with raad....
the shaheen missiles cant hit movin targets....
you lack the capability of firing missiles from subs....


----------



## illusion8

Jf Thunder said:


> ummmm sure whatever, what if we fire 8 *Babur missiles from our subs,* 10 from land, 5 Raad missiles from our Jf Thunder and 7 Shaheen missiles from ground from different locations?



babur from subs? which subs? and how?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GURU DUTT

illusion8 said:


> babur from subs? which subs? and how?


did i mention the indian subs can fire sub launched club , bhramos & maybe exoset which we will get with scorpenes + the classified stuff we got thanks to israel

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Janmejay

GURU DUTT said:


> well then look at it this way each each indian CBG consists of 3 frigates , 2 cruisers , 2 destroyers one feul tanker + 1 supplies ship + 2 subs & an ACC
> 
> apart from subs & ACC for the obvious reson all other ships have muti layered and multi band ASEA/PESA radars with at least 12 LR sams & equal number of MR sams + twice the number of QRSR sams + multiple CIWS on differnet points + 8-12 sea launched bhramos + at least one ASW heli
> 
> no add & multiply them and then look for chnces ...i guess you will need real good luck to reach ACC


first ask him how babur and shaheens will hit moving targets...
how jf17 will hit raad when it cant go near to it...
pakistan does not have the capability of launching babur from submarines..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GURU DUTT

Janmejay said:


> first ask him how babur and shaheens will hit moving targets...
> how jf17 will hit raad when it cant go near to it...
> pakistan does not have the capability of launching babur from submarines..


common man dont be so unfair to him actually they know there is nothing they could do to stop tha naval blockade if it ever happens

but the truth is indian ACC or CBG is not for pakistan its for asserting the streanth in arabian ea and bay of bengal and indian ocean so the big dragon dosent gets too adventurous 

but pakistanies as they are will never sieze to iimagine india as an agressive naighbour while it was they who always started the fire than the other way round

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Janmejay

e


GURU DUTT said:


> common man dont be so unfair to him actually they know there is nothing they could do to stop tha naval blockade if it ever happens
> 
> but the truth is indian ACC or CBG is not for pakistan its for asserting the streanth in arabian ea and bay of bengal and indian ocean so the big dragon dosent gets too adventurous
> 
> but pakistanies as they are will never sieze to iimagine india as an agressive naighbour while it was they who always started the fire than the other way round


see the post 161...


----------



## GURU DUTT

Jf Thunder said:


> what are ICMs and MIRVs? and what r seekers?


its ICBM not ICM 

Intercontinental ballistic missile - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Donatello

OrionHunter said:


> Very good question. I'll put it in a nutshell. You can't destroy an AC with the usual cruise missile. You'd need a big explosive warhead to do that which means a massive increase in the weight of the missile. Which means maneuvering the missile by its intrinsic guidance systems in the terminal phase from stand off OTH ranges *on a moving target, *which is extremely difficult due to the missile's mass and kinetic energy, unlike the much smaller, lighter and easily maneuverable SAMs, AAMs, ATGMs etc.
> 
> The Chinese too are trying to get this technology perfected for their big long range DF series missiles for destroying ACs but have not been successful so far. However, the Americans are getting their Tomahawks equipped with NG explosives to take on moving targets with some new fangled electronic guidance systems to take on small ships and moving land targets. But destroying ACs is another story. You'd require half a dozen such missiles simultaneously to destroy an AC which has its own defensive measures against such attacks as well as the Carrier Strike Group which it is part of.




The aim is not to destroy it, but render it incapable for launching aircraft. If an aircraft carrier cannot launch it's aircraft, it's effectively useless. 

Actually, that is the aim of every naval warfare now. Neutralize the threat, no need to destroy it completely.



GURU DUTT said:


> well heres a scenario
> 
> india and pakistan are at war and indian navy is given the task to block your sea lines
> 
> now the question is how
> 
> answer is simple a squad of SU-30MKI at baroda lainches a attack on karachi and gadawar and dessimates all the naval ships of PN standing there and the second wave of jags finishes the job
> 
> well the things are not that easy but not that difficult aswell for india ause
> 
> 1. all of your Air force will be monitored and all your actions will be tracked and followed very closeli by the indian ground based radars which even today scan all pakistani airspace as much as untill the hindukush ranges
> 
> 2.All pakistani airforce will be bizzi in fighting and keeping indian iar force at bay where on earth will they be able to spare a squad of your almighty JF17s to diliver there define CM-400 and other so called carrier killers cause
> 
> a. there are at least 12 squads(240) of fighters on owr western border to keep PAF bizzi that includes
> 
> 2 squads of M2k
> 2squads of MIG29
> 5squads of MKI
> 3squads of Jaguars
> 
> b. besudes this 3 dedicated phalcon AWACS platforms will keep even a better eye on PAF
> 
> c.round the clock Spy SAT cover(both israeli & indian + a few inputs from russian and americans aswell) will keep even a better eye on all you movements
> 
> d. every CBG will have at least 1 squad ok Mig 29K + 6 K25 & K31 ASW & AWAC helicopters backed by there own radars and anty aircraft missile systems
> 
> 3. what about other ships of indian navy do you realli think they will stay away form the party
> 
> well brother thing is there is nothing you can do to take on owr CBGs they are not for you




While India has to maintain some airforce against China, Pakistan doesn't. So it can put all it's fighters against India in no time.

Last, as usual from Indian members, IAF is not the only one with dedicated AWACs aircraft in it's fleet.


----------



## GURU DUTT

Donatello said:


> The aim is not to destroy it, but render it incapable for launching aircraft. If an aircraft carrier cannot launch it's aircraft, it's effectively useless.
> 
> Actually, that is the aim of every naval warfare now. Neutralize the threat, no need to destroy it completely.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While India has to maintain some airforce against China, Pakistan doesn't. So it can put all it's fighters against India in no time.
> 
> Last, as usual from Indian members, IAF is not the only one with dedicated AWACs aircraft in it's fleet.


thats true brother but the thing is chinese have to over come the IAF & IN bases in andaman and nicobar islands which sits owt like a watch god at the gates of amllacca starits + chinese presence in sri lanka will be taken care of by IAF & IN air bases in Goa, karnataka , kerala , tamil nadu while for karachi and gadawar owr bases in baroda , jaiselmair and pune are well equipped to handle all chinese and pakistani air force in southren part of pakistan while the air bases in central and north india will hold PAF & can even give PLAAF a very bloody nose if ever they try to cross the himalayas

now tell me what will you do if chinese like in all previous indo - pak wars stay owt and just provide you with free supply of wepons 

as for awacs no dought you have 4 chinese AWACS couple of swedish AWACS but your a intellegent person please can they hold agaisnt 3 Phalcons backed equal number of Indian ASEA based AWACS which again will be backed mutiple layered and muli band indian ground based and aerostat radars + on open sea's we have P8i's and K 31 AWACs and very soon E2D is in the offening 

how will you counter it & not to forget owr MKIs are called mini awacs deu to there power full PESA radars while in couple of years they will have the ASEA upgrade and a new genration of Jammers + EW suite

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Jf Thunder

wow, i didn't get one word what you people said what i understood was
"India has very strong navy, it cannot be defeated, Pakistan Navy is too weak, we have no chance of firing and successfully hitting our missiles on targets, if war starts India will be the clear victor from the start, India can take on China and Pakistan from both sides at the same time"

now my answer is that you should not underestimate us, an Air craft carrier does not move very fast, but missile do, if we aim for the peak of the Carrier, it will most likely at least hit its bottom half, and if does hit anywhere successfully, it will be bye bye to the big ship, and you are not the only one with radars and jammeres, i am no technical person but at least i know this we are not so stupid enough to not have anything to counter the "Invincible" India, we have some tricks up our sleeves which one cannot disclose. 
well that's all i could come up with


----------



## illusion8

GURU DUTT said:


> did i mention the indian subs can fire sub launched club , bhramos & maybe exoset which we will get with scorpenes + the classified stuff we got thanks to israel



PN's agosta's can fire exocets too.


----------



## GURU DUTT

Jf Thunder said:


> wow, i didn't get one word what you people said what i understood was
> "India has very strong navy, it cannot be defeated, Pakistan Navy is too weak, we have no chance of firing and successfully hitting our missiles on targets, if war starts India will be the clear victor from the start, India can take on China and Pakistan from both sides at the same time"
> 
> now my answer is that you should not underestimate us, an Air craft carrier does not move very fast, but missile do, if we aim for the peak of the Carrier, it will most likely at least hit its bottom half, and if does hit anywhere successfully, it will be bye bye to the big ship, and you are not the only one with radars and jammeres, i am no technical person but at least i know this we are not so stupid enough to not have anything to counter the "Invincible" India, we have some tricks up our sleeves which one cannot disclose.
> well that's all i could come up with


well brother i neversaid IAF & IN are invincible but pakistan is in no postion to cahllenege us and thats priceislli why you made babur, raad & nasr ....ps...they are not for sea but for mainland(india) when your estabishment after whenever they are cornerred starts gloating about neuclear war 

and yes we have been prepairing and builduing owr defences aginst two front war ever since 1962 defeat from china which was speeded up after 1971 when we saw US can come to your aid and we have prepared well in advance for a possible two front war 

but if ever china trys to engage us my dear freind dont rule owt the open and unconditional US support to us while Japan and S korea & vietnam & Tawian are already to much irrtated of chinese bullying in that sector do you think they will keep quite so rule owt china buddy chinese dont think like pakistanies ...period 

as for your so called "secret trump cards & some tricks up your sleeves" then biddy dont forget that we indians are not called cunning and evil followers of chankyan ideology for no reason either 



illusion8 said:


> PN's agosta's can fire exocets too.


well brother good for them but owr P8i's can take owt there subs as soon as they leave there safe shores and enter open seas and they wil be the first to scan and clear the area i hope you know what i mean

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dash

ejaz007 said:


> Yes the fighters have the capability. Even a single or two missiles can do the job. *It depends where the missile hits the ship*. If it hits an area where ammunition is stored then secondary explosions due to ships own weapons would be contributing factor.
> 
> Then there shall be lots of fuel and other flammable material available that shall render the ship out of service even if not sink her.



out of 100%, whats the kill probability then?


----------



## illusion8

GURU DUTT said:


> well brother good for them but owr P8i's can take owt there subs as soon as they leave there safe shores and enter open seas and they wil be the first to scan and clear the area i hope you know what i mean



The 3 advanced agosta 90B possessed by PN are a genuine threat to an ACC Bro and possibly the biggest threat in a war scenario, the ACC's will most likely and if they do will operate beyond the JF17's threat theater - as in beyond any land based fighter's ambit. The P8i's are surely a direct threat to PN's sub fleet as well.

Launching Shaheen's against an ACC - that's pure fantasy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## graphican

GURU DUTT said:


> well buddy babur is not an ASM and cant hit a target moving at speeds above even 10 KMPH



We have got a navel version of it. Now weather it can hit moving targets or not is unknown - but - what is known is that it is nuclear capable and can hit targets with pin-point accuracy. Recent experiments of Hatf revealed that missile fall within 1 of the target flag and this tells what level of accuracy Pakistani missiles possess. 



> now when you will be gearing up to launch your baburs or have launched them they will be instantli picked up by multi layered PESA/ASEA based 3D & 4D radars based near pakistani border with india and will track/calculate and alert all indian offensive & defensive assets in that area and all the launchers will be taken owt within minutes by batteries of indian land based bharmos as it flies more than twice the speed of sound



Babur launchers are mobile and a launcher can launch 3 missiles together. I do not think they will launch missiles and then wait for Indian Counter measures. After launching, if they are able to get 3 minutes time before an enemy missile hits that area, those 3 minutes would have given them enough distance to remain safe but you are forgetting one basic aspect here, Babur is a terrain hugging missile and can only be detected by a flying AWACS within a very short range. So none of your 2D and 3D radars near Pakistani borders will be able to see unless supported by an areal and closely flying AWACS - but - if AWACS was flying that near, why wouldn't it see an incoming AA missile from this side of the border? Secondly, cruise missile never fly on a linear path which any of your missile defense system could use. There is a reason why Indian minds are talking about Babur being a serious threat to India. 




> now comes the second part the already alerted indian Naval Armada will take on a barage of your babaurs and other so called "carrier killers" as almost all the ships in CBG have there multi layered radar shields and anty aircraft and anti missle shields cause til you missiles reach anywhere near them they would have changed the postion and come into attck mode and dont forget those CBGs will have there own air arm that will attack and help in taking owt your baburs thru its air to air missiles



Now this is where your post makes sense that air-defense system of Carrier will be your only shield but my point is that on land, kill ratio of missile to missile is less than 50% because of which multiple defense missiles are launched towards incoming object. Now you are talking about missile defense system on moving target and probably 10s of incoming missiles together. What survival chances do you think an AC would have in such a situation? As I mentioned, in order to survive, you must neutralize every incoming missile but for Pakistan to take your AC down, all we need is one hit of low-yeild device.

It doesn't matter how many side-gadgets an AC possess, when it comes to survival, it is alone who has to face all incoming threats and considering Pakistan's possible response, I do not see Indian AC getting closer to Pakistani waters unless Indian had attacked and had successfully eliminated defensive and offensive mechanisms of Pakistan but if India can think so, why don't you think Pakistan would want to attack Indian defensive and offensive mechanisms and approach AC in Indian waters? It would naive on your part if you think Pakistan won't. When daggers are drawn, attack is your best defense.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## illusion8

graphican said:


> *We have got a navel version of it.* Now weather it can hit moving targets or not is unknown - but - what is known is that it is nuclear capable and can hit targets with pin-point accuracy. *Recent experiments of Hatf revealed that missile fall within 1 of the target flag and this tells what level of accuracy Pakistani missiles possess. *
> 
> 
> 
> *Babur launchers are mobile and a launcher can launch 3 missiles together.* Babur is a terrain hugging missile and *can only be detected by a flying AWACS within a very short range. So none of your 2D and 3D radars near Pakistani borders will be able to see unless supported by an areal and closely flying AWACS*



Can you provide any proof for the statements marked in red that you made?


----------



## Jf Thunder

GURU DUTT said:


> and yes we have been prepairing and builduing owr defences aginst two front war ever since 1962 defeat from china which was speeded up after 1971 when we saw US can come to your aid and we have prepared well in advance for a possible two front war


US did nothing for our aid, and you don't have to worry about it it wont do anything to us or you, the last thing it wants is a war with another Nuclear country, be it India or Pakistan



illusion8 said:


> Can you provide any proof for the statements marked in red that you made?


they are confidential? its like asking to bring and show you our nukes as proof that we do have them ._.


----------



## GURU DUTT

illusion8 said:


> The 3 advanced agosta 90B possessed by PN are a genuine threat to an ACC Bro and possibly the biggest threat in a war scenario, the ACC's will most likely and if they do will operate beyond the JF17's threat theater - as in beyond any land based fighter's ambit. The P8i's are surely a direct threat to PN's sub fleet as well.
> 
> Launching Shaheen's against an ACC - that's pure fantasy.


well is that sarcasm or a hit under the belt buddy 

dont you know that a CBG has its very own under surface scanning and anty ship arseneell apart from the ASW helies which almost evry indian naval vessel carries 

and why on earth are we buying, making and leasing modern subs for (207s,KILOs,scorpenes and the neuklear ones)

above all why are we investing in 12+8 P8i's

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## illusion8

Jf Thunder said:


> US did nothing for our aid, and you don't have to worry about it it wont do anything to us or you, the last thing it wants is a war with another Nuclear country, be it India or Pakistan
> 
> 
> *they are confidential? its like asking to bring and show you our nukes as proof that we do have them ._.*



That's BS.



GURU DUTT said:


> well is that sarcasm or a hit under the belt buddy
> 
> dont you know that a CBG has its very own under surface scanning and anty ship arseneell apart from the ASW helies which almost evry indian naval vessel carries
> 
> and why on earth are we buying, making and leasing modern subs for (207s,KILOs,scorpenes and the neuklear ones)
> 
> above all why are we investing in 12+8 P8i's



It's a threat bro - does not necessarily mean a successful threat.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jf Thunder

illusion8 said:


> That's BS.
> 
> 
> 
> It's a threat bro - does not necessarily mean a successful threat.


whats BS?


----------



## GURU DUTT

graphican said:


> We have got a navel version of it. Now weather it can hit moving targets or not is unknown - but - what is known is that it is nuclear capable and can hit targets with pin-point accuracy. Recent experiments of Hatf revealed that missile fall within 1 of the target flag and this tells what level of accuracy Pakistani missiles possess.
> 
> 
> 
> Babur launchers are mobile and a launcher can launch 3 missiles together. I do not think they will launch missiles and then wait for Indian Counter measures. After launching, if they are able to get 3 minutes time before an enemy missile hits that area, those 3 minutes would have given them enough distance to remain safe but you are forgetting one basic aspect here, Babur is a terrain hugging missile and can only be detected by a flying AWACS within a very short range. So none of your 2D and 3D radars near Pakistani borders will be able to see unless supported by an areal and closely flying AWACS - but - if AWACS was flying that near, why wouldn't it see an incoming AA missile from this side of the border? Secondly, cruise missile never fly on a linear path which any of your missile defense system could use. There is a reason why Indian minds are talking about Babur being a serious threat to India.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now this is where your post makes sense that air-defense system of Carrier will be your only shield but my point is that on land, kill ratio of missile to missile is less than 50% because of which multiple defense missiles are launched towards incoming object. Now you are talking about missile defense system on moving target and probably 10s of incoming missiles together. What survival chances do you think an AC would have in such a situation? As I mentioned, in order to survive, you must neutralize every incoming missile but for Pakistan to take your AC down, all we need is one hit of low-yeild device.
> 
> It doesn't matter how many side-gadgets an AC possess, when it comes to survival, it is alone who has to face all incoming threats and considering Pakistan's possible response, I do not see Indian AC getting closer to Pakistani waters unless Indian had attacked and had successfully eliminated defensive and offensive mechanisms of Pakistan but if India can think so, why don't you think Pakistan would want to attack Indian defensive and offensive mechanisms and approach AC in Indian waters? It would naive on your part if you think Pakistan won't. When daggers are drawn, attack is your best defense.


well first part show me the link 

secondli i know babur is raod mobile and has shoot and scoot capality thats pricesly why we are investing so heavily on spy sat network that scans and detects all movements of your strategicl forces like missile launch sites and launchers 

as for countring baburs mid air i guess ill take chances with IAF prepairdiness in this area 

as for arial defnce of CBG and naval blockade brother things are way much more complicated than you think but its good to be optimistic ...good luck

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## illusion8

Jf Thunder said:


> whats BS?



*B*est *S*tatement ever.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GURU DUTT

Jf Thunder said:


> US did nothing for our aid, and you don't have to worry about it it wont do anything to us or you, the last thing it wants is a war with another Nuclear country, be it India or Pakistan
> 
> 
> they are confidential? its like asking to bring and show you our nukes as proof that we do have them ._.


well brother USA did send its 7th fleet to bully india in 1971 but in way came a soviet neuklear sub which surfaced in front of the 7th fleet before it could enter bay of bengal

as for usa worrying about neuklear state well brother they give a rats behind about that cause apart from russia & china no one will ever dare to send its ICBMs tipped with neukes to USA and i guess your intelegent enof to know why

as for your super duper baburs and devine carrier killers well USA along with israel made there anty dotes as soon as the oprationalised there tomahawks & ASMs and other classified stealthy arsenell cause they know there opponents will be bizzi in making the counterparts

and india is already building its shields with help of green pines , swordfish & other french and israeli + Indian and russian radars + making & buying akash PAD ,AAD, S -300 PMU, S-400 , spyder sam sytem an some other israeli ,french and russian systems in huge numbers to counter your cruise missle and billistick missile threat

so buddy it sure will put a few scars on owr face but we will be able to survive but sorry to say pakistan will sieze to survive if ever it tryies to do a neuklear tango with india

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Secur

The adversary's not sleeping in the meantime . People need to remember that before presenting out the entire current Indian arsenal and then boasting about their future procurements . Sometimes , I hate the ISPR not for releasing enough information @mafiya

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## graphican

GURU DUTT said:


> well first part show me the link



*Land Version of Babur Cruise Missile*






*Naval Version of Babur Cruise Missile*





URL: Pakistan Successfully Tests Hatf-VII Babur Cruise Missile ~ Pakistan Military Review




> secondli i know babur is raod mobile and has shoot and scoot capality thats pricesly why we are investing so heavily on spy sat network that scans and detects all movements of your strategicl forces like missile launch sites and launchers



Satellites may be able to locate major deployments but not individual vehicles and small sized - constantly moving trucks, unless they were looking for specific one and were tracking it from storage to deployment. We have 1200 KM long border with India and most of it is subject to such deployments. Unless India had 10s of satellites looking for hints continuously, they won't be able to locate them. Secondly in the battle field, there are always camouflage and fake threat casters. What are your chances to actually identify real carrier and launching a neutralizing it before it relocates or it launches an attack? Probably some chance is there but I don't think India will be deepening on its survival on such a minute chance. And this is an expected future tactic which doesn't exist on the ground as yet.



> as for countring baburs mid air i guess ill take chances with IAF preparedness in this area as for arial defnce of CBG and naval blockade brother things are way much more complicated than you think but its good to be optimistic ...good luck



I don't disagree with you and I acknowledge Indian navy is way stronger than Pakistan has or can counter using its naval fleet - but - what I am saying is rather simple and different from navy-vs-navy. Pakistan's navy wouldn't be able to move ahead to attack Indian asserts as long as AC or other naval fleets are blocking their way - but - Pakistan has good means to neutralize such naval blockade if India ever creates one; unless that blockage was created way down inside indian waters. If it was within our waters/within our reach, its survival chances are flimsy.


----------



## GURU DUTT

graphican said:


> *Land Version of Babur Cruise Missile*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Naval Version of Babur Cruise Missile*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> URL: Pakistan Successfully Tests Hatf-VII Babur Cruise Missile ~ Pakistan Military Review
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Satellites may be able to locate major deployments but not individual vehicles and small sized - constantly moving trucks, unless they were looking for specific one and were tracking it from storage to deployment. We have 1200 KM long border with India and most of it is subject to such deployments. Unless India had 10s of satellites looking for hints continuously, they won't be able to locate them. Secondly in the battle field, there are always camouflage and fake threat casters. What are your chances to actually identify real carrier and launching a neutralizing it before it relocates or it launches an attack? Probably some chance is there but I don't think India will be deepening on its survival on such a minute chance. And this is an expected future tactic which doesn't exist on the ground as yet.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't disagree with you and I acknowledge Indian navy is way stronger than Pakistan has or can counter using its naval fleet - but - what I am saying is rather simple and different from navy-vs-navy. Pakistan's navy wouldn't be able to move ahead to attack Indian asserts as long as AC or other naval fleets are blocking their way - but - Pakistan has good means to neutralize such naval blockade if India ever creates one; unless that blockage was created way down inside indian waters. If it was within our waters/within our reach, its survival chances are flimsy.


well brother thing is you have baburs in all version great but the main point is how will you use them agaisnt indian navy but maybe you know what i dont so i dont conteston it 

as for sats well brother they are way more than what you think + its not just indians that are keeping an eye on you its USA , Isarel & russia aswell cause they are already warry about your adventourism and we share all these informations and vice versa but again its not just sats or radars but ground intel aswell which we have thanks to freinds + your own assets are targets of tallibunnies and so very often we see pakistani inteletualls saying its pakistan which is gurding its neukes than the other way around any way good for you again 

now the last part well brother why will we send owr navy for your blockade when we can counter all threats posed by you by owr land based assets as karachi isnext door to mumbai do you realli think your navy will vnture far from your ports when already owr assets will be targeting them from owr border states with you say gujrat or maharashtra 

any way nice thread i enjoyed it thanks buddy


----------



## Bratva

Secur said:


> The adversary's not sleeping in the meantime . People need to remember that before presenting out the entire current Indian arsenal and then boasting about their future procurements . Sometimes , I hate the ISPR not for releasing enough information @mafiya



Na zakhmo par namak chirko... Agai hi ISPR par bohot tap hai. 

Rightly said. Whatever Pakistan has or got, it has the best defensive arsenal. Though we suck at having offensive punch.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## graphican

illusion8 said:


> Can you provide any proof for the statements marked in red that you made?



Short answer is no I cannot empirically prove you but here is my rational and logic.

In war-scenarios, aircrafts fly close to tree-line to avoid detection and they stay undetected unless seen by an areal scanner like an AWACS or they had reached fairly close to radar installations as otherwise they remain submerged within ground noise. Here, we are talking about an object which has several times smaller radar signature than aircrafts reflect. When you say 3D, that means scanner/radar is supported by xy-ground-scanner and is linked with a high altitude AWACS. A ground hugging object who never crosses the line of horizon stays submerged within the ground-noise zone and thus stays undetected by xy-scanner but when Awacs is there, it can identify it when the missile was close enough to reflect radar signals back. 

Now consider the 3m2 standard RCS produced by 10-15m wide aircrafts having engine, wings and wave reflecting surfaces VS radar signature of a wingless tiny object having 0.52m radius, which on top is is terrain hugging and continuously changes its path. If an AWACS can detect a 10-15m wide target from the distance of 400KM, how much detection range would you expect for an object which is 2-5% of size of an aircraft and who stays ducked under the line of horizon, with negligible heat signature and no deflecting fins?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bratva

illusion8 said:


> Can you provide any proof for the statements marked in red that you made?



Nasr test video showed the accuracy of the system which was 1-2 meters. Babur Accuracy is 3-4 Meter and it's last year test it flew at 50 meter height. Can your ground based 2D, 3d radars can pick CM at such height?


----------



## graphican

GURU DUTT said:


> well brother thing is you have baburs in all version great but the main point is how will you use them agaisnt indian navy but maybe you know what i dont so i dont conteston it



I told you there is a naval and nuclear capable version. What we both don't know is that if it can target moving targets but I like to hope it would. We have serious threats and we have harpoons+chinese carrier killers + all the support which we need from them. Logically speaking why shouldn't it be ready to attack sea-based targets?



> as for sats well brother they are way more than what you think + its not just indians that are keeping an eye on you its USA , Isarel & russia aswell cause they are already warry about your adventourism and we share all these informations and vice versa but again its not just sats or radars but ground intel aswell which we have thanks to freinds + your own assets are targets of tallibunnies and so very often we see pakistani inteletualls saying its pakistan which is gurding its neukes than the other way around any way good for you again



I can say the same about China and they having their eye on India. Here your stance is more of a political in nature and I leave you happy with that.



> now the last part well brother why will we send owr navy for your blockade when we can counter all threats posed by you by owr land based assets as karachi isnext door to mumbai do you realli think your navy will vnture far from your ports when already owr assets will be targeting them from owr border states with you say gujrat or maharashtra. any way nice thread i enjoyed it thanks buddy



Now you have started saying what I was saying but keeping a wrong reason. India will depend on its airforce more than it does on Navy for Pakistan's scenario and it wouldn't dare bringing AC close to our waters being cautious. Pakistan has enough means to bring mighty AC down. Also for Pakistan, Aircraft Carrier doesn't increase our threat perception as India has enough land airbases near our border and if Pakistan can counter threat from those bases, adding AC to those wouldn't change anyting for us. 

You have a good day.. i'm also leaving my desk for today.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GURU DUTT

graphican said:


> I told you there is a naval and nuclear capable version. What we both don't know is that if it can target moving targets but I like to hope it would. We have serious threats and we have harpoons+chinese carrier killers + all the support which we need from them. Logically speaking why shouldn't it be ready to attack sea-based targets?
> 
> 
> 
> I can say the same about China and they having their eye on India. Here your stance is more of a political in nature and I leave you happy with that.
> 
> 
> 
> Now you have started saying what I was saying but keeping a wrong reason. India will depend on its airforce more than it does on Navy for Pakistan's scenario and it wouldn't dare bringing AC close to our waters being cautious. Pakistan has enough means to bring mighty AC down. Also for Pakistan, Aircraft Carrier doesn't increase our threat perception as India has enough land airbases near our border and if Pakistan can counter threat from those bases, adding AC to those wouldn't change anyting for us.
> 
> You have a good day.. i'm also leaving my desk for today.


well brother thing is you sureli have all those as you said but the question is element of surprize which is getting dileuted each passing day for you deu to new techs we have aquired

any way china is no where in the picture even if its keeping an eye on us they will not attack us cause they have to worry about USA joining the party openliwhile japan , s korea , vietnam and taiwan wil brovide the bcak up

now its good you got my final point thank you sir but the thing is its not just the indian airbases they have to worry on there eastern front butmany things they cant ignoare any way good night buddy



mafiya said:


> Na zakhmo par namak chirko... Agai hi ISPR par bohot tap hai.
> 
> Rightly said. Whatever Pakistan has or got, it has the best defensive arsenal. Though we suck at having offensive punch.


well the offence is the best line of defence and indiacan & wil own pakistan whenever they try to be over adventurous and remeber china will not come to save you all it will do is supply you free wepons and forget USA rather it will help india with all your secrets and you already know why ...cheerrs mate

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Donatello

GURU DUTT said:


> thats true brother but the thing is chinese have to over come the IAF & IN bases in andaman and nicobar islands which sits owt like a watch god at the gates of amllacca starits + chinese presence in sri lanka will be taken care of by IAF & IN air bases in Goa, karnataka , kerala , tamil nadu while for karachi and gadawar owr bases in baroda , jaiselmair and pune are well equipped to handle all chinese and pakistani air force in southren part of pakistan while the air bases in central and north india will hold PAF & can even give PLAAF a very bloody nose if ever they try to cross the himalayas
> 
> now tell me what will you do if chinese like in all previous indo - pak wars stay owt and just provide you with free supply of wepons
> 
> as for awacs no dought you have 4 chinese AWACS couple of swedish AWACS but your a intellegent person please can they hold agaisnt 3 Phalcons backed equal number of Indian ASEA based AWACS which again will be backed mutiple layered and muli band indian ground based and aerostat radars + on open sea's we have P8i's and K 31 AWACs and very soon E2D is in the offening
> 
> how will you counter it & not to forget owr MKIs are called mini awacs deu to there power full PESA radars while in couple of years they will have the ASEA upgrade and a new genration of Jammers + EW suite




If you are ignoring the ZDK03 and SAAB ERIEYE, along with P3C orions and F-16s, then you have the common Indian TV mentality.

Pakistan's posture is not to conquer anyone, but make sure that an attacking party (hint India) can be given a lethal punch in the face.

The Mirages based at Karachi are lethal too, with the Exocet. not to mention the Agostas and their AIP and capability to launch Exocet while submerged.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## illusion8

mafiya said:


> Nasr test video showed the accuracy of the system which was 1-2 meters. Babur Accuracy is 3-4 Meter and it's last year test it flew at 50 meter height. Can your ground based 2D, 3d radars can pick CM at such height?




Post the article/ video regarding the accuracy of babur and nasr - purely for my information only. 

Of course they can - Aerostat radars are lined up along India's western borders specifically to detect low flying aircraft and possible cruise missiles.


----------



## Bratva

illusion8 said:


> Post the article/ video regarding the accuracy of babur and nasr - purely for my information only.
> 
> Of course they can - Aerostat radars are lined up along India's western borders specifically to detect low flying aircraft and possible cruise missiles.



Nasr Video is in Pakistan missile technology thread. Check last couple of pages and regarding Babur, It's somewhere in *Babur Cruise Missile - Database *thread, A grainy video, can't figure out, but the official news item that came with it in "Urdu" disclosed it's accuracy and height parameters plus that Babur serial production officially started in 2012


----------



## trident2010

Why would India have to use ACC for Pakistan? IN will fire around 50-75 naval Brahmos in conjunction with anti-submarine charges (with the help of P8-I and Tu-142) which is more than enough to sink all the PN fleet and then they can use guided-missile destroyers to achieve the mission objectives. Using ACC for Pakistan is more than overkill.


----------



## TaimiKhan

trident2010 said:


> Why would India have to use ACC for Pakistan? IN will fire around 50-75 naval Brahmos in conjunction with anti-submarine charges (with the help of P8-I and Tu-142) which is more than enough to sink all the PN fleet and then they can use guided-missile destroyers to achieve the mission objectives. Using ACC for Pakistan is more than overkill.



So easy for arm chair generals to say, but very difficult to do it practically or not every plan goes as planned.


----------



## trident2010

TaimiKhan said:


> So easy for arm chair generals to say, but very difficult to do it practically or not every plan goes as planned.



Yes, I know but if a light fighter like JF-17 can sink an ACC which is protected by CBG and Mig-29K, then it is more than possible that 50-75 naval Brahmos + anti-submarine charges will sink all the PN along with some fishing boats near by.


----------



## TaimiKhan

trident2010 said:


> Yes, I know but if a light fighter like JF-17 can sink an ACC which is protected by CBG and Mig-29K, then it is more than possible that 50-75 naval Brahmos + anti-submarine charges will sink all the PN along with some fishing boats near by.



If any irrational member like you can assume that JF-17 can sink an ACC, well then you guys are fit for each other. 

Any rational / sane member won't be indulging in such comments which can't be based on reality.


----------



## trident2010

TaimiKhan said:


> If any irrational member like you can assume that JF-17 can sink an ACC, well then you guys are fit for each other.
> 
> Any rational / sane member won't be indulging in such comments which can't be based on reality.



Exactly, but if we see last 4-5 pages, even senior members are trying to imply that JF-17 can sink ACC.


----------



## Bratva

trident2010 said:


> Exactly, but if we see last 4-5 pages, even senior members are trying to imply that JF-17 can sink ACC.



There is something wrong with your thinking capability. What Senior members are implying is putting ACC out of action through significant damage to it's deck or runaway


----------



## TaimiKhan

trident2010 said:


> Exactly, but if we see last 4-5 pages, even senior members are trying to imply that JF-17 can sink ACC.



A single aircraft can not do that feat, only a miracle can happen for such thing to happen and that is nearly impossible. 

Yeah, a group of aircraft in which some take on the air cover of the ACC and some try to sneak close enough to launch a few Anti Ship missiles simultaneously, and then hoping that one or two are missed by the CIWS of the ACC, to land on the ACC, and won't destroy it, just damage it to put it out of action for a few weeks, that is something which can be planned but very risky and costly. Best to have many submarines and get a capability to have workable ballistic missiles just like what China is making and recently Iran showed it to the world that it is working on such a thing. But again for that a robust C4ISR system is required. 

And i don't know why will India bring the ACC so much close to us, other assets are more then enough to keep us busy with.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## trident2010

mafiya said:


> There is something wrong with your thinking capability. What Senior members are implying is putting ACC out of action through significant damage to it's deck or runaway



Yes and this significant damage is done by light fighter JF-17 which will defeat fighters like Mig-29K, air defences of ACC and CBGs? Not to mention rest of IN armada !!

If we are considering a scenario when an ACC is roaming alone and not a single Mig/Hunter present on deck and its defences are offlline, yes ofcourse JF-17 can disable even a Ford class carrier.


----------



## AUz

gslv mk3 said:


> @
> 
> 
> Usually bragging,I guess pakistan also has ICBMs & MIRVs....
> Ever heard of 'Seekers'??



MIRVs. Yes.

ICBMs? We don't need those. We are working on more sophisticated technologies of 21st centuries. Seeker technology isn't hard to get...specially if you work with nations like China (in India's case, Russia).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ejaz007

Dash said:


> out of 100%, whats the kill probability then?




If we talk about taking carrier out of war then 100%.

If we talk about sinking it then it is hard to say. Depends on a number of factors.


----------



## Dash

ejaz007 said:


> If we talk about taking carrier out of war then 100%.
> 
> If we talk about sinking it then it is hard to say. Depends on a number of factors.



Out of war is not 100% either as you said it depends on where the missile hits.


----------



## Juice

Jf Thunder said:


> you do that, you keep sending in planes and we will keep sending them onto hell, does that sound good? desu ne?


Lol....sending them to hell? You can't even fight off a few Helos or drones.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GURU DUTT

Donatello said:


> If you are ignoring the ZDK03 and SAAB ERIEYE, along with P3C orions and F-16s, then you have the common Indian TV mentality.
> 
> Pakistan's posture is not to conquer anyone, but make sure that an attacking party (hint India) can be given a lethal punch in the face.
> 
> The Mirages based at Karachi are lethal too, with the Exocet. not to mention the Agostas and their AIP and capability to launch Exocet while submerged.


no im not ignoaring any thing but please tell me brother will you send your chinese and swedish awacs in open seas where they will need more feul and will be fighting away from the home and wont have the backing of surface to air missles to back them againt the agressive or enemy force because since same will not be the case with MIG29s(they have 850 fighting radius withwt external feul tanks) so they will carry more wepons and will also have novotar -100 very long range BVR (also called AWACS Killer) + will have backing of multiple band and multi layered ship based and heli based AWACs + we also have the latest P8i's which are at least two generations ahead of you P3Cs

Mikoyan MiG-29K - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kamov Ka-31 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Boeing P-8 Poseidon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and dont forget the land based aradrs will already be tracking , calculating , evaleutaing all your moves and alerting and dispatching the counter force (land based 3 squads oh MKI & 3 squads jags are kept seperatelli for this purpose) and they are more than enof to blunt any such move and can take on all those mirages and F-16s + 1 squad M2K & MIG29 are kept as the second line of defence backed again by huge numbers on MIG 21 Bisons for point defnce

EL/W-2090 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sukhoi Su-30MKI - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mikoyan MiG-29 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dassault Mirage 2000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


as for your Aogasta subs with AIP & exoset missiles well brother you are forgeting we bought P8i's for some reason dint we and dohave i to tell you what hrm it can inflict upon you + dont forget indian CBG will also have dedicated anty sub warfare helis and surface ships + 2 subs will be escorting owr CBG all time there to take on any of your subs (and we have Kilo's & scorpenes for the same)

last but not the least we have all the offensive wepons in much much grater number than yours hope you get the big picture but my earlier point is that CBG will never be used to do naval blokade role as karachi is very near to indian coast and we have made 'other arrangement ' for the job which are much more effective while are way more cheaper and carry much less risk for us


thing is we have not bought XCBG for you but it is pakistanies who want to sink owr CBG in name of misplaced aprehenssion that it will be used for there naval blokade ...well sir dont give so much importance to yourself ...your not worth it ....cheers mate


----------



## Friei Indien

Saifullah Sani said:


> *CM-400AKG missile is China's new 'carrier killer': Russian media
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The CM-400AKG supersonic cruise missile designed by Aviation Industry Corporation of China — an export version of China's YJ-12 anti-ship missile — can be used successfully against India's aircraft carrier when launched by Pakistan's JF-17 Thunder fighter, reports the Moscow-based Russian Military Analysis website.*
> 
> The CM-400AKG was demonstrated to the public for the first time during the Zhuhai airshow last year. The YJ-12 was originally designed to be used against multiple targets including US aircraft carriers with a combat range of 500 kilometers and can be carried by various platforms such as bombers like the H-6 and JH-7, fighter jets such as the J-11B, J-15, J-16 and Su-30MKK and Type 052D destroyers. However, the range of the CM-400AKG has been reduced to 250 kilometers to meet export restrictions of the international Missile Technology Control Regime.
> 
> The missile can be launched when the aircraft reaches speeds of between 750 and 800 kilometers an hour, the report said. The speed of the Chinese supersonic cruise missile is between mach 3.5 to mach 4. It can be equipped with high-explosive and armor-piercing warheads. Insiders said that the missile was designed for the FC-1 Xiaolong also known as JF-17 Thunder, a fighter jointly developed by China and Pakistan.
> 
> The Indian navy currently has two aircraft carriers in service, a Russian-built INS Vikramaditya and a British-built INS Viraat, while two domestic Vikrant-class vessels are still in construction. Anti-ship cruise missiles such as the YJ-12 and CM-400AKG are thus crucial for both China and Pakistan to compete against their common enemy in the Indian Ocean region, the report said.
> 
> CM-400AKG missile is China's new 'carrier killer': Russian media｜Politics｜News｜WantChinaTimes.com


seriously, i dont think pakistan needs carrier killers, chinese shud keep them 4 themselves, for our CBG are not meant for pakistan

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## hussain0216

Oh yeah, you've been telling us they are not meant for Pakistan.

So course we should not prepare for them or any other indian ship and trust your word,,

Frack that

The CM-400AKG missile is a fantastic asset that we need to build upon, we need to have an effective plan to take on our enemy

Finance/economy has held us back but as the economy improves the Pakistani military needs to procure the assets to make it effective.

If nothing else you need a basic effective detterance and way of hurting your enemy


----------



## Jf Thunder

Juice said:


> Lol....sending them to hell? You can't even fight off a few Helos or drones.


cuz the drones come on base of agreements from the government, shooting down a drone is a child's play, until the government doesn't tell the Air Force to shoot it down the cant, so in short this government takes money for the lives taken by drones.


----------



## Khan_patriot

Good move we need force multiplyers inorder to tip the scales of war in our favour...


----------



## Jf Thunder

THIS WAR IS OURS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## ejaz007

Dash said:


> Out of war is not 100% either as you said it depends on where the missile hits.



Out of war is definitely 100% because you do not wish to operate a damaged carrier in the middle of war. What if the carriers own defense system is crippled or it is not able to manoeuvre?


----------



## Dash

ejaz007 said:


> Out of war is definitely 100% because you do not wish to operate a damaged carrier in the middle of war. What *if?* the carriers own defense system is crippled or it is not able to manoeuvre?



Again, there is if.....so you are not 100% sure!


----------



## xyxmt

bloo said:


> For Pete's sake, its just a very high speed AShM, I still don't see how people call it impervious to missile defense and what not.



there is only one way to find out
by the way after missile is fired who is to say if it was fired from 250 miles or 500 miles.


----------



## MULUBJA

A missile with Mach 3.5 speed without remjet having bellow 400 KG weight and 150 KM + range is BS. In normal engine, you have to put oxidizer which significantly increase the weight which plane like JF 17 can not carry. If it weighs less than JF 17 have to come very close. in the shooting range of EX SAM.

Let us assume that it is fired from a close range, MRSAM shall shoot it down.


----------



## Basel

al_asad_al_mulk said:


> I visited Indian defense forum every thread filled with lies and fine example of hypocrisy even they don't want to listen a reasonable argument from a Pakistani why this Indian sh..t here abusing and using foul language here in this forum we are here to discuss and share our knowledge. Admin kindly ban this Indian Sh..t. We need reasonable arguments not bullying.



I totally agree with you on that, I occasionally visit ***, Indian defense forum and Bharat rakshak they are full of hate, bias and extremely bad language for Pakistan while those Indian try to teach ethics and moral here. Mods should look into it as this Pakistani Defense Forum.

Sorry for being off topic.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## desimorty

If the missiles flys high and then goes into a dive to attain high speed, to hit target, there is your weakness.
Such a missile will be easier to see and track with radar than a sea skimmer. Also interception will happen earlier.
Its no Brahmos, and its no Carrier Killer either. If such a missile is to be a threat, the PAF will need to launch dozens at the same time, to hit even a single target.


> weight as 910 kg and range as 100-240 km


1 ton missile with a range of 240 with high-high flight mode and minimum range of 100 KM because it needs the distance to fly high.
Okay, its new but nothing revolutionary. the KH-31 ASM is more devestating given its flight profile.


> A list of system features appears to confirm an unusual characteristic associated with the CM-400. Unlike most high-speed cruise missiles, which fly at low altitude to avoid detection, the CM-400 uses “high [altitude] launching” to achieve “higher aircraft survivability”, according to the video.


"higher aircraft survivability"? are they talking missile or the launch platform because that doesn't sound to good for survivability of the missile.


> A fighter such as the Chengdu/Pakistan Aeronautical Complex JF-17 would launch the missile at speeds between Mach 0.7 and M0.9 at an elevation between 26,200ft and 39,400ft, according to the AVIC specifications.


Given its flight profile, I don't see it suprising enemy boats.
Also it is to be noted that the Barak 1 was tested against KH-31 which has a similar terminal velocity. And Barak 8 was tested against Brahmos on multiple occasions, long range and short range as well.


----------



## CHI RULES

if missile is called carrier killer doesn't mean will not be used against enemy ships it shall be used more for defensive purposes from attacking enemy frigates or destroyers. Further Missile can reach up range of 250KM which is quite sufficient to defend our coast line. Further in future like Brahmos , PN may start JV with China to develop next version of under discussion Missile with long range. Pak May also further develop Raad-Hatf VIII Missile further in naval role which already has range of 350KM may be easily increased up to 500 to 600Km.
Further there are major chances that PN will get it's own multi role naval fighter may be of 4.5th gen which will have stealth features, so a semi stealth plane with high flight ceiling and speed of Mach 2.2+ may pierce through any defenses not only Indian's and may effectively fire Missile from 5 to 600KM easily.

Further it is a fact that u will have to pay price to attack any Aircraft Carrier due to heavy defenses.


----------



## tahir195

`


Rana of Heryana said:


> BTW JF-17 engaging a MiG is one thing, winning against it is whole another thing.



Dont worry sir, we can handle every aircraft, in which, the pilot is, an Indian..... !!!! Be it a Mig or F-35....[/QUOTE]
larke tune to dill jeet liya



amitkit said:


> carriers are not dummy shots...will commentator keep that in mind......carrier killer lul.....first how PN or PAF going is going to pass carrier battle group defense...


abay jin ki kabotaro se phat ti hai un ke liya missle ka name hi kafi hai


----------



## Penguin

danish_vij said:


> *what is the use of ur navy if u need ur airforce JF17's to attack IN ?   *





@RV said:


> Bro, You made my day



A rather limited perspective IHMO.
As if IN does not operate under cover of landbased aviation....

Consider:

F-16C Combat radius*:* 340 mi (295 nmi, 550 km) on hi-lo-hi mission w. four 1,000 lb (450 kg) bombs
General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mirage IIIE Combat radius*:* 1,200 km (647 nmi, 746 mi)
Dassault Mirage III - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

JF-17 *Combat radius:* 1,352 km (840 mi)
CAC/PAC JF-17 Thunder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tejas LCA Combat radius*:* 500 km (162 nmi, 186 mi)
HAL Tejas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mig-29K combat radius of 850 km (531 mi).
Mikoyan MiG-29K - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

SU-30MKI Range*:* 3,000 km (1,620 nmi) at altitude; (1,270 km, 690 nmi near ground level; with no external fuel tanks)
Sukhoi Su-30MKI - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

By comparison, the Indian EEZ (200nmi, typically).

The low level unrefuelled attack range of the SU-30MKI (comparable to JF-17) is about 3,5 times the EEZ.
The distance Karachi to Mumbai 477.25 nmi
Karachi to Goa is 700.78 nmi
Karachi to Cochin is 1041.72 nmi.
Karachi to Dar Es Salaam is 2500.91 nmi.
Karachi to Jakarta is 2985.65 nmi.
That, my friends, puts land and ship based air cover in proper perspective. Certainly if you then factor in land-based tanker support (which IN aviation is unlikely to get from IAF).

IN carriers provide an additional layer of air defence to a naval task force. The attack capability is limited, relatively speaking. So yes, India would need (or at least use) its landbased SU-30MKI to attack PN surface units. If only to free up its carrier force for other duty.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## vitalsign

joekrish said:


> We have 24 migs on board plus the CBG's, so......how many JF 17 are you planing to send in.


Quantity is not important for us, We have Mastermind pilots, they can kick you out.


----------



## kaku1

Penguin said:


> IN carriers provide an additional layer of air defence to a naval task force. The attack capability is limited, relatively speaking. So yes, India would need (or at least use) its landbased SU-30MKI to attack PN surface units. If only to free up its carrier force for other duty.



Isnt Indian Carrier Groups is for naval blockading, or to prevent Pakistani blockading ( or any other muslim nation blockading) in Strait of Hormuz?

Or to create no fly zone/ exclusion zone over a large area?


----------



## Penguin

DJ Crudept said:


> oh Wannabe White Spotted !!!
> 
> do my Pakistani Friends really think that these Missiles Can Sunk a Air Craft Carrier ??


If the Chinese claim they can take out USN carriers with their arsenal, why would you believe some of the same weapons cannot sink a somewhat less capable Indian navy carrier, in a somewhat less capable carrier group?


----------



## Stephen Cohen

JF 17 will have to fight with Mig 29 K And Su 30 to reach a Carrier

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hurter

gslv mk3 said:


> This would not even reach Indian AC-the JF 17 carrying this one would not cross the ' Mig Screen '.
> Carrier killer?? lol



You want a demo? Please do something so that we can test on you.


----------



## Penguin

kaku1 said:


> Isnt Indian Carrier Groups is for naval blockading, or to prevent Pakistani blockading ( or any other muslim nation blockading) in Strait of Hormuz?
> 
> Or to create no fly zone/ exclusion zone over a large area?



SU-30MKI combat range: 1,620 nmi
Jam Nagar AFB - Bandar Abbas: 803.27 nmi (in range also for Mirage-2000)
Mumbai - Bandar Abbas: 1038.00 nmi

Having a carrier and escorting ships near the Strait of Hormuz would certainly have advantages, such as faster response times, longer loiter time, heavier war load over shorter distance etc. Without ships it is difficult to e.g. board and search ships. But in a major conflict scenario, you could/would still have Su-30MKI flying CAP over the area, backed by IL-76 based AWACS and tankers. The navy would use its land-based 1,200 nmi (with 4 hrs on station) P-8I, the 3887nmi IL-38 MPA's and the 6775 nmi range Tu-142 Bear MPA/bomber for recon, patrol and (antiship) strikes.

Likewise for a no-fly zone in the Indian Ocean. The carrier force comes into play for real at the very edges of the land-based air cover. And where staying power is required. That goes in the direction of the Gulf but also in the direction of the Malacca and Sunda Straits. and the antarcic.

Pakistan is in no position to blockade: they don't have the necessary number and quality of ships. Pakistan's naval doctrine is sea denial.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
2


----------



## tahir195

Stephen Cohen said:


> JF 17 will have to fight with Mig 29 K And Su 30 to reach a Carrier


now that's a good and sensible question



Penguin said:


> SU-30MKI combat range: 1,620 nmi
> Jam Nagar AFB - Bandar Abbas: 803.27 nmi (in range also for Mirage-2000)
> Mumbai - Bandar Abbas: 1038.00 nmi
> 
> Having a carrier and escorting ships near the Strait of Hormuz would certainly have advantages, such as faster response times, longer loiter time, heavier war load over shorter distance etc. Without ships it is difficult to e.g. board and search ships. But in a major comflict scenario, you could/would still have Su-30MKI flying CAP over the area, backed by IL-76 based AWACS and tankers. The navy would use its land-based 1,200 nmi (with 4 hrs on station) P-8I, the 3887nmi IL-38 MPA's and the 6775 nmi range Tu-142 Bear MPA/bomber for recon, patrol and (antiship) strikes.
> 
> Likewise for a no-fly zone in the Indian Ocean. The carrier force comes into play for real at the very edges of the land-based air cover. And where staying power is required. That goes in the direction of the Gulf but also in the direction of the Malacca and Sunda Straits. and the antarcic.
> 
> Pakistan is in no position to blockade: they don't have the necessary number and quality of ships. Pakistan's naval doctrine is sea denial.


ha ha ha what about 25 Submarines


----------



## Penguin

tahir195 said:


> ha ha ha what about 25 Submarines


What about them?

The track record of the 10 IN Kilo/Sindhugosh class and 4 Shishumar/209-1500 class subs isn't exactly stellar. There is a single Akula class, Chakra, and a single Arihant SSBN. Oh wait, that adds up to just 16 subs. Which cannot under all circumstances be put in one place (unless you like flanks and rear exposed), assuming they are all operational at any given time. Besides, how will you board ships from subs during a blockade?

Pakistan has 3 Agosta 90B and 2 Agosta 70 subs.

End of story.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tahir195

Penguin said:


> What about them?
> 
> The track record of the 10 IN Kilo/Sindhugosh class and 4 Shishumar/209-1500 class subs isn't exactly stellar. There is a single Akula class, Chakra, and a single Arihant SSBN. Oh wait, that adds up to just 16 subs. Which cannot under all circumstances be put in one place (unless you like flanks and rear exposed), assuming they are all operational at any given time. Besides, how will you board ships from subs during a blockade?
> 
> Pakistan has 3 Agosta 90B and 2 Agosta 70 subs.
> 
> End of story.


Bhai kia need ma hai

PAKISTAN is buying 20 New sub


----------



## Basel

CHI RULES said:


> if missile is called carrier killer doesn't mean will not be used against enemy ships it shall be used more for defensive purposes from attacking enemy frigates or destroyers. Further Missile can reach up range of 250KM which is quite sufficient to defend our coast line. Further in future like Brahmos , PN may start JV with China to develop next version of under discussion Missile with long range. Pak May also further develop Raad-Hatf VIII Missile further in naval role which already has range of 350KM may be easily increased up to 500 to 600Km.
> Further there are major chances that PN will get it's own multi role naval fighter may be of 4.5th gen which will have stealth features, so a semi stealth plane with high flight ceiling and speed of Mach 2.2+ may pierce through any defenses not only Indian's and may effectively fire Missile from 5 to 600KM easily.
> 
> Further it is a fact that u will have to pay price to attack any Aircraft Carrier due to heavy defenses.



If you read announcement of ISPR after Raad test, it said it can hit targets at sea, which means it already has AShM capability.



tahir195 said:


> Bhai kia need ma hai
> 
> PAKISTAN is buying 20 New sub



When it is announced that Pakistan will buy 20 new submarines? Please confirm purchase of 8 submarines via reliable sources first.



Penguin said:


> SU-30MKI combat range: 1,620 nmi
> Jam Nagar AFB - Bandar Abbas: 803.27 nmi (in range also for Mirage-2000)
> Mumbai - Bandar Abbas: 1038.00 nmi
> 
> Having a carrier and escorting ships near the Strait of Hormuz would certainly have advantages, such as faster response times, longer loiter time, heavier war load over shorter distance etc. Without ships it is difficult to e.g. board and search ships. But in a major conflict scenario, you could/would still have Su-30MKI flying CAP over the area, backed by IL-76 based AWACS and tankers. The navy would use its land-based 1,200 nmi (with 4 hrs on station) P-8I, the 3887nmi IL-38 MPA's and the 6775 nmi range Tu-142 Bear MPA/bomber for recon, patrol and (antiship) strikes.
> 
> Likewise for a no-fly zone in the Indian Ocean. The carrier force comes into play for real at the very edges of the land-based air cover. And where staying power is required. That goes in the direction of the Gulf but also in the direction of the Malacca and Sunda Straits. and the antarcic.
> 
> Pakistan is in no position to blockade: they don't have the necessary number and quality of ships. Pakistan's naval doctrine is sea denial.



What is your opinion about sea denial capabilities of Pakistan? Can they deny a blocked in any future war?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tahir195

Basel said:


> When it is announced that Pakistan will buy 20 new submarines? Please confirm purchase of 8 submarines via reliable sources first.











Basel said:


> When it is announced that Pakistan will buy 20 new submarines? Please confirm purchase of 8 submarines via reliable sources first.


huma dhandora peetne ka shoq nhi hai ok.


----------



## Basel

tahir195 said:


> huma dhandora peetne ka shoq nhi hai ok.



Post agreement confirmation source not some rag tag PhotoShop stuff. 

Do you even know how Pakistan procure stuff specially from China? The deal is not signed yet because no confirmation from government till now, the government has announced that Pakistan will purchase subs from China so they will not hide the deal if/when confirmed.


----------



## Muhammad Omar

tahir195 said:


> huma dhandora peetne ka shoq nhi hai ok.



It says 8 subs... the deal ins't inked yet.. what about rest 12??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Penguin

tahir195 said:


> Bhai kia need ma hai
> 
> PAKISTAN is buying 20 New sub


Thusfar, Pakistan is not getting zip. Even if 8 boats come in, you will some of them replacing the oldest boats now in service. So it is not a straight 5+8 and beyond


----------



## Indus Falcon

Penguin said:


> Thusfar, Pakistan is not getting zip. Even if 8 boats come in, you will some of them replacing the oldest boats now in service. So it is not a straight 5+8 and beyond



Rightly said. Depending on the time frame it might be 3+8 or ultimately just 8. For now.


----------



## Basel

Penguin said:


> Thusfar, Pakistan is not getting zip. Even if 8 boats come in, you will some of them replacing the oldest boats now in service. So it is not a straight 5+8 and beyond



True but 8 is not final number PN may place order for 3 to 5 more subs if initial deal went through well. As per new PN is also looking for used subs, if true then it means used subs will be rapid replacement of old 70-Cs.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Penguin

Basel said:


> True but 8 is not final number PN may place order for 3 to 5 more subs if initial deal went through well. As per new PN is also looking for used subs, if true then it means used subs will be rapid replacement of old 70-Cs.


Let's first see how those first 8 materialize. Certainly not 25 subs.


----------



## ConcealCarry

Chill... IN does not need to be afraid of PN or PAF, incompetent IN sailors and officers will sink half their vessels themselves. 



amitkit said:


> carriers are not dummy shots...will commentator keep that in mind......carrier killer lul.....first how PN or PAF going is going to pass carrier battle group defense...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Basel

Penguin said:


> Let's first see how those first 8 materialize. Certainly not 25 subs.



I never said PN will have25 subs, they initially want 10 to 12 subs to have decent area denial capability for future.

What you think about current and future area denial capabilities of Pakistan?


----------



## CHI RULES

Pak should work in JV with China to produce Anti ship Cruise Missile like Brahmos with range of 600-1000KM along with immediate acquisition of 4.5th gen Naval Fighter from Chin i.e J15 or J16 squadron along with integration of 1 to 2 squadrons of JF17 dual seaters for support roles in near future. There are speculations that dual seater may have french engines along with avionics with longer range.

By the way we should follow the subject of discussion rather than Pak future subs


----------



## Akasa

The CM-400AKG is not an anti-ship weapon; its flight profile and propulsion suggest that it is more along the lines of an anti-radiation weapon than anything else.

If Pakistan wish to invest in heavy-duty anti-shipping capabilities, it should consider purchasing the air-launched YJ-12 (with a speed of Mach 3.5 and 400 km range), the ground- or naval-launched YJ-18 (with a speed of Mach 2.5-3.0 and 540 km range), or the ground- or naval-launched CX-1 (with a speed of Mach 2.8-3.0 and 280 km range).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CHI RULES

SinoSoldier said:


> The CM-400AKG is not an anti-ship weapon; its flight profile and propulsion suggest that it is more along the lines of an anti-radiation weapon than anything else.
> 
> If Pakistan wish to invest in heavy-duty anti-shipping capabilities, it should consider purchasing the air-launched YJ-12 (with a speed of Mach 3.5 and 400 km range), the ground- or naval-launched YJ-18 (with a speed of Mach 2.5-3.0 and 540 km range), or the ground- or naval-launched CX-1 (with a speed of Mach 2.8-3.0 and 280 km range).



Pak will have to develop a domestic version of YG12 due to Missile Export Intl Limitations up to 300KM. Further it would be better to have Anti ship Missile in range of 600KM to 1000Km in order to increase survivability of carrier Naval Fighter Jet. First of all Pak should acquire heavier Naval Twin Eng 4.5 gen Fighter Jet like J15 or J16 from China to carry such missiles effectively to attack AC carrier.


----------



## Akasa

CHI RULES said:


> Pak will have to develop a domestic version of YG12 due to Missile Export Intl Limitations up to 300KM. Further it would be better to have Anti ship Missile in range of 600KM to 1000Km in order to increase survivability of carrier Naval Fighter Jet. First of all Pak should acquire heavier Naval Twin Eng 4.5 gen Fighter Jet like J15 or J16 from China to carry such missiles effectively to attack AC carrier.



The J-15 and J-16 won't be exported since they use a Russian airframe.


----------



## Penguin

Basel said:


> I never said PN will have25 subs,


I never said you said that.



Basel said:


> What you think about current and future area denial capabilities of Pakistan?


Pakistan has a decent mix of long range coastal missile batteries, land based air with AShM, MPAs and large ASW heli's with AShM, and naval units (surface and subsurface). It is that layering that adds the complexity for an attacker..

Pakistan has coastal C602. IN addition to its surface and air launched c-802

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## joekrish

vitalsign said:


> Quantity is not important for us, We have Mastermind pilots, they can kick you out.


And the quality of the fighters are out of the window?


----------



## vitalsign

joekrish said:


> And the quality of the fighters are out of the window?


None of your concern.


----------



## CHI RULES

SinoSoldier said:


> The J-15 and J-16 won't be exported since they use a Russian airframe.


J15 and J16 are developments done endogenously by China, no Russian Air frames only engines are Russian which are also in limited numbers in development by China. Pak may go for a deal with China for J15 and J16 in similar way may purchase independently engines from Russia. Further China in Musharaf era offered J11 fighter jets to Pak which may have more similarities with SU27.


----------



## Akasa

CHI RULES said:


> J15 and J16 are developments done endogenously by China, no Russian Air frames only engines are Russian which are also in limited numbers in development by China. Pak may go for a deal with China for J15 and J16 in similar way may purchase independently engines from Russia. Further China in Musharaf era offered J11 fighter jets to Pak which may have more similarities with SU27.



These jets operate a Russian-designed airframe, which has proved to be quite a point of contention with regards to Beijing's relationship with Moscow. Yes, Beijing technically has the right to export these jets, but at the risk of harming relations with Moscow.


----------



## gslv mk3

Junaid B said:


> You want a demo? Please do something so that we can test on you.



You have only 50 JF 17s..I hope you don't wanna lose one


----------



## Pindi Boy

AirRodgers said:


> This is how you attack a badly design India AC.. The India carrier is very limited by its design lol an island almost in the middle of the deck, what morron think that a good AC design. This will hamper(slow) the launch and recovery of the 24 mig 29... If Pakistan send say 24 jf 17 toward the India AC and is detected India will launch the migs to intercept. This will take time because of the limitation of the AC.. By the time the migs are launch and heading toward the 24 jf 17, the Pakistani should turn their fighter back home.. This is when the AC is vulnerable, the mig will chase the jf 17 or return to their AC because their fuel is running dry... About this time if Pakistan send in another group of jf 17 toward the India AC, they be without mig protection. The mig in the air need to land to refuel and because of the badly design of the AC it takes them too long to recover and put up a fully fuel mig to defend the carrier from the incoming jf 17..





AirRodgers said:


> This is how you attack a badly design India AC.. The India carrier is very limited by its design lol an island almost in the middle of the deck, what morron think that a good AC design. This will hamper(slow) the launch and recovery of the 24 mig 29... If Pakistan send say 24 jf 17 toward the India AC and is detected India will launch the migs to intercept. This will take time because of the limitation of the AC.. By the time the migs are launch and heading toward the 24 jf 17, the Pakistani should turn their fighter back home.. This is when the AC is vulnerable, the mig will chase the jf 17 or return to their AC because their fuel is running dry... About this time if Pakistan send in another group of jf 17 toward the India AC, they be without mig protection. The mig in the air need to land to refuel and because of the badly design of the AC it takes them too long to recover and put up a fully fuel mig to defend the carrier from the incoming jf 17..


GOOD JOB

45463tgrg


----------



## black-hawk_101

The latest visit of ACM to China might turn the table for PAF. As there is a possibility that PAF might get all the 3 versions of J-10s similar to JF-17s. Like:
50 J-10A/AS
50 J-10B/BS
50 J-10C/CS

50 JF-17 Block-I
50 JF-17 Block-II
50 JF-17 Block-III

Now, China is also keen towards War on Terror and also to impose pressure over India. Then they can sell these to PAF on cost to cost basis.


----------



## ZAC1

usama fiaz said:


> GOOD JOB
> 45463tgrg


well before turning back if 24 jf-17 fire 2 carrier killer missile each towards AC then what will be the scene  .
Dnt forget our subs, c 602


----------



## Viper0011.

bloo said:


> You are thoroughly underestimating a CSG's attack capabilities.
> The US Navy Aircraft Carriers
> 
> BTW JF-17 engaging a MiG is one thing, winning against it is whole another thing.




Oh dear, PLEASE, for the love of God or Bhagvan or the Vedic times, please don't compare your little navy to a CBG of the USN. Both of your carriers COMBINED can't do HALF the operations that ONE USN CBG does!!!

When you get to that level, I won't mind doing an Apple to Apple analysis. Right now, the analysis is Apples to Tomatoes.

24 Mig-29 K's means one thing, when the war takes place, I can ASSURE you, that your carrier will be pushed out about 400 miles beyond the sea lines of Pakistan (and i mean the extended EEZ lines). So really, like 600-700 miles away from the port of Karachi (1200-1400 miles round trip!!!). Flying over the ocean from the carrier, you'd have much shorter combat radius to be anything effective via using your air assets against the port.

Next, the defense, well again, 24 jets defending a Carrier isn't that big of a deal. There are RARELY any carriers in existence (outside of the USN), which would support 24 consecutive carrier born jets and their ops. I can assure you of that too. 

Your Russian carrier at a time is able to launch 4-8 jets and then there needs to be re-configuration of the launch platform. The USN always keeps 5 aircraft ready to go (Alert 5) and has a backup of 5, this is without war. 

So do me a favor, learn about your naval capabilities before doing any comparison. Just to give you facts, the Indian AC would be a prize for the Pakistanis. I am more than sure that they won't mind sending 20 JFT's for it. Both Migs and JFT's will engage each other with BVR missiles and I am sure there will be casualties and the JFT's might not go back.

But 20-40 fired Supersonic cruise missiles with missile defense systems installed inside the missile, will overwhelm the AC's air defense system. Let's say, out of 40 or 20, even 20% of the missile force hits the AC (being very conservative), your AC flips over or becomes unusable for weeks. That is if a second attack isn't sent behind it to sink it. I won't be surprised if in a war (At this point with the PAF having good teeth and a potential naval arm in the next a couple of years), your AC's will be parked by Bombay or Sri Lanka.

The extension of Pakistan's recent EEZ did wonders. It has provided that "strategic Sea Line Depth) that Pakistan never had before and chances of Indian Navy doing a block-aid were very real. 

Now the PN will be on a shopping spree buying many more missile boats, SUBs and Missile Frigates, many of which will be pushed out to the extended EEZ's so they are far from the traditional coast line, and can take out from behind, things forming an arch around the littoral coastline by Karachi. 

In fact, a large enough number, can even put pressure on incoming Indian ships from the strait of Homez as those will be in easy missile reach of these PN ships out in the extended EEZ of Pakistan (trying to protect the ocean "exploratory activities". The Pakisanis have been playing their cards right and it's been interesting to see their strategy actually playing out very well.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ZAC1

if only 8 subs of ours in waters indian ACs will never dare to come close in . no need of air power no blockage nothing much IN can achieve .i salute PN for purchasing chinas S20.


----------



## black-hawk_101

But now it seems that PN might be looking to have their own fighter fleet may be with Su-35s or possible is the 80-100 Su-27s with latest upgrades that might bring them close to the SU-35s. This will allow the PN to guard better.


----------



## dilpakistani

Stephen Cohen said:


> JF 17 will have to fight with Mig 29 K And Su 30 to reach a Carrier


or it will just release weapons 250 KM away and avoid it at all


----------



## danger007

dilpakistani said:


> or it will just release weapons 250 KM away and avoid it at all



*1)* AEW asset detects incoming Anti-Ship missiles at a distance of ~150 km from the main fleet.
*2)* AEW asset relays the details of the hostile missiles back to the fleet and to the fighter aircraft operating from the fleet carrier.
*3)* Fighters armed with Air to air missiles switch on afterburner and speed towards the indicated target.
*4)* Fighters detect the incoming hostile missiles on their own radar and lock on to it.
*5)* Once the hostile missiles are in range, multiple AAMs are fired and a successful interception ensures.
*6)* Hostile AShMs rarely make it past this stage. If they do, they are quickly acquired by the ship borne radars and shot down using long/medium range SAMs.
The existing naval AEW assets are E-2, Ka-31 and Seaking AEW. These are operated by US, Russia, China, UK, France and India. As I said, only the top navies use these force multiplier assets. The Ka-31 is unique as it is frequently deployed from surface combatants as well as carriers.



black-hawk_101 said:


> But now it seems that PN might be looking to have their own fighter fleet may be with Su-35s or possible is the 80-100 Su-27s with latest upgrades that might bring them close to the SU-35s. This will allow the PN to guard better.



not going to happen.. it just pakistanis wishful thinking...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## dilpakistani

danger007 said:


> *1)* AEW asset detects incoming Anti-Ship missiles at a distance of ~150 km from the main fleet.
> *2)* AEW asset relays the details of the hostile missiles back to the fleet and to the fighter aircraft operating from the fleet carrier.
> *3)* Fighters armed with Air to air missiles switch on afterburner and speed towards the indicated target.
> *4)* Fighters detect the incoming hostile missiles on their own radar and lock on to it.
> *5)* Once the hostile missiles are in range, multiple AAMs are fired and a successful interception ensures.
> *6)* Hostile AShMs rarely make it past this stage. If they do, they are quickly acquired by the ship borne radars and shot down using long/medium range SAMs.
> The existing naval AEW assets are E-2, Ka-31 and Seaking AEW. These are operated by US, Russia, China, UK, France and India. As I said, only the top navies use these force multiplier assets. The Ka-31 is unique as it is frequently deployed from surface combatants as well as carriers.
> 
> 
> 
> not going to happen.. it just pakistanis wishful thinking...



Well i'm not insisting to destroy Indian ship... I really wish that it never comes to that (both nations are too beautiful to be destroyed like that) but if it does.... sir there would be no way any counter measure on any of your ship will be able to detect a subsonic cruise missile surface skimming the sea and closing in.... When they would be detected it would be too late for counter measures. if that wouldn't be enough then in near future another supersonic weapon (CM-400) will be in theater of war... then my friend Indian Navy can kiss goodbye to Pakistani port blockade ever.... What happened in 1971 was really brave of you guys... but you wouldn't been able to repeat it ever again....


----------



## danger007

dilpakistani said:


> Well i'm not insisting to destroy Indian ship... I really wish that it never comes to that (both nations are too beautiful to be destroyed like that) but if it does.... sir there would be no way any counter measure on any of your ship will be able to detect a subsonic cruise missile surface skimming the sea and closing in.... When they would be detected it would be too late for counter measures. if that wouldn't be enough then in near future another supersonic weapon (CM-400) will be in theater of war... then my friend Indian Navy can kiss goodbye to Pakistani port blockade ever.... What happened in 1971 was really brave of
> you guys... but you wouldn't been able to repeat it ever again....




No you are over there... every ship is designed to face multiple threat... why you are thinking IN will give chance to get close to fire a missile??? Short range sams deployed in every ship for a reason... You are talking about a CBG... in case of War, they will be on high alert.... don't talk in unprofessional way... war scenario will be completely different from what you are thinking..


----------



## dilpakistani

danger007 said:


> No you are over there... every ship is designed to face multiple threat... why you are thinking IN will give chance to get close to fire a missile??? Short range sams deployed in every ship for a reason... You are talking about a CBG... in case of War, they will be on high alert.... don't talk in unprofessional way... war scenario will be completely different from what you are thinking..


Actually you are bit over rating short range sams as countermeasures or underestimating the lethality of supersonic or subsonic anti ship cruise missiles... anyway... Even Isrealis with their Barak missiles weren't been able to defend their corvette (much smaller target )....


----------



## Rajaraja Chola

dilpakistani said:


> Well i'm not insisting to destroy Indian ship... I really wish that it never comes to that (both nations are too beautiful to be destroyed like that) but if it does.... sir there would be no way any counter measure on any of your ship will be able to detect a subsonic cruise missile surface skimming the sea and closing in.... When they would be detected it would be too late for counter measures. if that wouldn't be enough then in near future another supersonic weapon (CM-400) will be in theater of war... then my friend Indian Navy can kiss goodbye to Pakistani port blockade ever.... What happened in 1971 was really brave of you guys... but you wouldn't been able to repeat it ever again....



Lets have one clear point. The Radar range of a CBG is far bigger than a JF17 radar. A CBG radar can locate a ac even before it can acquire a carrier in its radar and then to fire a missile. 
It is entirely possible, a CBG will start taking counter measures even before a JF 17 can know it.


----------



## Basel

Rajaraja Chola said:


> Lets have one clear point. The Radar range of a CBG is far bigger than a JF17 radar. A CBG radar can locate a ac even before it can acquire a carrier in its radar and then to fire a missile.
> It is entirely possible, a CBG will start taking counter measures even before a JF 17 can know it.



JF-17 will only activate their radar when they will be launching missile salvo other then that AWACS will be monitoring and guiding them and they can track ships up to 450 kms

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dilpakistani

Rajaraja Chola said:


> Lets have one clear point. The Radar range of a CBG is far bigger than a JF17 radar. A CBG radar can locate a ac even before it can acquire a carrier in its radar and then to fire a missile.
> It is entirely possible, a CBG will start taking counter measures even before a JF 17 can know it.


Yup it can....but there are ways to avoid it...... by the way even battle group is used to block a port it has to come closer to the shore right?.... there the odds are....


----------



## xyxmt

bloo said:


> For Pete's sake, its just a very high speed AShM, I still don't see how people call it impervious to missile defense and what not.



are you going to bet on your missile defense on a mach 4 missile?


----------



## danger007

dilpakistani said:


> Yup it can....but there are ways to avoid it ...... by the way even battle group is used to block a port it has to come closer to the shore right?.... there the odds are....



No need to come close... CBG can blockade from 400-500km range...


dilpakistani said:


> Actually you are bit over rating short range sams as countermeasures or underestimating the lethality of supersonic or subsonic anti ship cruise missiles... anyway... Even Isrealis with their Barak missiles weren't been able to defend their corvette (much smaller target )....



you are making silly assumptions... Over rating Short range SAMS??? have you heard about Manpods??? you are talking about CBG it's like hornet nest... You are over rating Ashm...  read # Taimikhan post 214 i think

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rajaraja Chola

Basel said:


> JF-17 will only activate their radar when they will be launching missile salvo other then that AWACS will be monitoring and guiding them and they can track ships up to 450 kms



Doesnt matter when they activate radars buddy. Even with the help of AWACS , a JF 17 has to come in the range of its own radar to launch a missile. And thats enough for a CBG. It still can locate a JF 17 long before its radar can lock onto the CBG. 
AWACS tracking ships is beyond the point. Finally its the fighters that should lock onto a target, and not the AWACS


----------



## Basel

Rajaraja Chola said:


> Doesnt matter when they activate radars buddy. Even with the help of AWACS , a JF 17 has to come in the range of its own radar to launch a missile. And thats enough for a CBG. It still can locate a JF 17 long before its radar can lock onto the CBG.
> AWACS tracking ships is beyond the point. Finally its the fighters that should lock onto a target, and not the AWACS



This is 21st Century and weapons launching platform not necessarily need to guide them it can be done with 3rd party like UAVs etc. Also ever heard of E-2D capability of guiding weapons?? that is future dude and China will have it soon too which means we will have it too. 

JF-17 will not be flying solo they will have escort and PAF will not just launch supersonic missiles they will also use subsonic missiles of western / eastern origin and remember PAF also have HARM capability of beyond 100km range which will allow then do daredevil missions.


----------



## Rajaraja Chola

Basel said:


> This is 21st Century and weapons launching platform not necessarily need to guide them it can be done with 3rd party like UAVs etc. Also ever heard of E-2D capability of guiding weapons?? that is future dude and China will have it soon too which means we will have it too.
> 
> JF-17 will not be flying solo they will have escort and PAF will not just launch supersonic missiles they will also use subsonic missiles of western / eastern origin and remember PAF also have HARM capability of beyond 100km range which will allow then do daredevil missions.



What you are trying to tell is beyond the scope of discussion. Last time I saw, PAF were busy defending Army and they forgot the Navy, and our naval force had a feast. Pakistan isnt in Africa. If a CBG is in danger, lets say 50 PAF ac, IAF aircraft will come over to give their aid. And PAF would want to avoid a situation having IAF in Naval war. 
PAF planners arent idiots either. They will send a limited amount of ac, say 1 squadron atleast, which can be dealt by the CBG's aircraft alone. 

I know about the guiding of missiles. But still if you are to launch a missile, especially Ashm, you still need to lock from a mother aircraft. You still cant guide it blindly. 
Maybe the USA can do it. But countries like India, Pakistan are decade away from achieving that capability


----------



## Basel

Rajaraja Chola said:


> What you are trying to tell is beyond the scope of discussion. Last time I saw, PAF were busy defending Army and they forgot the Navy, and our naval force had a feast. Pakistan isnt in Africa. If a CBG is in danger, lets say 50 PAF ac, IAF aircraft will come over to give their aid. And PAF would want to avoid a situation having IAF in Naval war.
> PAF planners arent idiots either. They will send a limited amount of ac, say 1 squadron atleast, which can be dealt by the CBG's aircraft alone.
> 
> I know about the guiding of missiles. But still if you are to launch a missile, especially Ashm, you still need to lock from a mother aircraft. You still cant guide it blindly.
> Maybe the USA can do it. But countries like India, Pakistan are decade away from achieving that capability



PN's request for 30 dedicated JF-17s for Navy have been approved by the govt. so they will have their strike package supported by AWACS & MPAs and escorted by PAF, any strike against IN CBG will be not a solo one it will be combined effort of PN & PAF utilizing whatever they have.

small UAVs like scan eagle can stay on station for hours and can provide targeting data to launching platform of directly to weapon and guess what Pakistan have those.

Dude ever hard of something called Lock On After Launch or LOAL capability?? Its NCW era man and PN have this capability along with PAF.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## knight11

Basel said:


> This is 21st Century and weapons launching platform not necessarily need to guide them it can be done with 3rd party like UAVs etc. Also ever heard of E-2D capability of guiding weapons?? that is future dude and China will have it soon too which means we will have it too.
> 
> JF-17 will not be flying solo they will have escort and PAF will not just launch supersonic missiles they will also use subsonic missiles of western / eastern origin and remember PAF also have HARM capability of beyond 100km range which will allow then do daredevil missions.


Does I heard a solo JF-17 is going to attack/destroy our carrier. Can you elaborate how your PAF JF-17 and its escorts(unknown), and UAV (unknown but of Chinese origin) with supersonic, subsonic, HARM capable weapon(pls specify) and yes DAREDEVIL mission.


----------



## Basel

knight11 said:


> Does I heard a solo JF-17 is going to attack/destroy our carrier. Can you elaborate how your PAF JF-17 and its escorts(unknown), and UAV (unknown but of Chinese origin) with supersonic, subsonic, HARM capable weapon(pls specify) and yes DAREDEVIL mission.



PAF pilots who fly Maritime role mirages have mastered their attacking capability against USN CBG in exercise and USN is teaching PN & PAF how to take care of a CBG. 

Pakistan have western & local UAVs and we only use one Chinese influenced UCAV (although we may purchase MALE UCAV) from China.

The weapons you are asking about are known to PDF members as they are discussed deeply here, so please Google or read PDF extensively.

Also I was referring to solo maritime strike package of JF-17 not solo JF-17.


----------



## Blue Marlin

whats the difference between the long fin missile and the short fin missile?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ACE OF THE AIR

danger007 said:


> No you are over there... every ship is designed to face multiple threat... why you are thinking IN will give chance to get close to fire a missile??? Short range sams deployed in every ship for a reason... You are talking about a CBG... in case of War, they will be on high alert.... don't talk in unprofessional way... war scenario will be completely different from what you are thinking..


Agreed every ship is required to have counter weapons but there is a limit. If you see that Israel used the Iron dome system but what happened when more missiles were fired and overwhelmed the system. The main airport was closed though for some hours but that did show the loss of trust. 

One has to realize that it is not a video game or a movie where one can have unlimited weapons and invincibility.


----------



## DJ Crudept

had dard ki d'va jf-17 hai

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asad-Ali

Kabooter ja ja ja ... Aik china killer bhe ly ja ja ja ... Indian ka AC tabah kr k aa aa aa 
(,")/
<)(


Fazool main jf-17 bana leya hum ny 2,4 darjan kabooter rakh letey indian ki wese hi phat jani thi (-_+)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ZAC1

if missiles fired 150 kilomters away from AC there is no way migs can detech wether they are coming for us or AC no doubt air confrontation will happen losses will be from boht sides but in the end a well cordinated attack with subs in waters n carrier killer AC tata bye bye


----------



## danger007

ACE OF THE AIR said:


> Agreed every ship is required to have counter weapons but there is a limit. If you see that Israel used the Iron dome system but what happened when more missiles were fired and overwhelmed the system. The main airport was closed though for some hours but that did show the loss of trust.
> 
> One has to realize that it is not a video game or a movie where one can have unlimited weapons and invincibility.



So you wanna compare Iron dome with CBG??? See Hamas fired unguided rockets in huge numbers into a city... But what you are talking about CBG with sophisticated Radars, Sam, Guns, Jets... You are not attacking particular area.. you are going to attack a ship in huge ocean...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ACE OF THE AIR

danger007 said:


> So you wanna compare Iron dome with CBG??? See Hamas fired unguided rockets in huge numbers into a city... But what you are talking about CBG with sophisticated Radars, Sam, Guns, Jets... You are not attacking particular area.. you are going to attack a ship in huge ocean...


Bro. what I wanted to convey is that every system has a limit. 
The comparison was only based on the shear numbers not on accuracy.

Accuracy normally reduces the chances of interception because it is meant to have systems to counter or jam radars. 

Do you think the IDF did not install sophisticated Radar to save their country men?


----------



## MastanKhan

Hi,

You need a combination of HI Lo---you need a havy strike aircraft and and light aircraft---. A heavy like the JH7B that can carry 8 anti ship missile load is the need of the hour----.

You can compliment the strike with the smaller aircraft that can slip thru the enemy defences.

So---instead of send 24 JF 17's to launch 48 anti ship missiles----I would rather have 6 JH7B's launching the same number of missiles----.

The attrition rate will be the same---about 70-80%-----. So---out of 24 JF 17's---around 18 will be shot down---out of the 6 JH7B's---4 will be shot down.

Both the aircraft are the same price-----. 18 aircraft being shot down will be a tremendous blow----but not 4 aircraft---.

So---basically---the JF 17 is will be a great asset as a complimentary strike aircraft for naval missions and air cover---but not for strikes against ships all the time.


----------



## Cool_Soldier

Just wait boys.....Naval version of JF17 will play a vital in PN.


----------



## danger007

Cool_Soldier said:


> Just wait boys.....Naval version of JF17 will play a vital in PN.


 We have Mig 29 in IN.. more will be inducted soon..


----------



## Sage

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> You need a combination of HI Lo---you need a havy strike aircraft and and light aircraft---. A heavy like the JH7B that can carry 8 anti ship missile load is the need of the hour----.
> 
> You can compliment the strike with the smaller aircraft that can slip thru the enemy defences.
> 
> So---instead of send 24 JF 17's to launch 48 anti ship missiles----I would rather have 6 JH7B's launching the same number of missiles----.
> 
> The attrition rate will be the same---about 70-80%-----. So---out of 24 JF 17's---around 18 will be shot down---out of the 6 JH7B's---4 will be shot down.
> 
> Both the aircraft are the same price-----. 18 aircraft being shot down will be a tremendous blow----but not 4 aircraft---.
> 
> So---basically---the JF 17 is will be a great asset as a complimentary strike aircraft for naval missions and air cover---but not for strikes against ships all the time.


Or may be we should have a bunch of J-11 B ....


----------



## Viper0011.

black-hawk_101 said:


> But now it seems that PN might be looking to have their own fighter fleet may be with Su-35s or possible is the 80-100 Su-27s with latest upgrades that might bring them close to the SU-35s. This will allow the PN to guard better.



Yes, the Naval Air Arm is a MUST and twin engines at that. Specially as Pakistan grows economically, it'll be the naval air arm which would not only defend Karchi and Gawader from inbound strikes, it would also keep other navies away just like we discussed above.

No destroyer or AC wants to see a barrage of 40 supersonic anti-ship missiles fired at it. The result of that situation is only one, significant damage or a hole that could flip the entire ship over pretty quickly. Also, remember, the Pakistani EEZ has been expanded out to like 350 nautical miles so that's a lot of additional area to keep your presence in. Deployed presence will all together destroy the idea of any blockade as outside of the USN, no other Navy can put a blockade on a country with the defending Navy and Subs deployed across 350 nautical miles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shaheenmissile

DJ Crudept said:


> had dard ki d'va jf-17 hai


Laikin Tejas nay jou India kou Dard dia. Uss ki koi dawa nahi

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## black-hawk_101

Viper0011. said:


> Yes, the Naval Air Arm is a MUST and twin engines at that. Specially as Pakistan grows economically, it'll be the naval air arm which would not only defend Karchi and Gawader from inbound strikes, it would also keep other navies away just like we discussed above.
> 
> No destroyer or AC wants to see a barrage of 40 supersonic anti-ship missiles fired at it. The result of that situation is only one, significant damage or a hole that could flip the entire ship over pretty quickly. Also, remember, the Pakistani EEZ has been expanded out to like 350 nautical miles so that's a lot of additional area to keep your presence in. Deployed presence will all together destroy the idea of any blockade as outside of the USN, no other Navy can put a blockade on a country with the defending Navy and Subs deployed across 350 nautical miles.


That's was the same thing that I was trying to tell. So with low budget; PN should go for the used SU-27s from Russia and Ukraine in numbers like 80-110+ of them. 

With upgrades to the current airframe with canards and engines with avionics suite similar to SU-35s. The SU-27s can prove something very problematic for the enemy. Also it can take out more duties like bombing on terrorist hideouts in South region of the country like in Baluchistan & Sindh.


----------



## Viper0011.

black-hawk_101 said:


> That's was the same thing that I was trying to tell. So with low budget; PN should go for the used SU-27s from Russia and Ukraine in numbers like 80-110+ of them..



I agree numbers make sense. I don't think they'll put all SU-35 here. I think they'll put a squadron, supplemented by JFT's two or three squadrons. Which is still not bad actually. Although I'd rather see twin engines in numbers like you suggested.

Similarly, I think there is a need for twin engines in about 60-80 in numbers within the PAF too. The J-31, whenever acquired, will not be a jet for normal, daily flying and CAP stuff. It'll be a special purpose plane knowing how sacred PAF keeps these things. So you'd still need a jet to form the "high" tier.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## black-hawk_101

Viper0011. said:


> I agree numbers make sense. I don't think they'll put all SU-35 here. I think they'll put a squadron, supplemented by JFT's two or three squadrons. Which is still not bad actually. Although I'd rather see twin engines in numbers like you suggested.
> 
> Similarly, I think there is a need for twin engines in about 60-80 in numbers within the PAF too. The J-31, whenever acquired, will not be a jet for normal, daily flying and CAP stuff. It'll be a special purpose plane knowing how sacred PAF keeps these things. So you'd still need a jet to form the "high" tier.


Also, there might be some secrets related to SU-35s and newer SU-30s which Russia might not want to showcase to Pakistan in anyway. So, Pakistan being a close partner with Ukraine can easily acquire their 45 Su-27s as they are also keen to sell all of their Russian made equipment ASAP! Source: Ukrainian Air Force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also, buying some more Su-27s from operators like Sukhoi Su-27 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia is also very much possible and even Russians would be interested in selling it to Pakistan in good numbers. PN can't depend NOW on JF-17s as even PAF has limited the numbers of it to 150 only at max. Which clearly identify that PAF is also keen towards a fighter like SU-27s with more used F-16s Block-15s and may be some additional 32+ F-16s Block-52s.

I am 100% sure that ex-Soviet countries and African countries might sell those SU-27s to PAF and PN at very cheap rates as just to acquire newer Jets from EU, US or even SU-35s or MiG-35s from Russia. As SU-35s or MiG-35s from Russia might not be possible for PAF and PN this time because of some Indian influence and MiG-29s are not worthy for PAF and PN in anyways; so better for PAF and PN to go for used SU-27s with upgrades in avionics similar to SU-35s and gain good experience in those super Russian jets.

I think PAF and PN both have a clear requirement of 100 jets each


----------



## Rajaraja Chola

Basel said:


> PN's request for 30 dedicated JF-17s for Navy have been approved by the govt. so they will have their strike package supported by AWACS & MPAs and escorted by PAF, any strike against IN CBG will be not a solo one it will be combined effort of PN & PAF utilizing whatever they have.
> 
> small UAVs like scan eagle can stay on station for hours and can provide targeting data to launching platform of directly to weapon and guess what Pakistan have those.
> 
> Dude ever hard of something called Lock On After Launch or LOAL capability?? Its NCW era man and PN have this capability along with PAF.



I know USA have this. But not sure of this capability with India, Pakistan. That too from an ac. Need to check. Thanks.


----------



## Pindi Boy

Good job


AirRodgers said:


> This is how you attack a badly design India AC.. The India carrier is very limited by its design lol an island almost in the middle of the deck, what morron think that a good AC design. This will hamper(slow) the launch and recovery of the 24 mig 29... If Pakistan send say 24 jf 17 toward the India AC and is detected India will launch the migs to intercept. This will take time because of the limitation of the AC.. By the time the migs are launch and heading toward the 24 jf 17, the Pakistani should turn their fighter back home.. This is when the AC is vulnerable, the mig will chase the jf 17 or return to their AC because their fuel is running dry... About this time if Pakistan send in another group of jf 17 toward the India AC, they be without mig protection. The mig in the air need to land to refuel and because of the badly design of the AC it takes them too long to recover and put up a fully fuel mig to defend the carrier from the incoming jf 17..


----------



## danger007

black-hawk_101 said:


> Also, there might be some secrets related to SU-35s and newer SU-30s which Russia might not want to showcase to Pakistan in anyway. So, Pakistan being a close partner with Ukraine can easily acquire their 45 Su-27s as they are also keen to sell all of their Russian made equipment ASAP! Source: Ukrainian Air Force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Also, buying some more Su-27s from operators like Sukhoi Su-27 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia is also very much possible and even Russians would be interested in selling it to Pakistan in good numbers. PN can't depend NOW on JF-17s as even PAF has limited the numbers of it to 150 only at max. Which clearly identify that PAF is also keen towards a fighter like SU-27s with more used F-16s Block-15s and may be some additional 32+ F-16s Block-52s.
> 
> *I am 100% sure that ex-Soviet countries and African countries might sell those* SU-27s to PAF and PN at very cheap rates *as just to acquire newer Jets from EU, US or even SU-35s or MiG-35s from Russia*. As SU-35s or MiG-35s from Russia might not be possible for PAF and PN this time because of some Indian influence and MiG-29s are not worthy for PAF and PN in anyways; so better for PAF and PN to go for used SU-27s with upgrades in avionics similar to SU-35s and gain good experience in those super Russian jets.
> 
> I think PAF and PN both have a clear requirement of 100 jets each






you are hilarious... are you expecting they will sell jets to pak @10rs??/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue Marlin

black-hawk_101 said:


> Also, there might be some secrets related to SU-35s and newer SU-30s which Russia might not want to showcase to Pakistan in anyway. So, Pakistan being a close partner with Ukraine can easily acquire their 45 Su-27s as they are also keen to sell all of their Russian made equipment ASAP! Source: Ukrainian Air Force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Also, buying some more Su-27s from operators like Sukhoi Su-27 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia is also very much possible and even Russians would be interested in selling it to Pakistan in good numbers. PN can't depend NOW on JF-17s as even PAF has limited the numbers of it to 150 only at max. Which clearly identify that PAF is also keen towards a fighter like SU-27s with more used F-16s Block-15s and may be some additional 32+ F-16s Block-52s.
> 
> I am 100% sure that ex-Soviet countries and African countries might sell those SU-27s to PAF and PN at very cheap rates as just to acquire newer Jets from EU, US or even SU-35s or MiG-35s from Russia. As SU-35s or MiG-35s from Russia might not be possible for PAF and PN this time because of some Indian influence and MiG-29s are not worthy for PAF and PN in anyways; so better for PAF and PN to go for used SU-27s with upgrades in avionics similar to SU-35s and gain good experience in those super Russian jets.
> 
> I think PAF and PN both have a clear requirement of 100 jets each


are you alright ?
Ukraine selling su27's sure they have some even some surplus (which may be for sale) but really! the first thing you should under stand these jets are very expensive to run, the par't don't last long and quiet heavy. also they have very old thirsty engines. it would be suicide for Pakistan to but them. them bringing the idea up in a Pakistan meeting will most probably get you sent to the doctors for a mental evaluation. yes it would be very easy to buy second hand su27 as sellers will probably beg you to buy them. you need a lot of money to maintain these jets thats some thing you dont

pakistan is buying a total of 250 jf17's (don't listen to wikipedia) and as of 2015 you have 54+ jf17's not 150.


please talk sense please. heres a good idea (hypothetically) buy about 48 eft along with second hand eft's from other countries such as italy germany, uk,Austria and Spain and upgrade them. this beauty will be more advanced then the su35. the tranche 3a with an tv and the recent ea package. it's also better than india's rafales so thats a plus

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Thorough Pro

size of the Fin. LOL, newer version for better maneuvering 



blue marlin said:


> whats the difference between the long fin missile and the short fin missile?


----------



## knight11

blue marlin said:


> are you alright ?
> Ukraine selling su27's sure they have some even some surplus (which may be for sale) but really! the first thing you should under stand these jets are very expensive to run, the par't don't last long and quiet heavy. also they have very old thirsty engines. it would be suicide for Pakistan to but them. them bringing the idea up in a Pakistan meeting will most probably get you sent to the doctors for a mental evaluation. yes it would be very easy to buy second hand su27 as sellers will probably beg you to buy them. you need a lot of money to maintain these jets thats some thing you dont
> 
> pakistan is buying a total of 250 jf17's (don't listen to wikipedia) and as of 2015 you have 54+ jf17's not 150.
> 
> 
> please talk sense please. heres a good idea (hypothetically) buy about 48 eft along with second hand eft's from other countries such as italy germany, uk,Austria and Spain and upgrade them. this beauty will be more advanced then the su35. the tranche 3a with an tv and the recent ea package. it's also better than india's rafales so thats a plus
> View attachment 241772


You are started getting better.


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

So this 1 Missile can knock out a 3 Billion dollar Carrier ?


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

[Bregs] said:


> Do fighter aircraft have capability to launch a missile capable of destroying an air craft carrier of 44000 tonne capacity ? 100 missile will be required that too by anticipating that AAD of entire CBG including viki is turned off....lol



A hypersonic missile may not destroy the carrier but it surely can cripple it... The impact itself would be great...


P.S: I'm not expert when it comes to air warfare but why do ppl think that Migs can detect the JF.. While the JF csnt ? JFT currently used KLJV(2) which is comparable the the APGs on our F-16s! The next block will carry an AESA.. Apart from that why are people forgetting that Pak has 8 AWACs that will also backup our Jets.


----------



## Fenrir

There's nothing wrong with second-hand Ukrainian SU-27s - these belonged to the USAF:





















They've since been sold, after giving up their secrets, but they're still respectable airframes none-the-less. @blue marlin is right though, these are really damn expensive to operate. And Ukraine only has 45 SU-27s, does it really want to mortgage that leverage? For air superiority, that would leave Ukraine with around 80 MiG-29s only - no other air superiority aircraft is in its inventory. I don't think this is a realistic proposition. With Russia's recent behavior, Ukraine needs these more than ever.


----------



## Blue Marlin

Thorough Pro said:


> size of the Fin. LOL, newer version for better maneuvering





Technogaianist said:


> There's nothing wrong with second-hand Ukrainian SU-27s - these belonged to the USAF:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They've since been sold, after giving up their secrets, but they're still respectable airframes none-the-less. @blue marlin is right though, these are really damn expensive to operate. And Ukraine only has 45 SU-27s, does it really want to mortgage that leverage? For air superiority, that would leave Ukraine with around 80 MiG-29s only - no other air superiority aircraft is in its inventory. I don't think this is a realistic proposition. With Russia's recent behavior, Ukraine needs these more than ever.



there not going to be a war the media in the uk is really making is as if we area already at war.

the only secrets they US got from the su27 was its aerodynamics the avionics belong in a museum


----------



## alee92nawaz

gslv mk3 said:


> And you really thing the JF 17 can come close to Vikramaditya-Mig 29 s flying BARCAP and Kamov AEW helis
> The ship itself packs remarkable AD capabilities - Barak 8 missiles,RAN 40 L/ MF STAR radars.
> 
> And thats just the AD of the carrier-P 15 A destroyers will lead the CBG and they too have significant AD systems.
> 
> And before thinking about that,think how the AKG would be delivered to the Carrier- which is part of a CBG and is located far away from your coast,You would have to face detection and interception from IAF and IN air arm
> 
> Well I would say leave all that and dig this- Mig 29 Ks have a combat radius of 850 kg with full internal fuel and can take off with a load of total 5.5 tonnes from Vikramaditya/Vikrant.
> 
> And I need not compare the capabilities of mig29 and JF 17....shall I??
> 
> @Water Car Engineer
> 
> Nice reply mate.
> 
> I guess these guys are getting Paranoid of growing capabilities of IN-which is getting 2 40,000 tonne ACs,more SSBNs and SSKs,more stealth frigates,destroyers and corvettes ( that weigh as much as their destroyers).
> heck it is a network centric force with itsown dedicated military communication sat...
> 
> Carrier Killer missile...lol


Sir do you even what is the purpose of an aircraft carrier ? Lol if india is planning to park it 3000kms away then this missile has served its purpose...
Barak 8 is under development...
You can't destroy a mach 4 speed missile with your machine guns lol..
By the way jf-17 will have air cover...and jf-17 with upgraded radar can take on mig 29k coz payload and hardpoints dont win you dog fights



bloo said:


> You are interely underestimating a CSG's attack capabilities.
> The US Navy Aircraft Carriers
> 
> BTW JF-17 engaging a MiG is one thing, winning against it is whole another thing.


Just Because its name is mig and is operated by some internet troll sorry your navy...


----------



## Viper0011.

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> So this 1 Missile can knock out a 3 Billion dollar Carrier ?



You never fire One missile on an advanced flying jet these days.....let alone on an AC. But 10-20 missiles would do the trick, 10-30% hit ratio is a good expectation. Any AC receiving two good missiles will become useless to operate for the next few months at the least. 

No one's going to provide you with a ship manufacturing company in the middle of the ocean (not to mention, in the middle of the war in this case). Once your runway and your STOBAR or CATOBAR hydraulics are hit. Your runway is obviously history for months to comes. Even if incoming missiles hit one half or the center area and say someone was macho enough to still launch some fighters from the shorter run way.....who's going to land them and where??

Also, two missiles if they hit on certain angles and explode at the same time, the blast impact with missiles high speed velocity can alone push the ship over. At that time, the kinetic energy transmitted into metallic structures provides a push forward and the big mass becomes it weakest points as it "tilts" forward (from the side), and tips the entire ship over into the water. 

If two missiles hit one of the lower decks, resulting in holes in the hull, the ship will be sunk due to hundreds of metric tons of water, with its own velocity (Ocean Current) pouring in and tilting the ship over or just submerging it. May be 30-40 years from that point on, someone can find it again and turn it into a museum!!

The moral of the story is, Don't fukk with the AShM missiles, specially the supersonic ones!! Make peace and trade, live longer and happily. Fukk all this war drama!!



black-hawk_101 said:


> Also, there might be some secrets related to SU-35s and newer SU-30s which Russia might not want to showcase to Pakistan in anyway. So, Pakistan being a close partner with Ukraine can easily acquire their 45 Su-27s as they are also keen to sell all of their Russian made equipment ASAP! Source: Ukrainian Air Force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Also, buying some more Su-27s from operators like Sukhoi Su-27 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia is also very much possible and even Russians would be interested in selling it to Pakistan in good numbers



If I was the PAF chief and knew what I was doing and was up to speed on Weapons procurement, I'd go in a heart beat and acquire used -16's in serious numbers (like 100 more from the USAF's low flown inventory), compared to buying the SU-27's. That junk is wasting money (on older jets). If the PAF must want to buy SU-27 type aircraft, PLEASE pay more and get the J-11D or the SU-35. SU-27 is a high maintenance plane and has serious issues. Ask the Ukrainians and the Chinese on their earlier batches of SU-27 and SU-30's. And then ask India about their SU-30's. 

There is a reason why the entire Indian air-force preferred the Rafale over their current crown jewel, the SU-30. Rafale and SU-30 drama caused a divorce between India and Russia and an engagement between Russia and Pakistan

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## black-hawk_101

Technogaianist said:


> There's nothing wrong with second-hand Ukrainian SU-27s - these belonged to the USAF:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They've since been sold, after giving up their secrets, but they're still respectable airframes none-the-less. @blue marlin is right though, these are really damn expensive to operate. And Ukraine only has 45 SU-27s, does it really want to mortgage that leverage? For air superiority, that would leave Ukraine with around 80 MiG-29s only - no other air superiority aircraft is in its inventory. I don't think this is a realistic proposition. With Russia's recent behavior, Ukraine needs these more than ever.



So, is there any possibility that Iranians will buy the SU-27s from Ukraine and may be from China on cheaper price tag. As both are looking to replace. Also, Ukraine might sell them all of the equipment which they have from Russian origin @ very cheap rates.

Iran has very good relationship with Russia. They can easily upgrade the bought equipment in no time. I am sure this will allow the IRIAF to survive it's fleet for the 15 years or less.

But PAF/PNAF is clear now. They are buying 50-60 SU-35s. But I agree with *Viper0011.* that PAF must go out to shop for more used F-16s from USAF and other AF like Egypt and Jordan both are keen to replace it with new planes. Jordan has 45 of them and they might be getting 100 Rafael or EF-2000s very soon, Egypt might receive new F-16s from US.


----------



## ZAC1

PN has already ordered Jf-17.Pakistan is getting all what is available in market for them but select only best.I think PN should stick with 2 squadrons of jf-17 and atleast one squadron of Su-family or j-11D.They should increase jf-17 numbers.
Pakistan should also purchase anti-ship ballistic missiles from china,few months before PN has tested ballistic missile,i pray that its an anti-ship ballistic missile.


----------



## Mr.WetPants

Manindra said:


> Do you know mid-flight refueling ?
> Do you know how many BVRAAM & WVRAAM a MIG-29K can carry ?
> Do you know how many target MIG-29K can track & how many can engage?
> 10 MIG-29K can butchered 50 JF-17


Do you know that India does not have mid air refueling capability?
Do you know that JF-17's range is 3 times more than the mighty mig-29?
Do you know how small the JF-17's turn radius is when compared to the mig-29?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## war&peace

Don't worry we have a plenty of options including JF-17s, Su-35s, SLCMs, DF-21 and many more.... as far as ugly carriers are concerned...we will drown them and down will go all indian naval power and pride with it....deep into the abyss of Arabian sea and then we will do Dawarka again


----------



## bloo

alee92nawaz said:


> Sir do you even what is the purpose of an aircraft carrier ? Lol if india is planning to park it 3000kms away then this missile has served its purpose...
> Barak 8 is under development...
> You can't destroy a mach 4 speed missile with your machine guns lol..
> By the way jf-17 will have air cover...and jf-17 with upgraded radar can take on mig 29k coz payload and hardpoints dont win you dog fights
> 
> 
> Just Because its name is mig and is operated by some internet troll sorry your navy...



Well yes, just coz it is named Mig it can.
Anyone will side with a long distinguished service record over something hardly a decade old.


----------



## sohail.ishaque

Blue Marlin said:


> are you alright ?
> Ukraine selling su27's sure they have some even some surplus (which may be for sale) but really! the first thing you should under stand these jets are very expensive to run, the par't don't last long and quiet heavy. also they have very old thirsty engines. it would be suicide for Pakistan to but them. them bringing the idea up in a Pakistan meeting will most probably get you sent to the doctors for a mental evaluation. yes it would be very easy to buy second hand su27 as sellers will probably beg you to buy them. you need a lot of money to maintain these jets thats some thing you dont
> 
> pakistan is buying a total of 250 jf17's (don't listen to wikipedia) and as of 2015 you have 54+ jf17's not 150.
> 
> 
> please talk sense please. heres a good idea (hypothetically) *buy about 48 eft* along with second hand eft's from other countries such as italy germany, uk,Austria and Spain and upgrade them. this beauty will be more advanced then the su35. the tranche 3a with an tv and the recent ea package. it's also better than india's rafales so thats a plus
> View attachment 241772



I dont think that PAF will go for eft.. and they shudn't. now we have more inventory coming from China and Russia(indirectly)... China working on J10 and J11 could be the future of PAF also, J11D in particular.. so i may b wrong but what i believe is PAF trying to shift to Flankers instead of Falcons for the long run before going for stealth.. Using JF17 in the low/medium range and Flankers(of any origin Russia or China) for the long range..


----------



## alee92nawaz

bloo said:


> Well yes, just coz it is named Mig it can.
> Anyone will side with a long distinguished service record over something hardly a decade old.


Combat records n other stuff of migs is damn impressive 



Mr.WetPants said:


> Do you know that India does not have mid air refueling capability?
> Do you know that JF-17's range is 3 times more than the mighty mig-29?
> Do you know how small the JF-17's turn radius is when compared to the mig-29?


Lol mid air refueling is nw available and how funny these men re who think payload wins them combat...soon jft will have aesa radars ...so poor mig...how much is its rcs #mig29K


----------



## Manindra

Mr.WetPants said:


> Do you know that India does not have mid air refueling capability?


India have mid air refueling capability much before Pakistan.
Mid Air refueling





Buddy refueling






> Do you know that JF-17's range is 3 times more than the mighty mig-29?



Your JF-17 uses same engine but due to increase thrust for single engine it have 2200 hrs engine life & guzzle more gas compared to RD33MK 4000 engine life of Fulcrum.
So, don't quote JF-17 range with three external drop tanks & MIG 29K with only internal fuel.


> Do you know how small the JF-17's turn radius is when compared to the mig-29?


Back up with source as MIG 29 is one of world most excellent dogfighter.
Check, T/W ratio, climb rate etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## m haris khan

bloo said:


> For Pete's sake, its just a very high speed AShM, I still don't see how people call it impervious to missile defense and what not.





gslv mk3 said:


> This would not even reach Indian AC-the JF 17 carrying this one would not cross the ' Mig Screen '.
> Carrier killer?? lol




I know it will be not easy for JF 17 To intercept the carrier Because the carrier is not only protected by aircraft but also by the 2\3 frigates which make it a hard point but you that your aircraft carrier was hiding in 1965 from our one submarine GHAZI and But planning is also a thing to utilize it  

And what if we created a version of it for our submarines


----------



## Beta-Fighter

m haris khan said:


> I know it will be not easy for JF 17 To intercept the carrier Because the carrier is not only protected by aircraft but also by the 2\3 frigates which make it a hard point but you that your aircraft carrier was hiding in 1965 from our one submarine GHAZI and But planning is also a thing to utilize it
> 
> And what if we created a version of it for our submarines


lol that time India dont have Anti -Sub Ships and technology.... in All wars your Army was technically superior but defected , now Indian Army changed that technological GAP in reverse order.

BTW , AC was in Sea on duty while your SUB searching in the cost and killed by other ship.


----------



## Imran Khan

Beta-Fighter said:


> lol that time India dont have Anti -Sub Ships and technology.... in All wars your Army was technically superior but defected , now Indian Army changed that technological GAP in reverse order.


and what make you think that pakistan never changed in these all years ?


----------



## Beta-Fighter

Imran Khan said:


> and what make you think that pakistan never changed in these all years ?


India getting latest Anti-SUB tech kike P8 while PAK still stuck on old technologies.


----------



## Imran Khan

Beta-Fighter said:


> India getting latest Anti-SUB tech kike P8 while PAK still stuck on old technologies.


and please inform me after how many decades you guys upgrade ASW? we have more then enough for cover up 1000km area and fyi our tech and you tech use same missiles on subs


----------



## illuminatidinesh

Viper0011. said:


> If I was the PAF chief and knew what I was doing and was up to speed on Weapons procurement, I'd go in a heart beat and acquire used -16's in serious numbers (like 100 more from the USAF's low flown inventory), compared to buying the SU-27's. That junk is wasting money (on older jets). If the PAF must want to buy SU-27 type aircraft, PLEASE pay more and get the J-11D or the SU-35. SU-27 is a high maintenance plane and has serious issues. Ask the Ukrainians and the Chinese on their earlier batches of SU-27 and SU-30's. And then ask India about their SU-30's.
> 
> There is a reason why the entire Indian air-force preferred the Rafale over their current crown jewel, the SU-30. Rafale and SU-30 drama caused a divorce between India and Russia and an engagement between Russia and Pakistan


Funny Rafale is another generation aircraft to perform another role. Our SU30 MKI is doing their job perfectly what they were intended to do hence IAF went for few 40 odd additional ones. SU-30 MKI caused divorce between India and Russia? How ? By signing FGFA? 
Delusion at its best, carry on. Though I would agree with your assertion of getting F16 instead of SU27 since u already operate F16 and I am sure PAF pilots can make hell in sky for the enemy. But with SU27 or rather J-11D I doubt it for another decade but by that time is it really worth?



black-hawk_101 said:


> But PAF/PNAF is clear now. They are buying 50-60 SU-35s. But I agree with *Viper0011.* that PAF must go out to shop for more used F-16s from USAF and other AF like Egypt and Jordan both are keen to replace it with new planes. Jordan has 45 of them and they might be getting 100 Rafael or EF-2000s very soon, Egypt might receive new F-16s from US.


We are not sure about SU 35 but even that deal goes through the numbers are small , I think you should go for more.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beta-Fighter

Imran Khan said:


> and please inform me after how many decades you guys upgrade ASW? we have more then enough for cover up 1000km area and fyi our tech and you tech use same missiles on subs


your are confused, Anti Sub tech work at various levels.
A) from Air - India uses Russian Anti-Sub plane while you uses Atlantique and P-3.
While India uses Russian system and upgraded to P-8

B) Anti Sub Frigate / Destroyers using Self develop Sonar :- Almost all Indian Ships using Indian made sonar

C) Below Sea :- India using Kilo class sub which is known for its Silent operations and deep diving capacity which can make it less prone to depth chargers and anti -sub rockets.

Indian Sub going to have Bahrmos after reofit.


----------



## Imran Khan

Beta-Fighter said:


> your are confused, Anti Sub tech work at various levels.
> A) from Air - India uses Russian Anti-Sub plane while you uses Atlantique and P-3.
> While India uses Russian system and upgraded to P-8
> 
> B) Anti Sub Frigate / Destroyers using Self develop Sonar :- Almost all Indian Ships using Indian made sonar
> 
> C) Below Sea :- India using Kilo class sub which is known for its Silent operations and deep diving capacity which can make it less prone to depth chargers and anti -sub rockets.
> 
> Indian Sub going to have Bahrmos after reofit.


you have outdated info

natlanique is already grounded since years
we have now ASW P3-C and z-9s and fyi scanning is something but p-8 and P3 have so many common thing expect P3 can fly more then p8 in single run and P8 have some modern systems on board . but overall P3 fly 16 hours and carry so much more arms while P8 fly less with less weapons options please have a just simple look of both we have already discussed it .
while indian subs are going new tech our new 8 subs will be arm less? all new 8 subs have modern weapon and if you forget let me remind you CX-1 is also cumming


----------



## Cash GK

Rashid Mahmood said:


> The indian carrier will be stationed some 3000 kms away from the Pakistani shore, so out of the range of a JF-17...


this is what we want to keep them away from our shores. that is why we brought this very toy.you can park them 5000 mils away from pakistan in war times. we dont mind lol



Rashid Mahmood said:


> The indian carrier will be stationed some 3000 kms away from the Pakistani shore, so out of the range of a JF-17...


this is what we want to keep them away from our shores. that is why we brought this very toy.you can park them 5000 mils away from pakistan in war times. we dont mind lol


joekrish said:


> Nobody here mentioned about all 24 taking off, do you ave an answer to my previous post?


send 10 to defend againt 10jf17 and 14 park there make the job easy for uslil

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beta-Fighter

Imran Khan said:


> you have outdated info
> 
> natlanique is already grounded since years
> we have now ASW P3-C and z-9s and fyi scanning is something but p-8 and P3 have so many common thing expect P3 can fly more then p8 in single run and P8 have some modern systems on board . but overall P3 fly 16 hours and carry so much more arms while P8 fly less with less weapons options please have a just simple look of both we have already discussed it .
> while indian subs are going new tech our new 8 subs will be arm less? all new 8 subs have modern weapon and if you forget let me remind you CX-1 is also cumming



Well P-3 was stopped in 90's . 

US also moving to P8, The Speed with which the P8 can reach is more then P3. P3 take 2 hrs to reach while P8 can reach in 1.2 Hrs on same spot.

 P8* has 4 hours on station (for anti-submarine warfare mission Vs 3 hrs in P3 ( which is important) 
*
every other thing is based on various calculation like P8 weight is 64K kg, while P3 is 35k Kg , while P8 weight included all the Equipment as standard while P3 is only consider without any equipment.


----------



## Cash GK

do you think we will send only jets....we will send some other stuff in air and deep in sea


----------



## m haris khan

Beta-Fighter said:


> lol that time India dont have Anti -Sub Ships and technology.... in All wars your Army was technically superior but defected , now Indian Army changed that technological GAP in reverse order.
> 
> BTW , AC was in Sea on duty while your SUB searching in the cost and killed by other ship.



We were also having no anti subs and for your knowledge we blow up your one frigate also and Ac was in sea we all but far away from Pakistan.
And our GHAZI was not killed it was an accident



Beta-Fighter said:


> Well P-3 was stopped in 90's .
> 
> US also moving to P8, The Speed with which the P8 can reach is more then P3. P3 take 2 hrs to reach while P8 can reach in 1.2 Hrs on same spot.
> 
> P8* has 4 hours on station (for anti-submarine warfare mission Vs 3 hrs in P3 ( which is important)
> *
> every other thing is based on various calculation like P8 weight is 64K kg, while P3 is 35k Kg , while P8 weight included all the Equipment as standard while P3 is only consider without any equipment.


BRo don't forget that we have upgraded the p3c orion by our own ..................your media also clamming it


----------



## Beta-Fighter

m haris khan said:


> We were also having no anti subs and for your knowledge we blow up your one frigate also and Ac was in sea we all but far away from Pakistan.
> And our GHAZI was not killed it was an accident
> 
> 
> BRo don't forget that we have upgraded the p3c orion by our own ..................your media also clamming it


lol, whatever you upgraded can you match the US technology? do you made Sonars?


----------



## m haris khan

Beta-Fighter said:


> lol, whatever you upgraded can you match the US technology? do you made Sonars?



You made sonars and radars but they are of no use............................Because the weapon des't matter ,the man behind it matters the most. And if you say no then what happen to
America having no match in technology was defeated in Afghanistan LOL PP
Plus Pakistan have the technology and equipment to deafened its borders.......


----------



## majid mehmood

guys according to some report jft can detect mig 29 before
kljv2 radar 130km for 5m2
zhuk me 120km for 5m2
mig 29 k has large rcs (4-5m2)due to large payload and some other features
while jft has low rcs due dsi and some ram coating around 5-10% so favourabe rcs would be 1-2 rcs
so it means jft can detect mig29 before

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Manindra

majid mehmood said:


> guys according to some report jft can detect mig 29 before
> kljv2 radar 130km for 5m2
> zhuk me 120km for 5m2
> mig 29 k has large rcs (4-5m2)due to large payload and some other features
> while jft has low rcs due dsi and some ram coating around 5-10% so favourabe rcs would be 1-2 rcs
> so it means jft can detect mig29 before


By same logic F 16 Block 52, F-15, Su-30 MKI would be slaughtered by JFT mercilessly.


----------



## bloo

alee92nawaz said:


> Combat records n other stuff of migs is damn impressive



Well if you are insinuating the horrible pilots, and the downgraded systems sold to the Serbs or to the middle east with non functioning subsystems which were still outnumbered 4 to 1 by the Americans along with the support of force multipliers like AWACS and other platforms for electronic warfare which neither the Serbs nor the Middle East had the luxury of, then don't.

We have all that and more and Pakistan doesn't enjoy the 4-1 numerical superiority of the Americans either.



History, Travel, Arts, Science, People, Places | Air & Space Magazine
_Plenty of the Fulcrum’s smug “show us what you got” adversaries—F-16 Fighting Falcon, F-15 Eagle, and U.S. Navy F-14 Tomcat and F/A-18 Hornet jocks among them—*became humbled, and often bloodied, after their first Fulcrum tangle*. “With some experience, you could outmaneuver any jet, even Vipers [F-16s]and [high-angle-of-attack] Hornets,” says Steiniger. “The nice airframe in combination with one weapon was the killer: The Archer in [sensor lock] mode.” Introduced in the mid-1980s, the Archer AA-11 is a very capable heat-seeker with a greater range than the U.S. Sidewinder. “A simple monocular lens in front of my right eye enabled me to slew the seeker head of the missile onto my adversary at high angle off [target].” The Fulcrum’s ability to lock a missile even though its nose was pointed far away from its target “watered many eyes,” says Steiniger._




m haris khan said:


> I know it will be not easy for JF 17 To intercept the carrier Because the carrier is not only protected by aircraft but also by the 2\3 frigates which make it a hard point but you that your aircraft carrier was hiding in 1965 from our one submarine GHAZI and *But planning is also a thing to utilize it *
> 
> And what if we created a version of it for our submarines



I'm pretty sure the IN would be planning too.
Now with further advancement of new ABMs surely the anti air capabilities of IN is on the rise


----------



## m haris khan

bloo said:


> I'm pretty sure the IN would be planning too.
> Now with further advancement of new ABMs surely the anti air capabilities of IN is on the rise


I am taking about war strategies,America fail in Afghanistan


----------



## alee92nawaz

bloo said:


> Well if you are insinuating the horrible pilots, and the downgraded systems sold to the Serbs or to the middle east with non functioning subsystems which were still outnumbered 4 to 1 by the Americans along with the support of force multipliers like AWACS and other platforms for electronic warfare which neither the Serbs nor the Middle East had the luxury of, then don't.
> 
> We have all that and more and Pakistan doesn't enjoy the 4-1 numerical superiority of the Americans either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Plenty of the Fulcrum’s smug “show us what you got” adversaries—F-16 Fighting Falcon, F-15 Eagle, and U.S. Navy F-14 Tomcat and F/A-18 Hornet jocks among them—*became humbled, and often bloodied, after their first Fulcrum tangle*. “With some experience, you could outmaneuver any jet, even Vipers [F-16s]and [high-angle-of-attack] Hornets,” says Steiniger. “The nice airframe in combination with one weapon was the killer: The Archer in [sensor lock] mode.” Introduced in the mid-1980s, the Archer AA-11 is a very capable heat-seeker with a greater range than the U.S. Sidewinder. “A simple monocular lens in front of my right eye enabled me to slew the seeker head of the missile onto my adversary at high angle off [target].” The Fulcrum’s ability to lock a missile even though its nose was pointed far away from its target “watered many eyes,” says Steiniger._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm pretty sure the IN would be planning too.
> Now with further advancement of new ABMs surely the anti air capabilities of IN is on the rise


Lol yeah then Americans would have retired all theirvjets n could have gone for mig 29 lol...such funny statements....even our thunder is good enough for your migs starting from 21 to 29 ....


bloo said:


> Well if you are insinuating the horrible pilots, and the downgraded systems sold to the Serbs or to the middle east with non functioning subsystems which were still outnumbered 4 to 1 by the Americans along with the support of force multipliers like AWACS and other platforms for electronic warfare which neither the Serbs nor the Middle East had the luxury of, then don't.
> 
> We have all that and more and Pakistan doesn't enjoy the 4-1 numerical superiority of the Americans e
> _Plenty of the Fulcrum’s smug “show us what you got” adversaries—F-16 Fighting Falcon, F-15 Eagle, and U.S. Navy F-14 Tomcat and F/A. “With some experience, you could outmaneuver any jet, even Vipers [F-16s]and [high-angle-of-attack] Hornets,” says Steiniger. “The nice airframe in combination with one weapon was the killer: The Archer in [sensor lock] mode.” Introduced in the mid-1980s, the Archer AA-11 is a very capable heat-seeker with a greater range than the U.S. Sidewinder. “A simple monocular lens in front of my right eye enabled me to slew the seeker head of the missile onto my adversary at high angle off [target].” The Fulcrum’s ability to lock a missile even though its nose was pointed far away from its target “watered many eyes,” says Steiniger._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm pretty sure the IN would be planning too.
> Now with further advancement of new ABMs surely the anti air capabilities of IN is on the rise


Lol yeah thats why even iaf has only 65 and Americans n west should throw their planes in fire n should buy mighty mig 29 ...lol who has engine holes...


Paf was offered migs....they didn't go for it...

Our thunder is good enough for migs...and I don't see them coming inside Pakistan


----------



## Super Falcon

feilong said:


> This missile baby will be pakistan new toys to do the job on the INDIA, we will selling many of this baby to Pakistan. Hope you guys finished the job well.


Dont worry they hit where it hurts the most


----------



## Imran Khan

Super Falcon said:


> Dont worry they hit where it hurts the most


sure they will hit tankers - destroyers and AC

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr.WetPants

Manindra said:


> India have mid air refueling capability much before Pakistan.
> Mid Air refueling
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Buddy refueling
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your JF-17 uses same engine but due to increase thrust for single engine it have 2200 hrs engine life & guzzle more gas compared to RD33MK 4000 engine life of Fulcrum.
> So, don't quote JF-17 range with three external drop tanks & MIG 29K with only internal fuel.
> 
> Back up with source as MIG 29 is one of world most excellent dogfighter.
> Check, T/W ratio, climb rate etc.



Hit the Brakes Dude.
India No Longer Has Mid Air Refueling Capability




Slide to 5:20
The Video was published on June, 6, 2015

No, The JF-17 uses a Russian Klimov RD-93 Turbofan engine and not a RD33 used in the fulcrums.
The service life of the JF-17's engine is 4000 Hours and not 2200 Hours like you mentioned.
And is running without no problems at 7000 Hours
I got this info by a site named jf-17.

And the Mig-29 range is 889 miles.
And the Jf-17 range is 2163 miles.
Note that both ranges are without external fuel tanks.


----------



## Manindra

Mr.WetPants said:


> Hit the Brakes Dude.
> India No Longer Has Mid Air Refueling Capability


Then I fear what for IAF IL 78 MKI ?






> Slide to 5:20
> The Video was published on June, 6, 2015


Good for you



> No, The JF-17 uses a Russian Klimov RD-93 Turbofan engine and not a RD33 used in the fulcrums.


RD 93 is a variant of RD-33MK used in MIG 29 but have improved thrust with penalty of engine life & fuel consumption.


> The service life of the JF-17's engine is 4000 Hours and not 2200 Hours like you mentioned.
> And is running without no problems at 7000 Hours







Klimov RD-33 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


> I got this info by a site named jf-17.


And its not updated with correct information.


> And the Mig-29 range is 889 miles.
> And the Jf-17 range is 2163 miles.
> Note that both ranges are without external fuel tanks.


And where it says that JFT range is without external fuel tank ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## bloo

alee92nawaz said:


> Lol yeah then Americans would have retired all theirvjets n could have gone for mig 29 lol...such funny statements....even our thunder is good enough for your migs starting from 21 to 29 ....
> 
> Lol yeah thats why even iaf has only 65 and Americans n west should throw their planes in fire n should buy mighty mig 29 ...lol who has engine holes...
> 
> 
> Paf was offered migs....they didn't go for it...
> 
> Our thunder is good enough for migs...and I don't see them coming inside Pakistan




Spoken like a true internet warrior, maybe you should spend a little more time in the forum and gather your thoughts before running with whatever you are thinking. 
And riddle me this?
Why would the Russians sell the Fulcrums to their arch rival USA and why would the americans buy at the cost of their ego, if not anything else, from their arch rivals the Russians?

Maybe you all should remove the Russian engines from your JFTs and not consider the Su35s if you have such aversion to Russian products.


----------



## majid mehmood

Manindra said:


> By same logic F 16 Block 52, F-15, Su-30 MKI would be slaughtered by JFT mercilessly.


f16 has has less or equal rcs so is hard to say
f15 yes rcs =10m2
and of ofcourse su 30mki yes it has 20m2 rcs

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## alee92nawaz

bloo said:


> Spoken like a true internet warrior, maybe you should spend a little more time in the forum and gather your thoughts before running with whatever you are thinking.
> And riddle me this?
> Why would the Russians sell the Fulcrums to their arch rival USA and why would the americans buy at the cost of their ego, if not anything else, from their arch rivals the Russians?
> 
> Maybe you all should remove the Russian engines from your JFTs and not consider the Su35s if you have such aversion to Russian products.


I was refering to actual reports go check internet for news I can't post links right now...migs have short life of 400 hours...

Pakistani f-16s n its pilots are too good for migs ....

Indian media was caught red handed on falao reports of mki kills vs typhoons....

While our pilots actually have done it ...that too with f-16s....


----------



## bloo

alee92nawaz said:


> I was refering to actual reports go check internet for news I can't post links right now...migs have short life of 400 hours...
> 
> Pakistani f-16s n its pilots are too good for migs ....
> 
> Indian media was caught red handed on falao reports of mki kills vs typhoons....
> 
> While our pilots actually have done it ...that too with f-16s....



Yeah I don't know where you are reading outdated crap like that, pm me those links that is if you have any at all.
IAF have been using Fulcrums fore a while including the latest UPGs and and SMTs, and I just gave you a link where *Americans* on F-16s, F/A-18s and F-15s were shown their *Aukaat *against the Mig-29. So what can the Pak pilots do so differently that the Americans themselves couldn't do? Come out of your bubble already.

As for the typhoons, it has been discussed to death. Go see the thread for yourself. And if by "caught red handed" you mean denial and ranting then go ahead make yourself feel good about how IAF didn't score 12-0 and so on and so forth.
After all people believe what they want to believe, whether to sate their denial or just for the sake of being obstinate.


----------



## Basel

bloo said:


> Yeah I don't know where you are reading outdated crap like that, pm me those links that is if you have any at all.
> IAF have been using Fulcrums fore a while including the latest UPGs and and SMTs, and I just gave you a link where *Americans* on F-16s, F/A-18s and F-15s were shown their *Aukaat *against the Mig-29. So what can the Pak pilots do so differently that the Americans themselves couldn't do? Come out of your bubble already.
> 
> As for the typhoons, it has been discussed to death. Go see the thread for yourself. And if by "caught red handed" you mean denial and ranting then go ahead make yourself feel good about how IAF didn't score 12-0 and so on and so forth.
> After all people believe what they want to believe, whether to sate their denial or just for the sake of being obstinate.



There is a difference how both air forces operates due to different threat perception so if U read history U will know on many occasions one weapon system fail with one military but works extremely well with other.


----------



## Manindra

majid mehmood said:


> f16 has has less or equal rcs so is hard to say
> f15 yes rcs =10m2
> and of ofcourse su 30mki yes it has 20m2 rcs


And they have powerfull jammers & EW suite backed with a pair of powerful engines to deal with any Air to air missiles or SAM.
They also have powerful internal IRST , so they can simply switch off their Radar & track enemy fighters.


----------



## Basel

Manindra said:


> And they have powerfull jammers & EW suite backed with a pair of powerful engines to deal with any Air to air missiles or SAM.
> They also have powerful internal IRST , so they can simply switch off their Radar & track enemy fighters.



If MKI or any other plate form tries to jam incoming AMRAAM C5 then dear its one of most advance BVR missile in the world and design to handle all current threats.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Manindra

Basel said:


> If MKI or any other plate form tries to jam incoming AMRAAM C5 then dear its one of most advance BVR missile in the world and design to handle all current threats.


No, its not
Most advance BVRAAMs are Meteor, MICA, Derby, AIM120D, K77


----------



## Basel

Manindra said:


> No, its not
> Most advance BVRAAMs are Meteor, MICA, Derby, AIM120D, K77



Plz read post before commenting on it, I said one of most advance not most advance, and it can bring down any thing below 5th gen what IAF can pitch against PAF even in intense ECM environment.

In near future PL-15 will be main BVR of PAF, just Google about it.

CHINESE AIR-TO-AIR MISSILE HITS TARGETS, SPOOKS USAF GENERAL


----------



## bloo

Basel said:


> There is a difference how both air forces operates due to different threat perception so if U read history U will know on many occasions one weapon system fail with one military but works extremely well with other.



On what basis are you saying that?
Apart from the soviet-afghan war where PAF's new and advanced F-16s were pitched against the outdated Su-22s and Mig-23s, PAF hardly has ever used F-16 extensively to say that PAF is better than USAF in using the F-16s.
And now further research proves that Mig-29s when used with better subsystems and pilots *can* out do an F-16.


----------



## Basel

bloo said:


> On what basis are you saying that?
> Apart from the soviet-afghan war where PAF's new and advanced F-16s were pitched against the outdated Su-22s and Mig-23s, PAF hardly has ever used F-16 extensively to say that PAF is better than USAF in using the F-16s.
> And now further research proves that Mig-29s when used with better subsystems and pilots *can* out do an F-16.



Man US have luxury of fielding many platforms while Pakistan don't have therefore different operational rules and strategies.


----------



## bloo

Basel said:


> Man US have luxury of fielding many platforms while Pakistan don't have therefore different operational rules and strategies.



And?

It still won't change the fact that Fulcrums are better and PAF was lucky never to face one.


----------



## Basel

bloo said:


> And?
> 
> It still won't change the fact that Fulcrums are better and PAF was lucky never to face one.



It will not just jet v jet in air war of 21st century there are many other things which impact it, both planes are equally good and have pros and cons too.


----------



## alee92nawaz

QUOTE

="bloo, post: 7687471, member: 137339"]Spoken like a true internet warrior, maybe you should spend a little more time in the forum and gather your thoughts before running with whatever you are thinking.
And riddle me this?
Why would the Russians sell the Fulcrums to their arch rival USA and why would the americans buy at the cost of their ego, if not anything else, from their arch rivals the Russians?

Maybe you all should remove the Russian engines from your JFTs and not consider the Su35s if you have such aversion to Russian products.[ QUOTE

]
I was refering to


bloo said:


> Yeah I don't know where you are reading outdated crap like that, pm me those links that is if you have any at all.
> IAF have been using Fulcrums fore a while including the latest UPGs and and SMTs, and I just gave you a link where *Americans* on F-16s, F/A-18s and F-15s were shown their *Aukaat *against the Mig-29. So what can the Pak pilots do so differently that the Americans themselves couldn't do? Come out of your bubble already.
> 
> As for the typhoons, it has been discussed to death. Go see the thread for yourself. And if by "caught red handed" you mean denial and ranting then go ahead make yourself feel good about how IAF didn't score 12-0 and so on and so forth.
> After all people believe what they want to believe, whether to sate their denial or just for the sake of being obstinate.


One shou not argue with Idiots or Indians as they have delusions of being best...
Ever do mind n check mig 29 Wikipedia page...how many times iaf fleet n Russian fleet was grounded due to various reasons...

Lo


Basel said:


> It will not just jet v jet in air war of 21st century there are many other things which impact it, both planes are equally good and have pros and cons too.


Lol paf was offered migs n su 27 but they rejected them ...khekhekhe

 QUOTE

="bloo, post: 7687471, member: 137339"]Spoken like a true internet warrior, maybe you should spend a little more time in the forum and gather your thoughts before running with whatever you are thinking.
And riddle me this?
Why would the Russians sell the Fulcrums to their arch rival USA and why would the americans buy at the cost of their ego, if not anything else, from their arch rivals the Russians?

Maybe you all should remove the Russian engines from your JFTs and not consider the Su35s if you have such aversion to Russian products.[ QUOTE

]
According to Russians jft was threat to mig 29....lol ....leave falcons alone brooh


----------



## bloo

alee92nawaz said:


> I was refering to
> 
> One shou not argue with Idiots or Indians as they have delusions of being best...
> Ever do mind n check mig 29 Wikipedia page...how many times iaf fleet n Russian fleet was grounded due to various reasons...



Oh wow wikipedia, the book of ultimate truth for noobs.
F-22s were grounded, Shenyang J-11s were grounded, F-16s were grounded. What does that tell your biased mind?

You can nitpick all you want, the fact that the Americans themselves were not able to outdo the Mig-29s should silence your obstinacy.



alee92nawaz said:


> Lol paf was offered migs n su 27 but they rejected them ...khekhekhe



LOL, ab aukaat aur paisa nahin tha to uske liye bahaana kyon banaa rahe ho. Sour grapes much.




alee92nawaz said:


> According to Russians jft was threat to mig 29....lol ....leave falcons alone brooh



Tell that to yourself when you go to sleep maybe you'll feel better.
Here you have to give links before spouting brain farts lest people think you a troll.


----------



## majid mehmood

Manindra said:


> And they have powerfull jammers & EW suite backed with a pair of powerful engines to deal with any Air to air missiles or SAM.
> They also have powerful internal IRST , so they can simply switch off their Radar & track enemy fighters.


that why paf is pursuing for aesa radar

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Manindra

Basel said:


> Plz read post before commenting on it, I said one of most advance not most advance, and it can bring down any thing below 5th gen what IAF can pitch against PAF even in intense ECM environment.
> 
> In near future PL-15 will be main BVR of PAF, just Google about it.
> 
> CHINESE AIR-TO-AIR MISSILE HITS TARGETS, SPOOKS USAF GENERAL


Its AIM 120 'D' variant which should be most feared, PAF have AIM-120 '*C*' variant.


----------



## Basel

Manindra said:


> Its AIM 120 'D' variant which should be most feared, PAF have AIM-120 '*C*' variant.



Ask IAF how potent C5 is.


----------



## Manindra

Basel said:


> Ask IAF how potent C5 is.


So, is R77


----------



## Basel

Manindra said:


> So, is R77



Nope currently C5 is superior to the 77 IAF has now. Check the specs.


----------



## Manindra

Basel said:


> Nope currently C5 is superior to the 77 IAF has now. Check the specs.


Then you are ill informed.
You are quoting specification of higher end version of AIM which used by USA not Pakistan to R77 used by India.
I am not counting MICA Derby, ASRAAM, Astra in it.


----------



## NKVD

Basel said:


> Nope currently C5 is superior to the 77 IAF has now. Check the specs.


There is No Superior and inferior Term For BVRs All has there Merits and Demerits Current Version of R-77 *K-77M (izdeliye 180) & K-77ME (izdeliye 180-BD At Par With AIM-120 All Versions Even Step Head in Sum Instances *


----------



## MilSpec

NKVD said:


> There is No Superior and inferior Term For BVRs All has there Merits and Demerits Current Version of R-77 *K-77M (izdeliye 180) & K-77ME (izdeliye 180-BD At Par With AIM-120 All Versions Even Step Head in Sum Instances *


IAF doesn't have the K77M and is under development- this missile when out will be an absolute game changer, it is going to be a FGFA Missile for India. R77 Variants India operates are Rvv-AE, and RVV-SD, with PRGS21 seeker R27ET and R27ER are damn good missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## NKVD

MilSpec said:


> IAF doesn't have the K77M and is under development- this missile when out will be an absolute game changer, it is going to be a FGFA Missile for India. R77 Variants India operates are Rvv-AE, and RVV-SD, with PRGS21 seeker R27ET and R27ER are damn good missiles.


Yes I Know K-77M is Active Array Seeker Missile. 
One Question Any Idea About Combination of RVV-SD BTW Passive & Infrared Seekers ?


----------



## MilSpec

NKVD said:


> Yes I Know K-77M is Active Array Seeker Missile.
> One Question Any Idea About Combination of RVV-SD BTW Passive & Infrared Seekers ?


lets not talk about it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IHK_PK

MilSpec said:


> lets not talk about it.


Oh really???


----------



## majid mehmood

MilSpec said:


> IAF doesn't have the K77M and is under development- this missile when out will be an absolute game changer, it is going to be a FGFA Missile for India. R77 Variants India operates are Rvv-AE, and RVV-SD, with PRGS21 seeker R27ET and R27ER are damn good missiles.


who told u that india uses r77-1 missile 
any links that india uses r27 er missile

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Reichsmarschall

SrNair said:


> India gets mood when we complete the modernization of Army,Navy and Airforce.But at that time
> Pakistan mood will be in trouble.


4 years have been passed are you in the mood now?


----------



## Reichsmarschall

SrNair said:


> There is no comparison between India and Pakistan .
> So no need to measure mood


you are right you cant compare you cant compare men with closet gays and suicidal sadists 
Btw when are you coming for atoot ang?


----------



## SrNair

Jon-Snow said:


> you are right you cant compare you cant compare men with closet gays and suicidal sadists
> Btw when are you coming for atoot ang?



Like I said earlier ,Pakistan should find someone their own size like Afghanistan.
You are no match for India
We had already forced Pak in to their own knees in international arena .

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
1


----------



## Reichsmarschall

SrNair said:


> Like I said earlier ,Pakistan should find someone their own size like Afghanistan.
> You are no match for India
> We had already forced Pak in to their own knees in international arena .


really is that the reason 75% of your armed forces are deployed on our border ? your politicians including Butcher of gujrat use Pakistan's name to win public support and fool people like yourself
The truth is that you along with nation are obsessed with Pakistan may this is the reason you are on Pak forum

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## SrNair

Jon-Snow said:


> really is that the reason 75% of your armed forces are deployed on our border ? your politicians including Butcher of gujrat use Pakistan's name to win public support and fool people like yourself
> The truth is that you along with nation are obsessed with Pakistan may this is the reason you are on Pak forum


75% what ?
Dont need to exaggerate your importance .Ok.
Modi pointed about a meeting ,let the Congress answer about it .That is our internal matter.If that was China or US he would have been said the same .
Here it was Pakistan.
AFAIK this is an international forum.
Ban Indian topics ,then Indians will go .
Simple as that


----------



## Reichsmarschall

SrNair said:


> 75% what ?


may be instead of screeching here you should learn a bit about the deployment of your own forces
learning is always good


SrNair said:


> Modi pointed about a meeting ,let the Congress answer about it .That is our internal matter.If that was China or US he would have been said the same .


I wonder why its always Pakistan who is bogeyman despite your claim of "We don't care about Pakistan"
entire 2014 campaign was based on anti-Pakistan rhetoric


SrNair said:


> Ban Indian topics ,then Indians will go .
> Simple as that


Indian forums hasn't banned Pak topic either but guess what? there is no Pakistani over there

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## undercover JIX

Modi jee's obsession saying something else.......India need to pick on someone its own size. Pakistan is in a defensive mode to counter 7 times bigger obsessed enemy.


----------



## Daghalodi

As long as pakistan is around india can NEVER be a super power.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## batmannow

well coming news for pakistani air power , which is making THUNDER a will be long running , profile with years to come , bringing in the most wanted capabilities to its fast ageing fighting air fleet


----------



## xyxmt

or we can just wait and rely on the professionalism of Indian navy personnel to sink it them self.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## undercover JIX

xyxmt said:


> or we can just wait and rely on the professionalism of Indian navy personnel to sink it them self.



not nice


----------



## ARMalik

India has not been able to do anything about Pakistan for 70 years, and now that Pakistan is growing militarily stronger, india has no option but to sign a peace treaty with Pakistan. I think this would be the best way forward for both countries as both countries are nuclear powers, and it would be extremely silly of these two to start using nuclear weapons.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GumNaam

ARMalik said:


> India has not been able to do anything about Pakistan for 70 years, and now that Pakistan is growing militarily stronger, india has no option but to sign a peace treaty with Pakistan. I think this would be the best way forward for both countries as both countries are nuclear powers, and it would be extremely silly of these two to start using nuclear weapons.



treaties only mean anything when signed with a nation that has honor. 

india has no honor. its a well known fact that when it comes to abiding by treaties, india has a way of turning away like a fat, emotional woman suffering from severe pms...

so no treaties...


----------



## ARMalik

For the sake of millions of lives at sake in Kashmir, Pakistan and India I believe that they will come a day in the near future when these two will have no other option but to be friends. Geopolitical realities of China becoming a Superpower sooner rather than later will compel india to have friendly relations and to prosper for the sake of 500 million poor in india.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## batmannow

Manindra said:


> did
> 
> With current BVRAAM, WVRAAM, ECM suite , dog fight ability, advance sensors, low RCS of MIG-29K compare to JF-17 I didn't over estimate MIG-29K
> Kindly counter with logical conclusion.


still JF THUNDER is a unknown to a decade old MIG 29S ?
I can bet you , you I'll have a life long surprise same as what happened in ICC champion trophy ?lol
there are a very few features , of JF thunder in public , it's still a unknown so becarefull .lol


----------



## ziaulislam

ARMalik said:


> For the sake of millions of lives at sake in Kashmir, Pakistan and India I believe that they will come a day in the near future when these two will have no other option but to be friends. Geopolitical realities of China becoming a Superpower sooner rather than later will compel india to have friendly relations and to prosper for the sake of 500 million poor in india.


it wount happen, as indian are brain washed to be anti china and anti pakistan


----------



## MultaniGuy

@title,

this is indeed a good development.


----------



## DJ_Viper

joekrish said:


> We have 24 migs on board plus the CBG's, so......how many JF 17 are you planing to send in.



At a given time, one US AC can launch 5 aircraft on ADA (referred to as Alert-5 aircrafts). In case of a war, you couldn't operate 24 Migs, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Running away from 12-20 missiles, as a ship, is close to impossible. CIWS and AAM's can provide security but still, sea-skimming, near-hypersonic missiles are very hard to take out with 100% certainty. India needs much more ships to form a real CBG so not there yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ultima Thule

CoffeeByte said:


> Nope.
> Notba single pic of CM400 in Pakistani service has emerged nor was it tested even once.


its our strategic weapon against IN so how you suppose that PAF show its operational pics to the world, you believe in pics than its good for your health


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

CoffeeByte said:


> Nope.
> Notba single pic of CM400 in Pakistani service has emerged nor was it tested even once.


PAF black Spider SQD jf armed with CM-400


----------



## volatile




----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

CoffeeByte said:


> So if there is no proof this weapon is in PAF service at all, why should we consider it?


Close up:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

CoffeeByte said:


> So if there is no proof this weapon is in PAF service at all, why should we consider it?


sorry to burst your bubble kid here it is










 go kid play your toys this place is not for yours


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

pakistanipower said:


> its our strategic weapon against IN so how you suppose that PAF show its operational pics to the world, you believe in pics than its good for your health


You can easily google dude.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

CoffeeByte said:


> that's a old pic from 2013-14 when Pakistan testing the weapons.
> But it was never ordered because of its poor performance in tests.
> Which is why we have not even seen any pics of CM400 with JF-17 or even heard of it since then.


For testing there is a dedicated jet.

Two jfs have been pictured with CM400s.

P. S: How do you know they tested it?

LMAO.. Weren't you claiming cm400 hasn't been tested by PAF...

There isn't even a single pic of JF armed with CM400 etc!?

CM400 isn't a threat because PAF doesn't use it!!

And now you have a new drama playin.



pakistanipower said:


> can you backup your claim with solid proves huh Mr insane @CoffeeByte and why you guys lives in a denial modes Mr insane @CoffeeByte





He's a pathetic troll. 

Nile is a river in Egypt.. 

While 

Denial is in India.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Trango Towers

gslv mk3 said:


> This would not even reach Indian AC-the JF 17 carrying this one would not cross the ' Mig Screen '.
> Carrier killer?? lol


Nothing like unlimited confidence


----------



## Areesh

CoffeeByte said:


> that's a old pic from 2013-14 when Pakistan testing the weapons.
> But it was never ordered because of its poor performance in tests.
> Which is why we have not even seen any pics of CM400 with JF-17 or even heard of it since then.



I already informed you about this ID. Now other members are also having problems with this multiple ID troll @The Eagle @waz @WAJsal


----------



## CoffeeByte

pakistanipower said:


> what is your source Mr insane @CoffeeByte you're continue to b@rk here without of solid prove give us a backup of your claim you sh!twhole Mr @CoffeeByte, @The Eagle , @waz , @Horus please control @CoffeeByte with his baseless troll


The fact is there zero source to indicate CM400 has entered operational setvice with PAF.
In fact even no mention of weapon since 2015.
Itvwas also not showcased in recent China weapons expo or Airshow.

There has been no indication of it in at MoDP report eve though MoDP report indirectly mentioned Zarb ( coastal C-602) and Harba (ship launched C-602).


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

CoffeeByte said:


> All those pics were from 2013-14. Some were probably taken during Dubai Airshow.
> Nothing has emerged on CM400 front since.
> In fact AVIC itself has stopped mentioning the weapon most of the time after 2014.
> There are no mention of CM400 even in Chinese media since.




Nope.. Lying again.

Only pics with static display is from an airshow.

Other pic is from Pakistan... A different jet (see the number on tail).

As for it being stopped.

One has to be a bloody moron... To claim that... Unless one has a solid proof to back up his claims... Do you?

Also one thing you should understand... No country in the world Markets failed weapons at international expos or airshows... Not even Comoros would do such a thing... It's bad for business and image..



CoffeeByte said:


> The fact is there zero source to indicate CM400 has entered operational setvice with PAF.
> In fact even no mention of weapon since 2015.
> Itvwas also not showcased in recent China weapons expo or Airshow.


It was... Under the designation YJ12 family.

also PAF chief is enough for us to believe it's success... Rather than somebody with zero credibility... Caught lying on PDF.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

CoffeeByte said:


> CM 400AKG poor performance in tests is why AVIC stopped its marketing since 2015.



As i said.. You stupid Indian troll.. Google YJ ANTI SHIP MISSILE FAMILY.. 

instead of proving your stupidity again and again..


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

CoffeeByte said:


> @DESERT FIGHTER @pakitanipower
> 
> Read this:
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/goto/post?id=7961924#post-7961924


A post? 

Also.. How did you find such an old post?

What was your previous account... 


We have a dumbas multiple ID douche.. 

@The Eagle. @Irfan Baloch


----------



## Areesh

CoffeeByte said:


> I already gave source:



So we should believe you and @Bilal Khan 777 but not deputy project director of JFT Air Commodore Khalid Mehmood who clearly says that CM400AKG is in service with PAF and is part of operational doctorine.






I warned you about this multiple ID pig. You should have banned him earlier without wasting any time. @The Eagle @WAJsal @waz

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ARMalik

Gentlemen, strategic weapons of a nation are NOT displayed openly on websites, magazines or newspapers. These are classified weapons. Why would someone assume otherwise?


----------



## Areesh

pakistanipower said:


> some senior member post which may be wrong, i want a solid prove like Janes, aviation weekly, flight global
> @The Eagle , @Irfan Baloch ,@waz please control this troll @CoffeeByte



Air Commodore Khalid Mehmood Deputy Director of JFT has clearly said in an interview that CM400AKG is "in service" and is part of operational weapon set of JFT. 

No need to waste time on this rat. This is the same multiple ID swine whose dozens of IDs I have got banned earlier. He would be pink soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Areesh

CoffeeByte said:


> Very old interview from 2012.
> Where as bilal Khan 777 post far more newer.



Old or new. If deputy director of JFT says it is in service then that means it is service. No bilal or a bharati can change that.



maravan91 said:


> Pakistan purchased c802ak missile not cm400akg



SIPRI already announced purchase of CM400AKG



CoffeeByte said:


> @Areesh
> In the original interview text, Khalid mahmood never said cm400akg is in service but that it is not conceptual.
> 
> https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.militaryflighttrainingee.com/downloader/?d=eJDRrwOr0JiZAjJurWIYvhWQF9OxtcaOp8DWUdUTrzqPZHaqo4sGaBqbsVDEonKETlQl93cl9zthXSFRw%2B2w3UW1u8HpmjP9Y7Ca2krxEG%2FAg4Fft7gRoWtXod9XDPcYAPf%2BJG9ZIb2qt4woE42KTdn%2F007fiCnldDzh9uQPzXxGSLY74gGX2fvPj88YQGh10Pd%2FkSLBoxjaVStxDFxs2YViDAunfEb23M%2BEdDAWd8lMnscZbgB2obsDdlRQl0laQE7CUL8t3cB0XubBYNwscQlkIBZ%2BJ2a5xtr%2BwtbLisM%3D&ved=0ahUKEwibw5zZu4bYAhWBB8AKHSENCicQFgghMAA&usg=AOvVaw0ow4VzTqafvp_V9cGcFm5R



Janes the most authentic and reliable source about military clearly quoted Khalid Mehmood words

"it is in service" and "is part of JFT weapons set"

Now go find a new twist.


----------



## Sheikh Rauf

rockstarIN said:


> Coz 1 is equal to 10 when it reaches pak handd. Thats their theory.


Atleast Pakistan dont make it looks like this tech we have it 2 million years ago some indian discovered it . we have every thing to finish the job we know it india knows it... thats it.


----------



## Areesh

CoffeeByte said:


> Jane's also said Sri Lanka will purchase JF-17.
> Did that happen?



Janes said SL had intention which is true. But due to various reason they didn't. Nothing wrong on janes part.

In any case Janes quoted Deputy Director JFT whose words I would always take over a tucha like you.


----------



## Reichsmarschall

CoffeeByte said:


> So if there is no proof this weapon is in PAF service at all, why should we consider it?


do you had the pic and Videos of our nukes before 1998 test?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Areesh

CoffeeByte said:


> @Penguin also told @Bilal Khan 777 about Khalid Mahmood interview this is what he said:
> 
> 
> 
> @Areesh



Bilal Kham might be your abbu. Not for me.

I like any sane guy believe in the words of Deputy Director JFT.



pakistanipower said:


> intentions but pressure from india they abandon their intentions Mr insane @CoffeeByte



Lol he clutching at straws. He would get banned while doing this. I have done this exercise dozens of times on this forum

Even bharatis have started to take this guys as a clown after the way I have handled him.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Areesh

maravan91 said:


> You should read modp Pakistan yearbook first.



You should read SIPRI first. And then listen to interview of Deputy Director JFT project. And then STFU



CoffeeByte said:


> I clearly provided Bilal Khan 777 as source



But you said your abbu is off topic.


----------



## Ultima Thule

maravan91 said:


> http://www.modp.gov.pk/pubDetails.aspx
> 
> Read all the yearbook reports
> http://www.modp.gov.pk/pubDetails.aspx
> 
> There is no cm400akg purchase you purchased c802ak


we are fre8e to include or don't include our yearbook


maravan91 said:


> last 9 years year book is available in website
> http://www.modp.gov.pk/pubDetails.aspx
> 
> There is no cm400akg purchase you only purchased c802ak missile


And what this for Mr sick head @maravan91


----------



## Gurjot.S

Aircraft carriers are not sitting ducks as claimed by pakistanis here. They move with a group loaded with all kind of defence measures otherwise they are not exposed to international waters. Indian A/C in arabian sea will be an overkill for pakistan.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Gurjot.S said:


> Aircraft carriers are not sitting ducks as claimed by pakistanis here. They move with a group loaded with all kind of defence measures otherwise they are not exposed to international waters. Indian A/C in arabian sea will be an overkill for pakistan.


Saturation attack mr @Gurjot.S with supersonic,subsonic, and hyper sonic ASHM, even US aircraft carriers will we vulnerable to this type of attacks from China and Russia, forgets yours Mr @Gurjot.S


----------



## Gurjot.S

pakistanipower said:


> Saturation attack mr @Gurjot.S with supersonic,subsonic, and hyper sonic ASHM, even US aircraft carriers will we vulnerable to this type of attacks from China and Russia, forgets yours Mr @Gurjot.S



You can expect same from us. As i said, A/C are not exposed unless crucial enemy assets are not neutralized.


----------



## Areesh

maravan91 said:


> http://www.modp.gov.pk/pubDetails.aspx
> 
> Read all the yearbook reports
> http://www.modp.gov.pk/pubDetails.aspx
> 
> There is no cm400akg purchase you purchased c802ak



No need to read anything.

SIPRI has confirmed. Deputy Director JFT project has confirmed. Not everything is necessary to be in yearbook.

You seriously need to STFU.



maravan91 said:


> Ùsing abusive language will not make your claim true. Again read following reports to know about your military purchases in last decade http://www.modp.gov.pk/pubDetails.aspx



Everything is not needed to be in yearbook. Some can be missed. Some can be added with other designations.

Stop begging us now.



CoffeeByte said:


> SIPRI ALso said India ordered more than 3000 Kornet Atgms when that is clearly untrue.
> At most 100-200 order for para regiment



I don't care what SIPRI says about India. I am not obsessed with India like you are for my country.

SIPRI claim is confirmed by most reliable person on JFT project. So we have good enough reason to believe that CM400AKG are part of our arsenal.


----------



## SecularNationalist

The first priority should be to control the falling Rupee against dollar,euro and sterling.


----------



## ziaulislam

SecularNationalist said:


> The first priority should be to control the falling Rupee against dollar,euro and sterling.


first pirority to put real polcies on yourr own not on pressure of IMF
what IMF forced the govt to do, the govt should have done by itself

the blame goes to one person Mr Dar, the state bank is an independent organization which acted appropriately couple of years ago in not intervening but Dar forced them to do so, this has lost us billion of rupees in foreign exchange, Mr Dar should be prosecuted for this decision

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SecularNationalist

ziaulislam said:


> first pirority to put real polcies on yourr own not on pressure of IMF
> what IMF forced the govt to do, the govt should have done by itself
> 
> the blame goes to one person Mr Dar, the state bank is an independent organization which acted appropriately couple of years ago in not intervening but Dar forced them to do so, this has lost us billion of rupees in foreign exchange, Mr Dar should be prosecuted for this decision


Yea whatever it takes to protect rupee value in the global forex market.That,s what i meant.


----------



## khanmubashir

gslv mk3 said:


> And you think JF 17 wil penetrate ADs of all other ships in the CBG & evade detection from the AEW aircraft and Vikys radar?
> 
> And the JF 17 would be intercepted by Mig 29 Ks long before it can come in range of vikramaditya.
> 
> Heck the Zhuk ME radar on the mig will see JF 17 before it can see the mig,and would fire a BVRAAM.
> 
> game over .


Google Pak old mirage penetrating USA air security zone to take a simulated stike on USA AC in joint exercises 



shuntmaster said:


> If China believed that a 100k Ton ship can be sunk by few 100 Kgs of explosives in the 'carrier killers' warhead, then why is it investing so much on aircraft carriers??


May not sink an AC but still it can be taken.out of operations with a few 100 kg explosive FYI those won't be traditional dynamite but very high power military detonics


----------



## ziaulislam

SecularNationalist said:


> Yea whatever it takes to protect rupee value in the global forex market.That,s what i meant.


well, what it really means that govt will subsidize something that value is not waht its been selling at

in another words its like govt artifical keeping the value of a 110 rs item ar rs 100, net result, govt will loose billion of fdollars and will become ultimately bankrupt

its so unfortunate that govt under pressure of "parhay lekay jahil" awam of Pakistan does stupid things while actual world power use common sense, for example india and china did devaluation of its currency by 20% during same period but hey as mushi said "pakistan ka allah he hafiz hu"

the solution is to correct imports/exports, spend on education, health not artifically cook numbers or defend an undervalued rupee





__ https://www.facebook.com/





so i will ask froma ll those "parhey likay jahil" if devaluation is such an evil act why was china doing it till now..? why did india did it?
of course you would say india is punny underdeveloped country(which is not true) but what about china?

its not devaluation is bad, it is was done sudddenly that is the issue that too under pressure of foreign organization, we are lucky to have IMF, it seems every right decision has to be forced on by foreign govt to save pakistan..i bet had their been no IMF we would have been crashed over econmy 10 times over

PS:
i expect some illogical reply..since that what "paray likhay jahil" do

the real reason for Pakistan suffering is this portion of population which i call "parahey likhay jahil" which by some odd reason/logic support "certified corrupt people" which vote for MQM but than cry about MQM too, which vote for "jiya bhutto" but than cry about sindh situation, which vote for mullahs but than ask why is terroism happening


----------



## bdslph

unless u have a nuke warhead its is useless against carrier it will just do serious damage


----------



## The Eagle

bdslph said:


> unless u have a nuke warhead its is useless against carrier it will just do serious damage



why to sink whole package when one strike can make it non-operational which is main purpose of carrier killer. An AC Carrier becomes redundant is nothing better but equal to Dead/Killed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MastanKhan

The Eagle said:


> why to sink whole package when one strike can make it non-operational which is main purpose of carrier killer. An AC Carrier becomes redundant is nothing better but equal to Dead/Killed.



Hi,

One strike won't make it " non-operational "---. The carrier 'Could' still be operational.


----------



## CHI RULES

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> One strike won't make it " non-operational "---. The carrier 'Could' still be operational.


There shall always be multiple attacks/strikes in case of AC. The CM400AKG with 250KM range should be challenging enough if fired in multiples.


----------



## Thorough Pro

Depends where you hit, take out the bridge and you are done.



MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> One strike won't make it " non-operational "---. The carrier 'Could' still be operational.


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Areesh said:


> So we should believe you and @Bilal Khan 777 but not deputy project director of JFT Air Commodore Khalid Mehmood who clearly says that CM400AKG is in service with PAF and is part of operational doctorine.
> 
> View attachment 442250
> 
> 
> I warned you about this multiple ID pig. You should have banned him earlier without wasting any time. @The Eagle @WAJsal @waz



You can choose who you like to believe. This weapon is not inducted and is still in development. However, Pakistan will eventually have supersonic anti ship missiles. Which one it will be, I will leave to your assessment.


----------



## Areesh

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> You can choose who you like to believe. This weapon is not inducted and is still in development. However, Pakistan will eventually have supersonic anti ship missiles. Which one it will be, I will leave to your assessment.



I would still go with Air Commodore Khalid. Thanks.


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Areesh said:


> I would still go with Air Commodore Khalid. Thanks.



whatever floats your camel.


----------



## Areesh

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> whatever floats your camel.



Thanks anyways


----------



## HRK

Areesh said:


> I would still go with Air Commodore Khalid. Thanks.


who latter clarified that CM-400 was integrated but not inducted

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Aasimkhan

Bratva said:


> *Passive radar* systems (also referred to as *passive coherent location* and *passive covert radar*) encompass a class of radar systems that detect and track objects by processing reflections from non-cooperative sources of illumination in the environment, such as commercial broadcast and communications signals
> 
> Capability is there to hit moving targets. No matter how imperfect. Carrier is a big thing. Missile would be able to hit it but how much it would penetrate it. It remains to be seen


A mach 4 missile will break the hull of any aircraft carrier by it's kinetic energy, the nuts and bolts will leave their place by the shock wave, carrier will sink within minutes



trident2010 said:


> Wrong answer. We are discussing real world scenario not the hypothetical nuclear exchange.


So nuclear is hypothetical becoz it scares the shit out of you, rest all is real, haha live in fantasy as long as u want



xyxmt said:


> or we can just wait and rely on the professionalism of Indian navy personnel to sink it them self.


I am sure some Indian sailor will forget to close the hatch of aircraft carrier sooner rather than later, just like they did to their nuclear submarine leased from russia


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Quite a powerful missile to have

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------

