# Rebuilding Pakistan Navy Aviation.



## Myth_buster_1

Currently the PN Aviation Force consists of:

3 Westland Lynx - anti-ship/anti-submarine/transport helicopters 
6 Westland Sea King Mk45 - transport helicopters 
18 Harbin Z-9EC - helicopters 
8 Aérospatiale SA-319B Alouette III - transport/anti-ship helicopters 
4 Lockheed P-3C Orion - maritime surveillance/anti-submarine warfare aircraft/airborne early warning (6 more to be delivered) 
5 Fokker F27-200 Friendship - maritime surveillance aircraft 
2-3 Breguet Atlantique I - maritime surveillance/anti-submarine warfare aircraft 
*12+ Dassault Mirage V* - anti-ship fighter aircraft (operated by the Pakistan Air Force) 

The only effective way to defend a mammoth Indian navy is to modernize our navy aviation to 21st standard aviation. 12 odd 60s era Mirages and 4 P-3 will have little impact to IN Navy? Currently PN has a plan to induct one new fighter sqd. the question is, is it enough? and what type is it goanna be?

Rafale M
Su-34
JF-17


----------



## Quwa

The PN's aviating wing is already being rebuilt, but it will take a long while before it to becomes a significant regional player. It will always depend on finances, requirements and the doctrine. To me it appears the PN wants to be a formidable regional power that regularly participates in international missions.

The PN has set its minimum criteria for MPAs by raising its P-3C fleet to 10 and attempts are being made to add 3 Hawkeye-2000 AEW. Now there is no guarantee that PN will get the Hawkeye-2000s, but at least the intention for such capability is definitely there. There were also reports by H Khan on PakDef that PN wants its own fighter squadron by 2009. Whatever happens, at the end of the day the PN land based fleet is expected to have 10-12 MPAs, 3 AEW and a fighter squadron.

The P-3Cs will probably build the necessary capability and phase into the new doctrine, but those airframes are pretty old. Sometime next decade - probably by 2019 - the PN will start looking for a new MPA to replace the Orion in the long-run. EADS is preparing for the next decade with their A320 MPA to compete with the Boeing P-8. The Turkish Navy will use an ASW variant of the prop-powered ATR-72. So the PN has both jet and prop options...it is likely the same aircraft will be used to operate a new AWACS system - probably the Sino-Pak one under development.

Fighter squadron would be interesting. I personally see a squadron of used F-16A/B or C/D first as Link-16 could be integrated between the Falcon and Hawkeye-2000 quite easily. However JF-17 is also very likely...but 2009 is cutting it close, so Mirages perhaps? In the long-run I am unsure as anything is possible...like a naval JF-17? Perhaps a variant of J-11B? Perhaps PLAN would have a 5th generation naval fighter? Nonetheless some serious threats will be accounted for such as possible Super Hornets within the IN and maybe even a 5th generation fighter like JSF.

The helicopter fleet will see some heavy expansion over the next decade. For one new systems such as the AW149, EC-175/Z-15 and Korean Medium will be flooding the market. These are reasonable priced new-generation helicopters that would form the mainstay of a lot of navies...especially for corvette & medium frigate operators. The PN's Marine Corps may also require some aviation capability. From what I've read on PakDef, it appears that the surface fleet will see heavy expansion in the long-term. In short expect a good number of perhaps EC-175/Z-15 - as China will also produce & procure - in the PN. We'll probably see a lesser number of 10-ton helicopters such as NH-90 or the Chinese equivalent replace the Seaking and operate on command ships.


----------



## sohailbutt

Mark Sien said:


> The PN's aviating wing is already being rebuilt, but it will take a long while before it to becomes a significant regional player. It will always depend on finances, requirements and the doctrine. To me it appears the PN wants to be a formidable regional power that regularly participates in international missions.
> 
> The PN has set its minimum criteria for MPAs by raising its P-3C fleet to 10 and attempts are being made to add 3 Hawkeye-2000 AEW. Now there is no guarantee that PN will get the Hawkeye-2000s, but at least the intention for such capability is definitely there. There were also reports by H Khan on PakDef that PN wants its own fighter squadron by 2009. Whatever happens, at the end of the day the PN land based fleet is expected to have 10-12 MPAs, 3 AEW and a fighter squadron.
> 
> The P-3Cs will probably build the necessary capability and phase into the new doctrine, but those airframes are pretty old. Sometime next decade - probably by 2019 - the PN will start looking for a new MPA to replace the Orion in the long-run. EADS is preparing for the next decade with their A320 MPA to compete with the Boeing P-8. The Turkish Navy will use an ASW variant of the prop-powered ATR-72. So the PN has both jet and prop options...it is likely the same aircraft will be used to operate a new AWACS system - probably the Sino-Pak one under development.
> 
> Fighter squadron would be interesting. I personally see a squadron of used F-16A/B or C/D first as Link-16 could be integrated between the Falcon and Hawkeye-2000 quite easily. However JF-17 is also very likely...but 2009 is cutting it close, so Mirages perhaps? In the long-run I am unsure as anything is possible...like a naval JF-17? Perhaps a variant of J-11B? Perhaps PLAN would have a 5th generation naval fighter? Nonetheless some serious threats will be accounted for such as possible Super Hornets within the IN and maybe even a 5th generation fighter like JSF.
> 
> The helicopter fleet will see some heavy expansion over the next decade. For one new systems such as the AW149, EC-175/Z-15 and Korean Medium will be flooding the market. These are reasonable priced new-generation helicopters that would form the mainstay of a lot of navies...especially for corvette & medium frigate operators. The PN's Marine Corps may also require some aviation capability. From what I've read on PakDef, it appears that the surface fleet will see heavy expansion in the long-term. In short expect a good number of perhaps EC-175/Z-15 - as China will also produce & procure - in the PN. We'll probably see a lesser number of 10-ton helicopters such as NH-90 or the Chinese equivalent replace the Seaking and operate on command ships.



Mark, i dont think India will go the JSF way cause they have their co-produced Indo-Russian 5th generation fighter comin up in the next decade, no doubt that their is a posibility that they can go the hornet way. I think PAF will go the JSF way, in the future, because PAF will not have all Chinese fighters in its fleet (for e.g. J-XX, we donot know when it is goin to come up, n also we don't know the tech in the aircraft, i doubt it can match JSF or Raptor), PAF have always kept a mix of US n Chinese fighters, wut do u think???


----------



## Myth_buster_1

@ Mark Sien

yes indeed pakistan navy has placed orders on 10 P-3c while 3 P-3C will be equipped with E2-2000 AEW system. India is countering this threat with a possible TOT of Hornets and P-3C and P-8.
PAF has only one airbase at the south, ill equipped Masroor with Mirages and F-7. Around 2010 i am sure many sqds will be equipped with jf-17s. but is it enough against 3 Indian air bases when they equip with super hornets or mig-35s?
the best solution.. Masroor acquires a sqd of RafaleM and replace its sqds consisting of F-7 and Mirages with JF-17s while Erieye provides 350 km coverage in a dense hostile electronic warfare environment!


----------



## BATMAN

> Now there is no guarantee that PN will get the Hawkeye-2000s


 Why so? I hope nothing to do with new govt.
I really would love to see Hawkeye2000s with PN.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

BATMAN said:


> Why so? I hope nothing to do with new govt.
> I really would love to see Hawkeye2000s with PN.



PN has placed an order for 3 P-3C Orions equipped with the E-2C Hawkeye 2000 AEW system.


----------



## Neo

BATMAN said:


> Why so? I hope nothing to do with new govt.
> I really would love to see Hawkeye2000s with PN.



I too agree with Mark, the way things are now I don't think GoP will risk placing more defence orders in USA specially if Democrats win the elections.


----------



## asaad-ul-islam

forgive me for my stupidity, but what's the chance of pakistan building an aircraft carrier in the next 10-15 years?

could this be possible if we boost our ship-building capabilities? KSEW has the infrastructure to develop a wide range of sea craft, from frigates to submarines to tankers. 

italy, france, india, china all have plans to develop an aircraft carrier. i'm sure we can send engineers to cooperate with the chinese and try to build up our capabilities.


----------



## Keysersoze

asaad-ul-islam said:


> forgive me for my stupidity, but what's the chance of pakistan building an aircraft carrier in the next 10-15 years?
> 
> could this be possible if we boost our ship-building capabilities? KSEW has the infrastructure to develop a wide range of sea craft, from frigates to submarines to tankers.
> 
> italy, france, india, china all have plans to develop an aircraft carrier. i'm sure we can send engineers to cooperate with the chinese and try to build up our capabilities.



I would say None dude. The thing that you have to remember is that you would require a whole battle group of ships in order to make the carrier feasible. (not to mention you would need three to maintain a ship on the water constantly) 

Cost would be huge. And since there is no doctrine that would support that cost it would be pointless for the moment


----------



## vish

Sorry if I'm being naive... but doesn't the PN's doctrine center around the defense of Pakistans coast and guarding of the countrys sea lanes? If that is the primary concern of the PN then I think it makes more sense for the PN to concentrate its efforts into expanding its surface fleet (in terms of number of combatants and not essentially in terms of tonnage) and maintain a relatively more potent submarine arm both in terms of quantity and quality (which PN has always been doing). 

As far as the PNs air arm is concerned, its (Navys) intention to have an independent fighter squadron threat is very much pragmatic, given the fact that in times of emergency, the PAF would be preoccupied elsewhere. 

These are my views, and Im no expert. So feel free to criticize me.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

vish said:


> Sorry if I'm being naive... but doesn't the PN's doctrine center around the defense of Pakistans coast and guarding of the countrys sea lanes? If that is the primary concern of the PN then I think it makes more sense for the PN to concentrate its efforts into expanding its surface fleet (in terms of number of combatants and not essentially in terms of tonnage) and maintain a relatively more potent submarine arm both in terms of quantity and quality (which PN has always been doing).
> 
> As far as the PNs air arm is concerned, its (Navys) intention to have an independent fighter squadron threat is very much pragmatic, given the fact that in times of emergency, the PAF would be preoccupied elsewhere.
> 
> These are my views, and Im no expert. So feel free to criticize me.



That seems about right, and is the direction that PN acquisitions seem to be heading in - hence the lack of interest in a carrier.


----------



## fatman17

i doubt if the PN will ever possess a fighter squadron - it will always remain the purview of the PAF which will in any case dedicate a maritime strike sqdn or flight for the PN just like the current mirages (with Exocets) based at masroor AFB.


----------



## IceCold

If PN gets its own squardon of fighter jets, perhaps it can cut the pressure off the PAF which will be heavily occupied at a time of conflict with the IAF. Besides it will then be the PN responsibility and PNs decision of how they want to maintain that squardon of theirs and with what weapons.


----------



## fatman17

IceCold said:


> If PN gets its own squardon of fighter jets, perhaps it can cut the pressure off the PAF which will be heavily occupied at a time of conflict with the IAF. Besides it will then be the PN responsibility and PNs decision of how they want to maintain that squardon of theirs and with what weapons.



icecold-your logic makes sense but it is the matter of operational expertise which the PAF possesses and PN dosnt. larger navies which operate carriers have their own fighters but as indicated in above posts the PN does not have any carrier acquisition plans. believe me the PN has its hands full with the current assets it possesses and will possess.


----------



## Quwa

fatman17 said:


> icecold-your logic makes sense but it is the matter of operational expertise which the PAF possesses and PN dosnt. larger navies which operate carriers have their own fighters but as indicated in above posts the PN does not have any carrier acquisition plans. believe me the PN has its hands full with the current assets it possesses and will possess.


Any PN fighter squadron would probably be raised with close cooperation with the PAF. It is likely that the PN will send its pilots and crews to be trained by PAF...and complete training within some PN Air College? With the growing aviation assets - AEW&C, more MPAs & helicopters; network-centric focus; UAVs & fighter squadron - we could see a PN Air College.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Mark Sien said:


> Any PN fighter squadron would probably be raised with close cooperation with the PAF. It is likely that the PN will send its pilots and crews to be trained by PAF...and complete training within some PN Air College? With the growing aviation assets - AEW&C, more MPAs & helicopters; network-centric focus; UAVs & fighter squadron - we could see a PN Air College.



so far their is only one god for PN and Airforce, "Risalpur Air Force Academy"


----------



## fatman17

Mark Sien said:


> Any PN fighter squadron would probably be raised with close cooperation with the PAF. It is likely that the PN will send its pilots and crews to be trained by PAF...and complete training within some PN Air College? With the growing aviation assets - AEW&C, more MPAs & helicopters; network-centric focus; UAVs & fighter squadron - we could see a PN Air College.



its a forward looking statement and would depend on budgets allocations.


----------



## Proud to be Pakistani

PAF will be dealing with PN Fighter requirements like it is at the moment. A dedicated sqd. is possible for PN in coming 5 years but will be operated by PAF. Making PN operate such a setup is not possible within 5 years.


----------



## Inception-06

23march said:


> @ Mark Sien
> 
> yes indeed pakistan navy has placed orders on 10 P-3c while 3 P-3C will be equipped with E2-2000 AEW system. India is countering this threat with a possible TOT of Hornets and P-3C and P-8.
> PAF has only one airbase at the south, ill equipped Masroor with Mirages and F-7. Around 2010 i am sure many sqds will be equipped with jf-17s. but is it enough against 3 Indian air bases when they equip with super hornets or mig-35s?
> the best solution.. Masroor acquires a sqd of RafaleM and replace its sqds consisting of F-7 and Mirages with JF-17s while Erieye provides 350 km coverage in a dense hostile electronic warfare environment!




yes PN could do it when some Generals from the pakistan Army and some corrupt politicans bring back the Pakistan money from the swiss banks !


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Ulla said:


> yes PN could do it when some Generals from the pakistan Army and some corrupt politicans bring back the Pakistan money from the swiss banks !



And exactly what do or Generals have to do with the Swiss bank?? so get your butt of from sofa watching GEO TV and stop with the anti pak generals thing! it makes me sick!


----------



## Inception-06

23march said:


> And exactly what do or Generals have to do with the Swiss bank?? so get your butt of from sofa watching GEO TV and stop with the anti pak generals thing! it makes me sick!



hahahaha muahahaha " so get your butt of from sofa watching GEO TV " 

you think to simple man

first I have not a Sofa !

second I hate all pakistani TV-Channels who are against PAKISTAN ARMY also I hate all people who are against THE PAKISTAN ARMY.

BUT I had also all generals who take the money of our Nation and put it in Swiss Bank!

also I can say my mind nothing can stop me !

Have you ever hear about the F-7PG case ? that a Air Marshall had take millions ! ....but the money was for the F-7PG !.......................


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Ulla said:


> hahahaha muahahaha " so get your butt of from sofa watching GEO TV "
> 
> you think to simple man
> 
> first I have not a Sofa !
> 
> second I hate all pakistani TV-Channels who are against PAKISTAN ARMY also I had all people who are against THE PAKISTAN ARMY.
> 
> BUT I had also all generals who take the money of our Nation and put it in Swiss Bank!
> 
> also I can say my mind nothing can stop me !
> 
> Have you ever hear about the F-7PG case ? that a Air Marshall had take millions ! ....but the money was for the F-7PG !.......................



 i thought you were one of these no war no war under ground hippie group in islamabad..
Please care to provide me a link?


----------



## TOPGUN

I will have to totally agree with wat Vish said we need to put more effort in to our surface fleet !!!! as said and known the PN Aviation is being upgraded slowly and any threats from the coast line comes in first alert for the PAF.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

TOPGUN said:


> I will have to totally agree with wat Vish said we need to put more effort in to our surface fleet !!!! as said and known the PN Aviation is being upgraded slowly and any threats from the coast line comes in first alert for the PAF.



in my opinion their is no way how PN can match IN surface fleet in terms of technology or numbers. so i think PN should purchase some more F-22P class Frigates for costal defence while other then 4 Agosta we add at least 10 more subs in the inventory! and that in the period of 10-15 years! 
IN will have 3 aircraft Carriers with at least 100 fixed wings! thats some serious threat to PN and bunch of P-3C and a squadron of JF-17 will be just walk in the park for IN aviation.


----------



## Inception-06

23march said:


> i thought you were one of these no war no war under ground hippie group in islamabad..
> Please care to provide me a link?



I had read that in pakistandefence.com in a discussion month ago...after I had hear or read that I was really sad about the F-7PG case


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Ulla said:


> I had read that in pakistandefence.com in a discussion month ago...after I had hear or read that I was really sad about the F-7PG case



So you believe in rumors?
my friend if generals were corrupt, Pakistan military would be history... just like our "Police".


----------



## Inception-06

China has very fine Plane for the Anti-ship-Role for example 

1. H-6M
->the bomber has all of its original 23mm cannons removed. Four large pylons are fitted under the wings to carry four YJ-81 anti-ship missiles. If necessary, the bomber may also be able to carry the KD-88 land-attack cruise missile (LACM) for precision strike role. 

This variant features some radical modifications, including six under-wing pylons to carry an unknown model air-launched land-attack cruise missile; two Russian-made D-30KP turbofan engines; a solid nose replacing the original framed glass-in nose; and a completely refurnished &#8216;glass&#8217; cockpit featuring six large multifunctional displays (MFD). XAC hopes that these modifications would significantly improve the performance of the 40-year-old design, thus extending its service life well into the next decade.

2.JH-7 also known as FBC-1 'Flying Leopard' 
->The JH-7 is fitted with a twin-barrel Type 23-III (a copy of the Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23L) 23mm cannon with 200 rounds in a ventral installation. The aircraft also has seven external stores stations (one under fuselage, four under wings, and two on wing tips), with the centreline fuselage station and two inboard wing stations pumped to carry a 1,400-litre drop tank each.

In a typical maritime strike mission, the JH-7 would carry four YJ-81 subsonic anti-ship missiles and two PL-5C/E IR-homing short-range air-to-air missiles (SRAAM), with a 1,400 litre drop tank. The aircraft would fly at low altitudes to avoid the detection of the enemy ship&#8217;s air search radar, and launch the sea-skimming YJ-81 missiles at a distance of 30~40km off the target ship.

Alternatively, the JH-7 could carry up to 20 250kg low-drag general-purpose (LDGP) bombs for surface attack missions. In this configuration, each of the two inboard wing stations is fitted with a pylon integrated dispenser system that can carry up to six 250kg LDGP bombs. Each of the two outboard wing stations is fitted with a smaller pylon that carries four bombs.

The JH-7 is fitted with a Type 232H Eagle Eye mono-pulse fire-control radar. The radar feeds to a fire-control computer, which is connected to the integrated INS/GPS navigation system, anti-ship missile fire-control system, and head-up display (HUD) via a HB6096 (ARINC429) data bus. This makes possible accurate delivery of weapons over long distances in the sea. The JH-7 is also the first Chinese indigenous combat aircraft fitted with a self-defence ECM suite consisting of all-aspect radar warning receiver (RWR), active/passive jammer, and chaff/flare dispenser.

One or two squadrons of this babys + one or two squadrons of the H-6 would give up a good Formation against the Indian Navy ! for the Anti-Ship Role they are enough!

One or two squadron of Jf-17 will guard them against IAF Planes......


----------



## Inception-06

here some picture of the H-6 Naval Bomber version !

http://img76.imageshack.us/my.php?image=h609yx4.jpg

http://img80.imageshack.us/my.php?image=h611ai8.jpg

http://img377.imageshack.us/my.php?image=h613sy2.jpg

http://img366.imageshack.us/my.php?image=h612de5.jpg


----------



## Inception-06

And here some picture of the J-7H naval version !

http://img377.imageshack.us/my.php?image=jh703lu4.jpg

http://img377.imageshack.us/my.php?image=jh713largegv3.jpg

http://img76.imageshack.us/my.php?image=jh704xe7.jpg

http://img241.imageshack.us/my.php?image=jh709yf5.jpg

http://img76.imageshack.us/my.php?image=jh712cp2.jpg

brother what you all think about thos combined Pakistan Naval Air Force ?

of course they will work with the P3C-orion ! so they will get a double effect of Fire Power and Electronic warfare...........................................


----------



## TOPGUN

I have stated it before on here that we could use the j-7h like 2 SQ if that backed up by 2 SQ of fighters but others did not agree oh well just my thoughts cheers to Ulla !!


----------



## Quwa

From 2010 to 2019 I would give PN a squadron or two of F-16s to make direct use of Link-16/11 and usage of Harpoon Block-II. After 2019 I would invest in a naval version of a light 5th generation fighter with VSTOL for use on LPD/LHDs. For the term I would use a special JF-17 variant until the 5th gen. fighter is ready...create short island strips on the Arabian Sea to deploy the VSTOL fighter. After 2030 employ the VSTOL fighter on a locally built LPH similar to the Korean Dokdo class...use it in a semi aircraft carrier/amphibious assault pattern.

In such a pattern one doesn't need an aircraft carrier, and the LPD can be converted into an semi-carrier whenever needed - otherwise the fighters would be on land.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

TOPGUN said:


> I have stated it before on here that we could use the j-7h like 2 SQ if that backed up by 2 SQ of fighters but others did not agree oh well just my thoughts cheers to Ulla !!



With all due respect, i have to disagree with you on this.. 2sq of J-7 will be just flying drones for IN surface fleet and aviation. why would the air force wana waist $20 million plane on a less then $10 million piece of ? 
With the geo statically environment changing... India is pursing for american equipment i believe we can move forward with this opportunity of negotiating with the ruskiz for a Sq of Su-34 for our Naval needs.. and that backed by a PN sq of JF-17 and while a sq of PAF F-16 aggressor provides full time air support to PN Fixed wing fleet!
That way before 2019 Masroor airbase is equipped with some serious deadly pact!


----------



## Inception-06

23march said:


> With all due respect, i have to disagree with you on this.. 2sq of J-7 will be just flying drones for IN surface fleet and aviation. why would the air force wana waist $20 million plane on a less then $10 million piece of ?
> With the geo statically environment changing... India is pursing for american equipment i believe we can move forward with this opportunity of negotiating with the ruskiz for a Sq of Su-34 for our Naval needs.. and that backed by a PN sq of JF-17 and while a sq of PAF F-16 aggressor provides full time air support to PN Fixed wing fleet!
> That way before 2019 Masroor airbase is equipped with some serious deadly pact!



yes why not a F-16 ! it has also good Anti-Ship-capebilletys...but it should work with the Jh-7 because this Jet was made for this task !


----------



## Inception-06

TOPGUN said:


> I have stated it before on here that we could use the j-7h like 2 SQ if that backed up by 2 SQ of fighters but others did not agree oh well just my thoughts cheers to Ulla !!



thx !


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Ulla said:


> yes why not a F-16 ! it has also good Anti-Ship-capebilletys...but it should work with the Jh-7 because this Jet was made for this task !



Dude! Mirage V, Mirage-F1, JH-7, jaguar, and Harrier are in the same of same old class, these planes are useless in naval warfare environment. 
Even Our JF-17 is a way ahead of JH-7 in this matter.


----------



## Proud to be Pakistani

What is IN Avaiation?

Some recked BAE Harriers i think only half a dozen are operational since they crashed 16.

MIG-29K, come on.... Its not a Super Jet by any means!


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Proud to be Pakistani said:


> What is IN Avaiation?
> 
> Some recked BAE Harriers i think only half a dozen are operational since they crashed 16.
> 
> MIG-29K, come on.... Its not a Super Jet by any means!



Super hornets, Mig-29K, MKI???


----------



## vish

Proud to be Pakistani said:


> What is IN Avaiation?



I'm only going to list the combat aircrafts dedicated for maritime roles.

17 Harriers (13 FRS 51 + 4 T 60 trainers) upgraded with the Elta EL/M-2032 radar and the Rafael Derby BVRAAM missiles. The Harriers are armed with the Matra Magic-II AAM and the Sea Eagle Anti-ship missiles.

16 Mig-29K (12 fighters + 4 trainers); yet to be inducted.

Also, there is the No. 6 squadron of the IAF, based in Pune, dedicated for maritime attack roles. Strength: 10 Jaguar IM.


----------



## Proud to be Pakistani

*Half of Sea Harrier fleet gone in 20 years​*
16 crashes doesn't seem like a big number in 20 years, consider this: these crashes have wiped out half of the Indian Navy's Sea Harrier fleet of 30 aircraft. Seven pilots, among the most elite flyers at the Navy have lost their lives in these crashes. And, every crash has happened during fairly routine sorties, as the Harrier has never seen battle since being inducted in 1983. 


International Institute for Strategic StudiesHalf of Sea Harrier fleet gone in 20 years

So India had 30 Harriers in Total and confirmed 16 crashes so *they are left with 14 Only!*.... Remains to be seen how operational they are?

As per my Info: *10 are the FRS 51 and 4 Trainers!*


----------



## Proud to be Pakistani

*I would say and defend that the IN Aviation is nothing at this moment!*


----------



## Proud to be Pakistani

*Russia to deliver first four MiG 29K by September​*

May 20 (IANS) The first four ship-borne Russian-made MiG 29 K/KUB fighter jets, purchased by India for the aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov, will be delivered to the Indian Navy in September, a navy official said Tuesday. The first four of the 16 MiG 29 K/KUB will arrive in the country in September and the pilot training has been completed for these aircraft, the official said.

The 45,000-tonne Kiev class aircraft carrier is being refurbished at the Sevmash shipyard in Russia, and the work is expected to be completed by 2010. *The carrier will be delivered to the Indian Navy only by 2012*. Till then, the jets will be based on shore.

*Russia will supply the Indian Navy with 16 carrier-based MiG-29K/KUB aircraft (12 single-seat K models and 4 dual-seat KUB models)*

» Russia to deliver first four MiG 29K by September - Thaindian News


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Proud to be Pakistani said:


> *I would say and defend that the IN Aviation is nothing at this moment!*



Currently IN aviation is upgrading and Indian Air force southwestern air command will very soon place its MKI fleet, and multiple MRCA sqds. and its most likely that IN will place at least 2sqd of Super hornets, with 2-3 aircraft carriers!


----------



## Proud to be Pakistani

What you are talking about is 2015 - 2025.

It is not that the items are bought from Shelves!

Takes time to execute Orders and get an operational Status for all the Planes. 

Futhermore, I cannot understand what people think about MKI Usage.... IAF will use MKI ...IN will use MKI then people will come up and say hey....you heard the news....

*Indian Army is also using MKI instead of Gunships.*

MKI MKI .... Come on people!.... Even with the induction of 40 MKIs in coming 4 Years as planned and ordered which is yet to be confirmed thou.... 40 MKIs + 40 to come. 80 MKIs will be used for What?...... Every possible role?..... Strike ... Air Defense .... Maritime Roles ... 


*Ironical!*


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Proud to be Pakistani said:


> What you are talking about is 2015 - 2025.
> 
> It is not that the items are bought from Shelves!
> 
> Takes time to exceute Orders and get an operational Status for all the Planes.
> 
> Futhermore, I cannot understand what people think about MKI Usage.... IAF will use MKI ...IN will use MKI then people will come up and say hey....you heard the news....
> 
> *Indian Army is also using MKI instead of Gunships.*
> 
> MKI MKI .... Come on people!



barrah tu appnay app ko kuch samagtha haan?

YOU just saw the word MKI and indian NAVY together in the same post and now you are assuming that i am saying IN will accquire MKIs? you take your time understanding the post before you reply to anything!

berrey thinking haan teri..
"Takes time to exceute Orders and get an operational Status for all the Planes."


----------



## Proud to be Pakistani

Man!

Refrain from Stupid comments!


----------



## Proud to be Pakistani

I not said that you said that IN or IAF is aquiring MKIs...

Your Post:

_Currently IN aviation is upgrading and Indian Air force southwestern air command will very soon place its MKI fleet, and multiple MRCA sqds. and its most likely that IN will place at least 2sqd of Super hornets, with 2-3 aircraft carriers!_

Consider you post and logic!.... IAF will place MKI everywhere! MRCA not before 2015!
F-18 = MRCA if India wants F-18. 2-3 Carriers .... !

What are you thinking!


----------



## vish

Proud to be Pakistani said:


> *Half of Sea Harrier fleet gone in 20 years​*
> 16 crashes doesn't seem like a big number in 20 years, consider this: these crashes have wiped out half of the Indian Navy's Sea Harrier fleet of 30 aircraft. Seven pilots, among the most elite flyers at the Navy have lost their lives in these crashes. And, every crash has happened during fairly routine sorties, as the Harrier has never seen battle since being inducted in 1983.
> 
> 
> International Institute for Strategic StudiesHalf of Sea Harrier fleet gone in 20 years
> 
> So India had 30 Harriers in Total and confirmed 16 crashes so *they are left with 14 Only!*.... Remains to be seen how operational they are?
> 
> As per my Info: *10 are the FRS 51 and 4 Trainers!*



Not all crashes result in right offs. Further, fourteen aircraft were upgraded with Derby BVRAAMs. Does this number include the double-seat trainers? I don't think so. 

Check the link:
Military Defence Equipment, Simulation and Training News - ETS-News.com

But this site mentions fifteen aircraft have been upgraded. I don't know where they got that number from.

BR also mentions 14 + 4 aircraft with 14 being upgraded.

I do agree that the IN's combat aviation arm is understrength though.

Further, we'll have to wait for the Naval-LCA to develop. 40 of these birds have been ordered. 16 Mig-29K (12 fighters + 4 trainers) have been ordered too, with an option of further 30 aircraft before 2015.

The F-18 thing isn't very credible.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Proud to be Pakistani said:


> I not said that you said that IN or IAF is aquiring MKIs...
> 
> Your Post:
> 
> _Currently IN aviation is upgrading and Indian Air force southwestern air command will very soon place its MKI fleet, and multiple MRCA sqds. and its most likely that IN will place at least 2sqd of Super hornets, with 2-3 aircraft carriers!_
> 
> Consider you post and logic!.... IAF will place MKI everywhere! MRCA not before 2015!
> F-18 = MRCA if India wants F-18. 2-3 Carriers .... !
> 
> What are you thinking!



Now i have come to know that you can not understand the most simplest form of English.. so here... i will use some illustration with color full maps just for you to understand..... 

IAF south western Air command


Airbase Pune - Lohegaon
Aircraft/Squadron 
MKI--------Lightnings 
-----------Rhinos
-----------?? ??
thats 3 SQD of MKI up-to-date!
Their primary role.. 
Air support for IN and maritime roles. Thus having hands off total air superiority over PAF southern air command!

2 Sukhoi-30 MkI combat jets for maritime roles.  While the exact date of induction of the Su-30 MkIs in the naval scheme of things is not yet known, pilot of the Number 20 Squadron, which flies the Su-30 MkIs from Lohegaon base, told TNN: &#8220;Training is under way.&#8221; 
New Sukhoi Su-30 MKI Squadron To Be Stationed At Lohegaon Base, Pune

Currently IAF has about 17 sqd of mix old MIG fleet and this is likely to be replaced by even more capable MRCA then MKI! so expect 7-10 sqd of new MRCA stationed in IAF South western air command in 10 years! With another 3 sqds on IN aircraft carriers...



only one PAF air base in southern air command!
and that equipped with old 60s upgraded mirages III and V..

So this is my point that i am trying to make here..


----------



## Inception-06

23march said:


> Now i have come to know that you can not understand the most simplest form of English.. so here... i will use some illustration with color full maps just for you to understand.....
> 
> IAF south western Air command
> 
> 
> Airbase Pune - Lohegaon
> Aircraft/Squadron
> MKI--------Lightnings
> -----------Rhinos
> -----------?? ??
> thats 3 SQD of MKI up-to-date!
> Their primary role..
> Air support for IN and maritime roles. Thus having hands off total air superiority over PAF southern air command!
> 
> 2 Sukhoi-30 MkI combat jets for maritime roles.  While the exact date of induction of the Su-30 MkIs in the naval scheme of things is not yet known, pilot of the Number 20 Squadron, which flies the Su-30 MkIs from Lohegaon base, told TNN: Training is under way.
> New Sukhoi Su-30 MKI Squadron To Be Stationed At Lohegaon Base, Pune
> 
> Currently IAF has about 17 sqd of mix old MIG fleet and this is likely to be replaced by even more capable MRCA then MKI! so expect 7-10 sqd of new MRCA stationed in IAF South western air command in 10 years! With another 3 sqds on IN aircraft carriers...
> 
> 
> 
> only one PAF air base in southern air command!
> and that equipped with old 60s upgraded mirages III and V..
> 
> So this is my point that i am trying to make here..




good really good...-->(+ P3C-Orion, F-27 Fokker and Bregaut Atlantic do not forget this Fleet....!)


----------



## Keysersoze

Time out for the bickering please


----------



## Myth_buster_1

*Boeing identifies 14 nations for P-8A exports*
By Andrew Doyle

Boeing sees an export market for "about 100 P-8 derivatives" with countries that operate the Lockheed P-3 Orion or similar aircraft and are "looking for a long-range maritime patrol, maybe multi-mission, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance-capable platform," says Egan Greenstein, the company's senior manager P-8A business development.

"Some we're talking to directly, some we're talking to in support of the US Navy's foreign military sales, but there are about 14 countries that are interested or have a current capability that they need to replace in the next 10 years," he says. The target nations are Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chile, Greece, India, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, *Pakistan*, Portugal, South Korea, Spain and Thailand.

Boeing is negotiating a direct commercial sale of eight P-8As to India to meet its requirement for an interim long-range maritime reconnaisance and anti-submarine warfare aircraft.






_______________________

one may ask... is it worth spending a billion dollars for 8 ex-USN P-3 with less then 15-20 years of service life?


----------



## lindsyebanks

Currently PN is not considering the P-8A for the inventory in view of the fact that they will be taking in P-3's over the course of the next few years. Whilst Boeing may well hold exploratory discussions with perspective clients incluidng PN, the P-3's being acquired by the latter are slated to provide service for a substantial period of time as is evidenced by the Atlantic's, which have soldiered on for more than 3 decades. Although the P-3 aircraft PN is in the process of acquiring are used airframes, they will undergo a complete restructuring program as part of the SDLM to enable them to fly for 25 years at least and ideally more. Any replacement aircraft will figure after that timeline in the PN acquisition time-table. Further more and perhaps more relevantly in the context of this discussion, PN like a lot of MPA operators has a preference fro a turbo-prop aircraft versus turbo jet. although TOT is quicker for the latter, a slower moving aircraft makes for a better SSK/SSN hunter killer as it can spend more time over the target. 

It has to be born in mind that the P-3C update III+ are being provided to PN free of charge as part of US FMS to Pakistan. Unless a similar option is provided for the P-8A's in the near future, PN would be hard pressed to justify procurment of the P-8A even if the service would like to acquire the aircraft. At present with the large acquisition program PN is undertaking with F-22P FFG's, SSK's, FAC, Z-9 helo's, additional FFG of type not yet designated, FMS funded P-3C's would be an attractive choice. 

In additon to 28 Sqn, PN will raise at least one and possibly more P-3C squadrons once all the P-3's have been delivered. A decesion in this regard has not been announced. Nor has any decision been made nor reports heard of the outcome of any delivery of P-3 AEW equipped with the Hawkeye 2000 system, but hopefully that will still happen. 

Rgds

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## fatman17

23march said:


> *Boeing identifies 14 nations for P-8A exports*
> By Andrew Doyle
> 
> Boeing sees an export market for "about 100 P-8 derivatives" with countries that operate the Lockheed P-3 Orion or similar aircraft and are "looking for a long-range maritime patrol, maybe multi-mission, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance-capable platform," says Egan Greenstein, the company's senior manager P-8A business development.
> 
> "Some we're talking to directly, some we're talking to in support of the US Navy's foreign military sales, but there are about 14 countries that are interested or have a current capability that they need to replace in the next 10 years," he says. The target nations are Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chile, Greece, India, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, *Pakistan*, Portugal, South Korea, Spain and Thailand.
> 
> Boeing is negotiating a direct commercial sale of eight P-8As to India to meet its requirement for an interim long-range maritime reconnaisance and anti-submarine warfare aircraft.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________
> 
> *one may ask... is it worth spending a billion dollars for 8 ex-USN P-3 with less then 15-20 years of service life?[/*QUOTE]
> 
> they (P-3Cs) were purchased under FMS credits so in my opinion are a very good deal for the PN.
> let the P-8A develop and then lets see what happens.


----------



## Contrarian

What I find weird is that even though Pakistan has a small coastline it has or plans to have around 12 P-3C's, while India with a bloody huge coastline plans to get only 8 P-8I to replace the old 8 Tu somethings...


----------



## Keysersoze

malaymishra123 said:


> What I find weird is that even though Pakistan has a small coastline it has or plans to have around 12 P-3C's, while India with a bloody huge coastline plans to get only 8 P-8I to replace the old 8 Tu somethings...



What's weird? The fact that the PN will have 12 or that India is only ordering 8?


----------



## Contrarian

Keysersoze said:


> What's weird? The fact that the PN will have 12 or that India is only ordering 8?



That India is ordering only eight. That Pakistan feels the need to have around 12 platforms while India thinks only 8 are required for all their needs! And this is when the IN now wants 'domain awareness' or something of the sort, i forget the term they used.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

lindsyebanks said:


> Currently PN is not considering the P-8A for the inventory in view of the fact that they will be taking in P-3's over the course of the next few years. Whilst Boeing may well hold exploratory discussions with perspective clients incluidng PN, the P-3's being acquired by the latter are slated to provide service for a substantial period of time as is evidenced by the Atlantic's, which have soldiered on for more than 3 decades. Although the P-3 aircraft PN is in the process of acquiring are used airframes, they will undergo a complete restructuring program as part of the SDLM to enable them to fly for 25 years at least and ideally more. Any replacement aircraft will figure after that timeline in the PN acquisition time-table. Further more and perhaps more relevantly in the context of this discussion, PN like a lot of MPA operators has a preference fro a turbo-prop aircraft versus turbo jet. although TOT is quicker for the latter, a slower moving aircraft makes for a better SSK/SSN hunter killer as it can spend more time over the target.
> 
> It has to be born in mind that the P-3C update III+ are being provided to PN free of charge as part of US FMS to Pakistan. Unless a similar option is provided for the P-8A's in the near future, PN would be hard pressed to justify procurment of the P-8A even if the service would like to acquire the aircraft. At present with the large acquisition program PN is undertaking with F-22P FFG's, SSK's, FAC, Z-9 helo's, additional FFG of type not yet designated, FMS funded P-3C's would be an attractive choice.
> 
> In additon to 28 Sqn, PN will raise at least one and possibly more P-3C squadrons once all the P-3's have been delivered. A decesion in this regard has not been announced. Nor has any decision been made nor reports heard of the outcome of any delivery of P-3 AEW equipped with the Hawkeye 2000 system, but hopefully that will still happen.
> 
> Rgds



Nice post, your information regarding PN aviation specially P-3 are very informative. So should we see PN after P-3 accusation as end state of PN accusation of maritime patrol air craft for next 2 decades? or will PN consider next generation MPA like SAAB-2000 MPA or Japanese P-X.. One set back of P-8 for PN is the prise tag of 737 platform and cost no less then 100 million dollars let alone MPA systems.. A very smart decision was made by PAF for its AEW&C platform over a jet platform and chose better SAAB-2000.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

malaymishra123 said:


> That India is ordering only eight. That Pakistan feels the need to have around 12 platforms while India thinks only 8 are required for all their needs! And this is when the IN now wants 'domain awareness' or something of the sort, i forget the term they used.



I dont think india will stick with only 8 MPAs, you have to wait and see what other MPA they chose to supplement P-8s..


----------



## nitesh

23march said:


> I dont think india will stick with only 8 MPAs, you have to wait and see what other MPA they chose to supplement P-8s..



Yup you are right, meanwhile this might be a good read in this context:
India&#8217;s Navy Holding Maritime Patrol Aircraft Competition (updated)


----------



## Myth_buster_1

here is my wish list of PN future aviation fleet.

or PAF/PN Gripen NG


or PN J-11 sea flanker





PN JF-17


PN P-3C/ P-3C AEW


PN Saab-2000 MAP


PN/ PAF Saab-2000 Erieye


?PN P-8 on ex-PIA 737?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myth_buster_1

here is my wish list of PN future aviation fleet.

or PAF/PN Gripen NG


or PN J-11 sea flanker






PN JF-17


PN P-3C/ P-3C AEW


PN Saab-2000 MAP


PN/ PAF Saab-2000 Erieye


?PN P-8 ex-PIA 737?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myth_buster_1

PN Z-9 anti ship 


PN AS 532 medium utility helicopter


PN AS555 Fennec

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ejaz007

Who says Pakistan has a small coast line. Our coast line is around 800 kilometers long. Considering 200 kilometers EEZ the total area becomes considerable. Considering India it is small but not small that we can't have 12 aircrafts to operate.

By the way of these 12 P-3's being obtained I believe three shall have AEW suites rest ASW capabilities.


----------



## Contrarian

ejaz007 said:


> Who says Pakistan has a small coast line. Our coast line is around 800 kilometers long. Considering 200 kilometers EEZ the total area becomes considerable. Considering India it is small but not small that we can't have 12 aircrafts to operate.


You misunderstood me. I did not mean that the Pakistani coastline is small in absolute figures, i meant in relative terms with India. And neither am i questioning the need for PN to have 12 aircrafts or even 20 if they deem it necessary. I was merely commenting on the fact that PN is tasked with a relatively smaller coastline than India and they find it necessary to use 12 planes, whereas India with a larger coastline feels the need for only 8 LRMP's.


----------



## niaz

This may be a wish list but one must be pragmatic. How are we going to pay for all the fancy hardware? We dont have money to pay for our daily needs (Trade deficit was $20-billion! in 2007-2008). Economy is on the way to a meltdown. Even Saudi deferred payment has not yet gone thru. 

Even if we get a 'Wind fall' and manage to secure funds, Grippen is still out of bounds as it uses a US engine and US wont allow the export of this plane to Pakistan with the US power plant.

No doubt the Navy is a very important service arm, we have to manage with whatever resources that can be spared for the PN and somehow make do.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## fatman17

niaz said:


> This may be a wish list but one must be pragmatic. How are we going to pay for all the fancy hardware? We dont have money to pay for our daily needs (Trade deficit was $20-billion! in 2007-2008). Economy is on the way to a meltdown. Even Saudi deferred payment has not yet gone thru.
> 
> Even if we get a 'Wind fall' and manage to secure funds, Grippen is still out of bounds as it uses a US engine and US wont allow the export of this plane to Pakistan with the US power plant.
> 
> No doubt the Navy is a very important service arm, we have to manage with whatever resources that can be spared for the PN and somehow make do.



PN is 3rd on the totem-pole whether we like it or not! there is a lot of stuff in the pipeline so kindly lets be patient.


----------



## fatman17

malaymishra123 said:


> You misunderstood me. I did not mean that the Pakistani coastline is small in absolute figures, i meant in relative terms with India. And neither am i questioning the need for PN to have 12 aircrafts or even 20 if they deem it necessary. I was merely commenting on the fact that PN is tasked with a relatively smaller coastline than India and they find it necessary to use 12 planes, whereas India with a larger coastline feels the need for only 8 LRMP's.



india always has add-on orders e.g Hawk trainer!


----------



## Myth_buster_1

niaz said:


> This may be a wish list but one must be pragmatic. How are we going to pay for all the fancy hardware? We don&#8217;t have money to pay for our daily needs (Trade deficit was $20-billion! in 2007-2008). Economy is on the way to a meltdown. Even Saudi deferred payment has not yet gone thru.
> 
> Even if we get a 'Wind fall' and manage to secure funds, Grippen is still out of bounds as it uses a US engine and US won&#8217;t allow the export of this plane to Pakistan with the US power plant.
> 
> No doubt the Navy is a very important service arm, we have to manage with whatever resources that can be spared for the PN and somehow make do.



The transition of PN upgradation will not just happen in 2-3 years but will take time and its not fair to judge according to current economic situation. We already know that PN has a done deal for P-3 and AEW, JF-17 will replace aging fleet of PAF like Mirage-3/5 F-7 and A-5 meaning that 4 PN/PAF fighter squadron in Masroor will be upgraded with JF-17 and plus PN wishes to raise one independent squadron of new type MRCA. China has offered J-11s but i think PN may show interest in Chinese J-11 sea flankers. If pakistan's economy improves most likely that defence budget will rise and would prefer to add western technology. 
Saab has reviled its new air borne systems based on Saab-2000 platform such as MPA, and SIGSTAR, Saab-2000 MPA is designed to operate together with the Saab 2000 ERIEYE but still have capability to operate independently. I think Saab-2000 MPA will be a perfect replacement for Atlantique, and fokker MPAs..


----------



## Proud to be Pakistani

Add a few P-3C Orion with Hawkeye in the Wish list....


----------



## lindsyebanks

23march said:


> Nice post, your information regarding PN aviation specially P-3 are very informative. So should we see PN after P-3 accusation as end state of PN accusation of maritime patrol air craft for next 2 decades? or will PN consider next generation MPA like SAAB-2000 MPA or Japanese P-X.. One set back of P-8 for PN is the prise tag of 737 platform and cost no less then 100 million dollars let alone MPA systems.. A very smart decision was made by PAF for its AEW&C platform over a jet platform and chose better SAAB-2000.



Is the P-3C acquisition the final MPA to be included within the PN NAA inventory you ask? That is not a question we could know the answer to at this point in time unfortunately. One can make a fair and intelligent assumption as to that being the case based on the information available today whilst not being privy to the PN future 20 year plan. But who know's what may happen in the future. With past US-Pakistani relationships having had their fair shares of up's and down's, we can only wait and watch to see if the remaining 5 P-3C's will be delivered. 

The 2nd thing is that all 7 Orions need to be of the Update III+ modification. The two aircraft delivered last year do not feature this upgrade and will be returned to LMCO in due course to retrofitted to that standard. So currently PN has two aircraft of update II.75 tail numbers 81 and 82 delivered in 1996/97 (83 was lost in Sep 1999 with loss of all 21 crew) and two aircraft of update II.5/III delivered in 2007, tail numbers 84 and 85. The aircraft have been provided to PN to help 28 Sqn ramp up its personnel in readiness for absorbing all 7 update III+ aircraft which is a substantial increase in trained aircrew for the squadron. This project plan does make sense when you look at all the factors involved. Aircraft 81 and 82 will not be updated to Update III+ standard. The contract with LMCO/Ogma signed in 2004 was only for maintining the structural integrity of the aircraft. It did not cover any avionics upgrade, with the aircraft maintaining their avionics suite as per their original spec when rolled out from the factory line and outfitted to II.75 in 1990. This will be news to most people, certainley was for me when I heard this from LMCO (and not from the briefing by PRO PN)

At present there has no talk of retiring the F-27 aircraft in PN service and it is likely that 27Sqn will continue using this aircraft type. The F-27 aircraft in NAA service features both the MPA version as well as at least 1 for liason duties. Whilst the configuration of the aircraft can be changed quickly to offer a versatile fixed-wing platform, it does have its uses which will only complement the Orion in PN service. One example of this is para drops for SSGN a role which only three other aircraft can undertake in Pakistan; C-130 and CN-235 both in PAF service and PBN Islander in MSA service. The P-3's can also act as a control aircraft in guiding F-27's for ASuW operations as the MPA version is equipped to undertake that. 

As for 29Sqn? No announcement has been made which talks about retiring the Br1150 Atlantic. Whilst it would make sense to do so after all the Orions have been delivered in their final configuration, it does bring to mind the question whether PN can afford to do so. Should sanctions be applied on the P-3 fleet any time in the future, the Atlantic is the only aircraft in PN service capable of offering anything resembling true MPA capabilities with the F-27 only supporting/complementing that role. Whilst the P-3's currently in PN service feature equipment-fit from 1990, the Atlantics however were upgraded in 1993-95 following contract signature with Thompson-CSF in 1993 and are still a potent MPA platform. However with a small fleet of 3 aircraft, the status of 29 Sqn and its aircraft composition may well be dictated by the financial disposition of the country's treasury in the short term, whilst inadvertently overlooking implications for the long term.

PN has made it hard in recent years for any journalists to visit PNS Mehran in order to write about NAA, so accurate and objective information is hard to come by, an example of this being the point made earlier as to PN only receiving 7 aircraft of Update III+, whilst the original two will remain II.75. But on the brighter side, Pakistani  P-3C aircrew are still travelling to Jacksonville, USA for training and Orion deliveries are still slated to be on track, so lets be optimistic.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Classic video of P-3C.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## fatman17

23march said:


> PN Z-9 anti ship
> 
> 
> PN AS 532 medium utility helicopter
> 
> 
> PN AS555 Fennec



Fennec's are already in PA service.


----------



## fatman17

ejaz007 said:


> Who says Pakistan has a small coast line. Our coast line is around 800 kilometers long. Considering 200 kilometers EEZ the total area becomes considerable. Considering India it is small but not small that we can't have 12 aircrafts to operate.
> 
> By the way of these 12 P-3's being obtained I believe three shall have AEW suites rest ASW capabilities.



3 P-3Cs were purchased in the late 80's, one has been lost leaving 2 which are now fully operational after upgrade at PNS Mehran.

out of the 8 P-3C being provided under FMS, only 2 have been delivered so far which will again be sent back to the US for similar upgrades. the 6 remaining P-3Cs status is un-known as funds are being shifted back-and-forth. so for the moment the PN P-3C strength is 4.

The 5 P-3H AEW allocated under EDA are in limbo due to funds problem. so all-in-all not a very pretty picture.


----------



## lindsyebanks

fatman17 said:


> 3 P-3Cs were purchased in the late 80's, one has been lost leaving 2 which are now fully operational after upgrade at PNS Mehran.
> 
> out of the 8 P-3C being provided under FMS, only 2 have been delivered so far which will again be sent back to the US for similar upgrades. the 6 remaining P-3Cs status is un-known as funds are being shifted back-and-forth. so for the moment the PN P-3C strength is 4.
> 
> The 5 P-3H AEW allocated under EDA are in limbo due to funds problem. so all-in-all not a very pretty picture.


P-3 aircraft 81 and 82 originally delivered in 1996/97, were brought back into service recently. However the were not modified in any way. The aim of the flight restoration programme was to maintain the structural integrity of the aircraft and strictly no equipment upgrade. 

Aircraft 84 and 85 delivered more recently are essentially flyable aircraft with limitations on their mission capability albeight without the final update III Plus configuration.

Rather than repeat everything, see my earlier post above

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TOPGUN

Thx for the video of P-3 23march umm speaking in general i really dont think more then 2 sqn will be in PN maybe 3 if so i really think the understanding is such that PAF and PN really want to keep PAF incharge of the skies even at the coast line ! therefore the dream of these wish lists dont really come in play and will not mean anything i belive cuz the only sqn of fighter aircraft that will come on service with PN will be jf-17's yes perhaps other aicraft like P-3's ,choppers and unmanned uav's will play in part of the PN avaiton section plan there focous is more on there surfacefleet at sea and there sub fleet as it is very badly needed and they are working on just my thought plus some info and answers i gathered from my fam & famfriends in PN again just my thought i do hope and pray the best for PN !!


----------



## Myth_buster_1

fatman17 said:


> Fennec's are already in PA service.



It would be a great news if the naval version are inducted.


----------



## muse

> PN J-11 sea flanker




Yes, Sir! - That would be really excellent.


----------



## ARSENAL6

23march said:


> here is my wish list of PN future aviation fleet.
> 
> or PAF/PN Gripen NG
> 
> 
> or PN J-11 sea flanker
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PN JF-17
> 
> 
> PN P-3C/ P-3C AEW
> 
> 
> PN Saab-2000 MAP
> 
> 
> PN/ PAF Saab-2000 Erieye
> 
> 
> ?PN P-8 ex-PIA 737?



Yep they are nice and I will add the Tu-22 Backfire in its arsenal but I'm totally against it. Rather see Pakistan spend trillons of Dollars on new military Items that will be half buillt or come too late or both, Pakistan should or MUST builds its own equipment. Thats how The US did it, Thats How French did it, The Russians China, British, Germany all made there own weapons
and now are controlling the world.

WE can do it we have seen this in the past and inshallah we will have capaible Navy in future. Inshallah Pakistan Navy will DEFEND its Land and Muslims alike from the Pacific, Atlanic, or anywhere in the world.

PS
However I'm quite worried about Obama. May Allah protcet Muslims around the world.


----------



## TOPGUN

That dude Obama is bad news for us all iam going tomm to vote for macan!! lol


----------



## Nishan_101

23march said:


> Currently the PN Aviation Force consists of:
> 
> 3 Westland Lynx - anti-ship/anti-submarine/transport helicopters
> 6 Westland Sea King Mk45 - transport helicopters
> *18 Harbin Z-9EC - helicopters *
> 8 Aérospatiale SA-319B Alouette III - transport/anti-ship helicopters
> 4 Lockheed P-3C Orion - maritime surveillance/anti-submarine warfare aircraft/airborne early warning (6 more to be delivered)
> 5 Fokker F27-200 Friendship - maritime surveillance aircraft
> 2-3 Breguet Atlantique I - maritime surveillance/anti-submarine warfare aircraft
> *12+ Dassault Mirage V* - anti-ship fighter aircraft (operated by the Pakistan Air Force)
> 
> The only effective way to defend a mammoth Indian navy is to modernize our navy aviation to 21st standard aviation. 12 odd 60s era Mirages and 4 P-3 will have little impact to IN Navy? Currently PN has a plan to induct one new fighter sqd. the question is, is it enough? and what type is it goanna be?
> 
> Rafale M
> Su-34
> JF-17



I was also thinkin about it :
Z-9EC bought 2 replace SEAKING the intial order is for 6 of them.
18-20:Z-9EC (may be this is the order i wish it comes true)
8-9:Aérospatiale SA-319B Alouette III - transport/anti-ship helicopters & 3 Westland Lynx - anti-ship/anti-submarine/transport helicopters (*must b replaced according 2 time wit Z-9EC) *5 Fokker F27-200 Friendship - maritime surveillance aircraft 
2-3 Breguet Atlantique I - maritime surveillance/anti-submarine warfare aircraft (* are going 2 b replaced by 6 P-3C coming may b next year as BUS goes with another 3-5 P-3C based Hawkeye-2000 AEW&C)*
12+ Dassault Mirage V[/B] - anti-ship fighter aircraft (operated by the Pakistan Air Force) 
(There is a comitment of 1 SQAD but in my opinion it will be atleast 2 in 2015 with latest set of PAF-French avionico)
SO DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT N SLEEP WELL THROUGH NIGT COZ INDUCTION IS THERE HAHAHAHAHA


----------



## nabeel190

when is pakistan gonna have a carier...????


----------



## TOPGUN

nabeel190 said:


> when is pakistan gonna have a carier



I really dont think any time soon Nabeel there is no need for it nor can we afford the funds to run it maybe in the far future who knows how the world and region change and specially how will PAK change . Second i think we need to stick with the plan on wat we can afford these silly wish lists dont make any sense like i said before and say again PN is more interested in taking care of its surface fleet first and its subs anyhow wish them all the best GOD bless Pakistan!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JK!

Pakistan is going to have a credible deterrance ability soon with the induction of Turkish Patrol boats, Chinese Frigates, German submarines (not sure on this one) and American maritime patrol aircraft.

For a small navy thats alot of good kit coming in over the next few years giving a solid foundation to build upon.


----------



## Always Neutral

JK! said:


> Pakistan is going to have a credible deterrance ability soon with the induction of Turkish Patrol boats, Chinese Frigates, German submarines (not sure on this one) and American maritime patrol aircraft.
> 
> For a small navy thats alot of good kit coming in over the next few years giving a solid foundation to build upon.



Are these plans still on given the devaluation of the Pak Rupees and IMF Constraints ?

Regards


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Always Neutral said:


> Are these plans still on given the devaluation of the Pak Rupees and IMF Constraints ?
> 
> Regards



seriously what is making your retarded ego say that? IMF has got nothing to do with military! PAkistan military has its own defense revenue from export. by 2010 it could be well over 500 million dollars!


----------



## Always Neutral

23march said:


> seriously what is making your retarded ego say that? IMF has got nothing to do with military! PAkistan military has its own defense revenue from export. by 2010 it could be well over 500 million dollars!



I guess u like the word retarded as it makes you feel good. Since you have superior intelligence please explain the below. 

Regards

BBC NEWS | World | South Asia | Pakistan 'needs IMF loans soon'

*Meanwhile the Pakistani army has said it has halted the construction of a new multi-million dollar headquarters in Islamabad because of the economic turmoil. 

A military spokesman said that army chief, Gen Ashfaq Kiyani, has decided to suspend construction of a $210 million new headquarters which would have housed all three military services*


----------



## Nishan_101

I was also thinkin about it :
Z-9EC bought 2 replace SEAKING the intial order is for 6 of them.
18-20:Z-9EC (may be this is the order i wish it comes true)
8-9:A&#233;rospatiale SA-319B Alouette III - transport/anti-ship helicopters & 3 Westland Lynx - anti-ship/anti-submarine/transport helicopters (must b replaced according 2 time wit Z-9EC) 5 Fokker F27-200 Friendship - maritime surveillance aircraft 
2-3 Breguet Atlantique I - maritime surveillance/anti-submarine warfare aircraft ( are going 2 b replaced by 6 P-3C coming may b next year as BUS goes with another 3-5 P-3C based Hawkeye-2000 AEW&C)
12+ Dassault Mirage V[/b] - anti-ship fighter aircraft (operated by the Pakistan Air Force) 
(There is a comitment of 1 SQAD but in my opinion it will be atleast 2 in 2015 with latest set of PAF-French avionico)
SO DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT N SLEEP WELL THROUGH NIGT COZ INDUCTION IS THERE HAHAHAHAHA


----------



## lindsyebanks

entry removed by Lindsy


----------



## lindsyebanks

Nishan_101 said:


> I was also thinkin about it :
> Z-9EC bought 2 replace SEAKING the intial order is for 6 of them.
> 18-20:Z-9EC (may be this is the order i wish it comes true)
> 8-9:A&#233;rospatiale SA-319B Alouette III - transport/anti-ship helicopters & 3 Westland Lynx - anti-ship/anti-submarine/transport helicopters (must b replaced according 2 time wit Z-9EC) 5 Fokker F27-200 Friendship - maritime surveillance aircraft
> 2-3 Breguet Atlantique I - maritime surveillance/anti-submarine warfare aircraft ( are going 2 b replaced by 6 P-3C coming may b next year as BUS goes with another 3-5 P-3C based Hawkeye-2000 AEW&C)
> 12+ Dassault Mirage V[/b] - anti-ship fighter aircraft (operated by the Pakistan Air Force)
> (There is a comitment of 1 SQAD but in my opinion it will be atleast 2 in 2015 with latest set of PAF-French avionico)
> SO DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT N SLEEP WELL THROUGH NIGT COZ INDUCTION IS THERE HAHAHAHAHA




I may have mis-interpreted the comment made in your post when you said, ''Z-9C bought 2 replace Seaking''. So apologies in advance of that is the case.

Z-9C helos are not being bought by PN to replace Sea Kings. Z-9 will be for ship based use from the F-22PFFG's, although they can be accomodated by Type-21 FFG's as well. Z-9C has limited flying duration as well as limited operational ability when compared to the Sea King. Whilst the latter is an older design it has the ability to be upgraded eg PN has fitted some of its aircraft with FLIR, dual ASW and ASuV roles as well as limited transportation 8-10 troops. The only helos which can be considered a like for like Sea King replacement are the Merlin or SeaHawk. Such helos have the ability to operate autonomously from the parent ship and act as an OTH (Over The Horizon) asset. Helo's such as the Z-9C and even the Lynx are able to offer many of these functions albeight not the complete mission package.

In the long term, it is likely that PN will continue using its fleet pf 14 Alouette helo's whilst looking for a larger Sea King replacement and this will be dictated by the budgetry constraints mnore than anything else. Any future induction of ship-based helo's such as the Z-9C will be dictated by the induction of additional surface vessels in the ensuing decade. Until then the Alouette fleet will soldier on in its current capacity of SAR, Liason, Intel, ASuV, SSGN/naval fire support.

222 Sqn comprising the 3 Lynx helo's has not seen service for many years now. The Lynx were flown for only 4 years after being inducted in 1995/96. They have been withdrawn from service and their are no plans to return them to service either. Given their current status, the airframes will require a major overhaul to return them to flying condition.


----------



## Nishan_101

lindsyebanks said:


> I may have mis-interpreted the comment made in your post when you said, ''Z-9C bought 2 replace Seaking''. So apologies in advance of that is the case.
> 
> Z-9C helos are not being bought by PN to replace Sea Kings. Z-9 will be for ship based use from the F-22PFFG's, although they can be accomodated by Type-21 FFG's as well. Z-9C has limited flying duration as well as limited operational ability when compared to the Sea King. Whilst the latter is an older design it has the ability to be upgraded eg PN has fitted some of its aircraft with FLIR, dual ASW and ASuV roles as well as limited transportation 8-10 troops. The only helos which can be considered a like for like Sea King replacement are the Merlin or SeaHawk. Such helos have the ability to operate autonomously from the parent ship and act as an OTH (Over The Horizon) asset. Helo's such as the Z-9C and even the Lynx are able to offer many of these functions albeight not the complete mission package.
> 
> In the long term, it is likely that PN will continue using its fleet pf 14 Alouette helo's whilst looking for a larger Sea King replacement and this will be dictated by the budgetry constraints mnore than anything else. Any future induction of ship-based helo's such as the Z-9C will be dictated by the induction of additional surface vessels in the ensuing decade. Until then the Alouette fleet will soldier on in its current capacity of SAR, Liason, Intel, ASuV, SSGN/naval fire support.
> 
> 222 Sqn comprising the 3 Lynx helo's has not seen service for many years now. The Lynx were flown for only 4 years after being inducted in 1995/96. They have been withdrawn from service and their are no plans to return them to service either. Given their current status, the airframes will require a major overhaul to return them to flying condition.



Salam, thnx 4 tellin me i was thinking that they will have a whole fleet of it but after seeing the pic of NH-90 a min before and also EH-101's documentry on NAT-GEO i think that PN should only go for these kind of birds as a sigle fleet so this will save some money as well as provide greater availability of these systems and may be over-hualin.they should acquire atleast 20 till 2015 if funds r there (as FIA has done some remarkable investigation yesterday by capturing the fraud of $10 billion by K&K' money exchange co.). also they should look towards UAV-UCAV like nishan -101 for maritime 24/7 duties which would be cheaper.
I am sure that PN will have 2 sqad of JF-17's in 2015 with PAK-French avionics n people were sayin acquire some grippen or rafael-M for pn it is far better 2 have FC-20 for that role.


----------



## fatman17

*222 Sqn comprising the 3 Lynx helo's has not seen service for many years now. The Lynx were flown for only 4 years after being inducted in 1995/96. They have been withdrawn from service and their are no plans to return them to service either. Given their current status, the airframes will require a major overhaul to return them to flying condition.*

very surprising indeed! are u sure!


----------



## lindsyebanks

fatman17 said:


> *222 Sqn comprising the 3 Lynx helo's has not seen service for many years now. The Lynx were flown for only 4 years after being inducted in 1995/96. They have been withdrawn from service and their are no plans to return them to service either. Given their current status, the airframes will require a major overhaul to return them to flying condition.*
> 
> very surprising indeed! are u sure!



Yes fatman very sure and unfortunately true. One of the Lynx has been grounded permanently owing to an accident and although repairable, the cost quoted by Wesstland Helicopters has sealed its fate - at least for PN service. When the T-21 FFG's were acquired during 1994-1996 for a unit cost of £10million apiece, the Lynx were sold as part of the ships primary weapon system. Three of the T-21's are equipped with towed array sonars (TAS) for ASW ops, the remaining three were supposed to be equipped with the ship borne Lynx, the latter three thereby providing an effective ASuV capability. There is of course nothing to suggest that a TAS equipped T-21 cannot carry a Lynx as well. But you have to bear in mind that PN was restricted by budgetry constraints. All this was happening at a time when £60 million had been used to buy 6 T-21's. Another £60 million (in 1996-98) was spent on modernising them. £6 million was spent on acquiring the 3 Lynx helos, albeight without any ASuV armaments - no Sea Skua or Sea Eagle AShM. In fact only provision was for depth charges and torpodoes.

I dont really want to give my opinion as that would only open a debate about what us arm chair experts think might have happened versus should have happened. However I would rather state the facts as they are and let the readership draw their own conclusions. 

On a slightly different note however, it would make sense to assign 2-3 Alouettes to SSGN mission support as a temporary stop gap measure in the absence of a dedicated helo platform. This is my opinion and not a fact!!! As even MARCOS have their own organic air wing in the shape of 6 Sea King Mk 42C's.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## fatman17

^^u must be right but i work very close to PNS Mehran, and i can actually see all naval / airforce air assets landing and taking off on a daily basis. Sea Kings, Alouttes, F-27s, C-130s, P-3Cs an occassional C-5A and I am darn sure I have seen Lynx's albeit rarely. anyway i am not trying to prove anything.


----------



## lindsyebanks

C5's have flown into Mehran/Faisal on at least 4 occasions in the past two years in support of US SEALs who were in training with SSGN. SEALS brought their own equipment including surface craft by air and this was then transported by road to Dockyard. These flights were around the same time as Inspired Siren exercises. 

I am not one to be involved in personal opinions and will respect those of all members. However if you still feel that PN Lynx are flying even on are occasions, then feel free to drop an email to Westland Helicopters. They will be more than happy to confirm their grounded status. Afterall they are responsible for supplying life cycle components for their helo's worldwide including Pakistan, bearing in mind that PN (as with most Sea Kind and Lynx operators) is nowhere near self sufficient in maintaining its fleet without aquiring fresh supplies for spares and support. 

Do ensure that you send your email to Westland's PR dept to ensure a reply.


----------



## fatman17

lindsyebanks said:


> C5's have flown into Mehran/Faisal on at least 4 occasions in the past two years in support of US SEALs who were in training with SSGN. SEALS brought their own equipment including surface craft by air and this was then transported by road to Dockyard. These flights were around the same time as Inspired Siren exercises.
> 
> I am not one to be involved in personal opinions and will respect those of all members. However if you still feel that PN Lynx are flying even on are occasions, then feel free to drop an email to Westland Helicopters. They will be more than happy to confirm their grounded status. Afterall they are responsible for supplying life cycle components for their helo's worldwide including Pakistan, bearing in mind that PN (as with most Sea Kind and Lynx operators) is nowhere near self sufficient in maintaining its fleet without aquiring fresh supplies for spares and support.
> 
> Do ensure that you send your email to Westland's PR dept to ensure a reply.



my apologies if i offended you!


----------



## lindsyebanks

fatman17 said:


> my apologies if i offended you!




Hey, please. No apologies as no offence. Sorry if thats how it came across as it was never intended. All I meant to convey was that you'll be surprised as to how much information is readily available from manufacturers/suppliers if it is requested from them. They may not have the exact piece of information to hand, however they will generally try to do their best to assist. The only exception to the norm is if it is commercially sensitive. But with PN Sea King helos over 35years old and Lynx around 20years old there will be no problem in the manufacturer volunteering information.

So once again my apologies.  Its easy to inadvertantly convey the wrong impression especially on an online forum, which is why I generally keep my posts factual rather than opinionated unless I have direct experience of the subject matter.  But I do like to volunteer the source so that individuals may should they wish be able to verify information directly. 

Best regards and have a good weekend.

Lindsy

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Super Falcon

j7h would be great for navy china made it specially for its naval use and it carries deadliest antiship missile system and bombing system it is not always that naval fighter jets have to destroy enemy ship also some time they need to destroy enemy naval instalations jh 7 would be great for us atleast 50 to 70 would be graeat.


----------



## TOPGUN

We have talked about this before so many times regarding j7h but no ones wants to agree!


----------



## saladite

i think that if PN has a separate aircraft squadron that will be welcome for the PAF coz they wont have to worry abt the PN needs bcz they will be looking after their own 
.coz one reason y the german navy suffered immensely in WW2 bcz they were all too independent on the land air force and they were niot in the possesion of their own avviation wing .
the next question comes of equipping the squadron with which aircraft .in the current scenarion of economic dont even think of rafales or any other aircraft esspecilly procured for PN.in short term MIRAGE might be the answer and in the long term modified JF17 will definitely be the aswer


----------



## Super Falcon

jf 17 cannot carry heavy bombs to destroy ships it only harm a ship to 25 percent jh7 can carry powerfull paylods to destroy heavy destroyryers.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Super Falcon said:


> jf 17 cannot carry heavy bombs to destroy ships it only harm a ship to 25 percent jh7 can carry powerfull paylods to destroy heavy destroyryers.



thats bull**** 

Jh-7 is nothing more then a improved jaguar, with the capability to carry AShM. Naval Jf-17 variant will be different from the air force with naval warfare systems. and mind you, this is not WWII where you drop dumb bombs and torpedoes at point blank range to destroy ships! naval JF-17 will most probably be fitted with Exocet AShMs and maybe RAAD, no need for dumb bombs here..


----------



## TOPGUN

PC said:


> thats bull****
> 
> Jh-7 is nothing more then a improved jaguar, with the capability to carry AShM. Naval Jf-17 variant will be different from the air force with naval warfare systems. and mind you, this is not WWII where you drop dumb bombs and torpedoes at point blank range to destroy ships! naval JF-17 will most probably be fitted with Exocet AShMs and maybe RAAD, no need for dumb bombs here..



Well if that is the case then we are long ways away to see that version !!


----------



## nabeel190

TOPGUN said:


> I really dont think any time soon Nabeel there is no need for it nor can we afford the funds to run it maybe in the far future who knows how the world and region change and specially how will PAK change . Second i think we need to stick with the plan on wat we can afford these silly wish lists dont make any sense like i said before and say again PN is more interested in taking care of its surface fleet first and its subs anyhow wish them all the best GOD bless Pakistan!



thx so much for your reply i really appriciate u r right that we don't have enough funds..but u know every pakistani want to see their armed forces strong i know they r still strong without carier. lets hope for the best for pakistan and lets pray that pakistan could get itself out of great depression....


----------



## nabeel190

Growler said:


> Classic video of P-3C.
> avbkPLxyjnE[/media] - Lockheed P-3 Orion



nice video thx for posting.....


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

have we received the *new* P-3C already? (the ones with anti-ship missiles)


----------



## nomi007

i think we need 20 attack helicopters,like Apache or z-10.also built more destroyers.induct A-10 thunderbolt,j-10c or f-35c.
but specially need more submarines like u-214 or Chinese class,but all these try to get with TOT.


----------



## monitor

nomi007 said:


> i think we need 20 attack helicopters,like Apache or z-10.also built more destroyers.induct A-10 thunderbolt,j-10c or f-35c.
> but specially need more submarines like u-214 or Chinese class,but all these try to get with TOT.



apche is not for naval attack sister but z-10 may be i am not quite sure.
building destroyer ? how 
f-35c a rare possibility to get soon or even in 10 year. 
and yes you should get some sub like u-214 and chinese class which is enexpensive comparing western one .


----------



## Stealth

Improve JH7 with Westren Avo.... its good i think!


----------



## Penguin

Super Falcon said:


> jf 17 cannot carry heavy bombs to destroy ships it only harm a ship to 25 percent jh7 can carry powerfull paylods to destroy heavy destroyryers.



Let's see:



> _JF-17 can be armed with up to 3,629 kg (8,000 lb) of air-to-air and air-to-ground ordnance, as well as other equipment, mounted externally on the aircraft's seven hardpoints._ One hardpoint is located under the fuselage between the main landing gear, two are underneath each wing and one at each wing-tip. All 7 hardpoints communicate via a MIL-STD-1760 data-bus architecture with the Stores Management System, which is stated to be capable of integration with weaponry of any origin. Internal armament comprises one 23 mm GSh-23-2 twin-barrel cannon mounted under the port side air intake, which can be replaced with a 30 mm GSh-30-2 twin-barrel cannon.
> 
> A model of the JF-17, armed with six Chinese air-to-air missiles, on display at a defence exhibition. The larger missiles mounted inboard are medium range SD-10s, the four smaller ones being short range PL-5Es._The wing-tip hardpoints will normally be occupied by short range infra-red homing air-to-air missiles, while many combinations of various ordnance and equipment (including avionics such as targeting pods) can be carried on the under-wing and under-fuselage hardpoints._ _Under-wing hardpoints can be fitted with multiple ejector racks, allowing each hardpoint to carry two 500 lb (241 kg) unguided or laser-guided bombs (Mk.82 or GBU-12). _It is currently unknown if multiple ejector racks can be used for other ordnance such as beyond visual range air-to-air missiles. The under-fuselage and inboard under-wing hardpoints are plumbed, enabling them to carry droptanks of various sizes for extra fuel (see propulsion and fuel system).
> 
> Active radar homing beyond visual range (BVR) air-to-air missiles can be deployed once integrated with the on-board radar and data-link for mid-course updates. The Chinese PL-12/SD-10 is expected to be the aircraft's primary BVR air-to-air weapon, although this may change if radars of other origin are fitted. Short range infra-red homing missiles currently integrated include the Chinese PL-5E and PL-9C, as well as the AIM-9L. The PAF is also seeking to arm the JF-17 with a modern fifth generation close-combat missile such as the IRIS-T or A-darter. These will be integrated with the helmet mounted sights/display (HMS/D) as well as the radar for targeting.
> 
> Unguided air-to-ground weaponry includes rocket pods, _gravity bombs of various sizes _and anti-runway munitions such as the Matra Durandal. Precision-guided munitions (PGM) such as _laser-guided bombs and satellite-guided bombs_, as well as other guided weapons such as _anti-ship missiles _and anti-radiation missiles can also be deployed.


JF-17 Thunder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So 4 underwing hardpoints and each hardpoint can carry two 500 lb (241 kg) unguided or laser-guided bombs (Mk.82 or GBU-12) or an equivalent single load of some 482kg+. 
According http://cnair.top81.cn/J-10_J-11_FC-1.htm max weapon load is even 3,900kg

Consider also the following weights:
C-802 715 kg 
Exocet 670 kg 
AGM-84 Harpoon 519 kg
Mk.33 / GBU-16 Paveway II / GBU-32 JDAM 460 kg
AGM-65 Maverick air-to-ground tactical missile 211&#8211;300 kg
Mk. 82 / GBU-12 Paveway II / GBU-38 JDAM 230 kg

The GBU-12 PAVEWAY II laser-guided bomb is an American aerial bomb, based on the Mk 82 500-pound (227 kg) general-purpose bomb, but with the addition of a nose-mounted laser seeker and fins for guidance. The GBU-16 Paveway II has the same guidance unit is fitted to a Mk 83 1014lb (460 kg) bomb. Actual bomb weight varies between 985 lb (447 kg) and 1,030 lb (468 kg), depending on fuze options, high-drag retardation devices, and fin configuration. The same bomb is at the core of the GPS-guided GBU-32 JDAM, for which Pakistan is an export customer (F16)

Maverick is effective against a wide range of tactical targets, including armor, air defenses, ships, ground transportation, and fuel storage facilities. AGM-65F (infrared targeting) used by the U.S. Navy has an infrared guidance system optimized for ship tracking and a larger penetrating warhead than the shaped charge warhead used by the U.S. Marine Corps and the U.S. Air Force (300 pounds / 140 kilograms vs. 125 pounds / 57 kilograms). Pakistan is a Maverick operator (F16)

By comparison:

Mirage III: 4,000 kg (8,800 lb) of payload on five external hardpoints, including a variety of bombs, reconnaissance pods or Drop tanks; (Mirages managed to kill HMS Sheffield, HMS Coventry, Atlantic Conveyor and to damage USS Stark, all with the Exocet missile).

F-16C Block 30: 2&#215; wing-tip Air-to-air missile launch rails, 6&#215; under-wing & 3&#215; under-fuselage pylon stations holding up to 17,000 lb (7,700 kg) of payload 

JH-7 weapon loads increased by the addition of two more wing hardpoints and two hardpoints under the intake trunking for mission pods such as targetting pods in JH-7a.
Hardpoints: 9 in total (6&#215; under-wing, 2&#215; wing-tip, 1&#215; under-fuselage) with a capacity of 9,000 kg (19,842 lb) external fuel and ordnance.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PakSher

Pakistan needs a strong Navy with a strong submarine force and 8 fighter squadorns of fighter jets and supported by Z-10s, P3 Orion, E2C and Saab Awacs. Babur cruise missile batteries and 50 fast attack stealth missile crafts. Then we can guard the economic and martimine frontiers of Pakistan.


----------



## Penguin

PakSher said:


> Babur cruise missile batteries and 50 fast attack stealth missile crafts.



There really isn't a reason for the navy to have these. It would very much suffice to have a few SSKs with AIP that can fire nuclear tipped Babur, a part of a nuclear triad that serves as a national deterrent. The era of swarms of small craft is long over.


----------



## pakistantiger

no ned of 8 fighter squadrons just 4 squadrons for navy are becouse thier will be some squadrons of paf deployed in karachi to defende the city and the aerial frontiers and at least 20 to 30 attack heli copters and awacs i think rafale with j11b or rafale with jf-17 rafale for strike mission and other one is air superiorty mission or interceptor mission


----------



## Mercenary

Pakistan needs to acquire some lethal Anti-Ship Missiles. Such as the Sunburn Missile.

SS-N-22 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think we need to create a Naval Aviation Wing of 48 AirCraft. Some of our Mirage Fighters can be converted to this role. If they are equipped with advanced anti-ship missiles they can pretty much hug the coast of Pakistan and be guarded by anti-aircraft missile batteries such as Spada 2000 and then unleash their deadly anti-ship missiles which can devastate the Indian Navy.


----------



## Penguin

Mercenary said:


> Pakistan needs to acquire some lethal Anti-Ship Missiles. Such as the Sunburn Missile.
> 
> SS-N-22 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> I think we need to create a Naval Aviation Wing of 48 AirCraft. Some of our Mirage Fighters can be converted to this role. If they are equipped with advanced anti-ship missiles they can pretty much hug the coast of Pakistan and be guarded by anti-aircraft missile batteries such as Spada 2000 and then unleash their deadly anti-ship missiles which can devastate the Indian Navy.



Out to just what ... hit targets 200km, maybe 300km off-shore? A fat load of good that would do! Do you really thing IN is going to sit that close to shore and present itself as a floating bulls-eye? Remember that to block or strike at the Pakistani coast, they don't need to be very close to it at all. Consider:
* The Club-N family of missile adopted by IN on board its ships and subs includes the 3M-54E - anti-shipping variant with supersonic terminal speed and a range of 220 km, the subsoni 3M-54E1 anti-shipping variant with a range is of 300 km and the subsonic3M-14E inertial guidance land attack variantwith a range of 275-300 km. Further, it is believed by at least some analysts that an air launched variant will be developed to arm the long-range Tu-142s and Tu-22M3 bombers currently in service with the IN
* The Sea Harriers that IN currently opperates from its present carrier have a longer range. The SHAR FA2 variant has a combat radius of 540 nmi (620 mi, 1,000 km) and a ferry range of 1,740 nmi (2,000 mi, 3,600 km). The earlier FRS1 and Indian FRS51 are based on the GR.3, which like GR.1 and AV-8A have a combat radius of 418 km (260 mi) on strike mission _without_ drop tanks (hi-lo-hi) and a ferry range of range 1900 km (1200 mi) 
* In future, IN will fly Mig-29Ks from their new carriers. The combat radius of MiG-29K is 850 km (528 mi). Also consider that range can be increased to 3,000 kilometer (1,860 mi) with 3 underwing fuel drop tanks, that MiG-29K and MiG-29KUB are equipped with an in-flight refueling system, and that MiG-29K and MiG-29KUB can perform aerial refueling if they are furnished with UPAZ refueling unit. The MiG-29K, unlike the previous MiG-29, is designed so it can be equipped with an aerial refueling system (ARS) or "buddy store" for the refueling of other aircraft.
* The Brahmos missile, of which both anti-ship and land-attack versions are available, has a range of almost 300km, and can be submarine, ship/surface or air-launched. Aircraft such as the Mig-29K will be able to launch it.
* The Kh-35U variant of the Harpoon-like 130km 70nm Kh-35E Uran antiship missile (a.k.a. SS-N-25 'Switchblade') that IN operates from its ship can also be air-launched by e.g. Mig-29. A 250km land attack version is under development.

And, by the way, are the subsonic missiles Pakistan recently ordered for coastal defence suddenly useless?
C-602: Weight 1.24 ton, Length 6.1 meter, Diameter 0.54 meter, 
Warhead 300 kg. Missile has a max range in excess of 400 kilometres (250 mi), though for the export version, this is _reduced_ to _280_ kilometres (170 mi) to meet the international arms trade regulation (which limit the max range to below 300 kilometres or 190 mi).


----------



## Sanchez

The latest JH-7A is believed to be better in A2G and A2S missions than Su-30MKK. It will be a boost for PAF and PAN if inducted.

China has also bought Sunburn and Yakhont missiles. The indigenous YJ-1X is supersonic and uses the same blister as YJ-62, but it has never been revealed to the public.


----------



## Super Falcon

i think recently navy announced they will buy 7 subs


----------



## Stealth

like this


----------



## Sanchez

http://www.fyjs.cn/bbs/attachments/Type_jpg/27_5847_3902c06ec2a4e22.jpg

JH/7a may carry most of Chinese and Russian A2A, A2G and A2S weapons.


----------



## Penguin

Sanchez said:


> The latest JH-7A is believed to be better in A2G and A2S missions than Su-30MKK. It will be a boost for PAF and PAN if inducted.
> 
> China has also bought Sunburn and Yakhont missiles. The indigenous YJ-1X is supersonic and uses the same blister as YJ-62, but it has never been revealed to the public.



See: International Assessment and Strategy Center > Research > The Flanker Fleet -The PLA's 'Big Stick'



> KnAAPO Su-30MKK/MK2 Flanker G
> 
> China's acquisition of the Flanker B/C triggered a series of 'tit for tat' buys of Flanker variants across Asia. The most important of these was a complex import and coproduction deal with India, for the IAPO/Irkut Su-30MKI Flanker H, a derivative of the IAPO SU-30 Flanker F, but incorporating the N-011M phased array radar, thrust vectoring AL-31FP engines, digital flight controls, aerial refuelling probe, canard foreplanes, glass cockpit, and numerous other developmental features used in the Russian Air Force Su-27M/Su-35 Flanker E and Russian Navy Su-27K/Su-33 Flanker D.
> 
> In response to the Indian buy, _the PLA-AF ordered the unique Su-30MKK Flanker G variant_, acquiring 38 aircraft in 2001 and another 38 in 2003. Chinese sources claim three operational regiments are now equipped, assigned to the PLA-AF 3rd Division at Wuhu, Anhui, the 18th Division at Datuopu, Changsha, Hunan and the 29th Division at Quzhou, Zhejiang.
> 
> _The Flanker G is an analogue to the F-15E Strike Eagle, and is a derivative of the Su-30PU series of dual seat interceptors, adapted to the strike role._ The aircraft is structurally strengthened, has heavier undercarriage, an aerial refuelling probe, a color glass cockpit, and a radar and weapon system intended to deliver guided munitions, while retaining the full air to air capabilities of the Flanker B/C. Chinese sources claim some of these aircraft are plumbed for external fuel tanks and rated for a maximum takeoff weight of 85,000 lb.
> 
> Other than structural changes, _the principal distinction in the Su-30MKK is the weapon system. The newer N-001V series radar has extensive air to ground modes, and the digital fire control system has interfaces to support a range of guided weapons._ These include the Kh-59M/AS-18 Kazoo series, analogous to the US AGM-142 Have Nap, the Kh-31P/AS-17 Krypton ramjet anti-radiation missile, the KAB-500L and KAB-1500L laser guided bombs, analogous to the US Paveway series, the KAB-500Kr and KAB-1500Kr TV guided bombs, analogous to the US GBU-8 HOBOS, and the KAB-1500TK, analogous to the US GBU-15 electro-optical weapon. The Russians are currently testing the KAB-500S-E and KAB-1500S-E with satellite aided inertial guidance, analogous to the US JDAM series. The PLA-AF fleet is expected to be equipped with the Russian Sapsan-E FLIR/laser targeting pod, analogous to the AAQ-13 LANTIRN targeting pod used initially on the F-15E.
> 
> _The PLA-N Air Arm was evidently not satisfied with the domestically built JH-7 Flying Leopard strike fighter, and opted to expand its fleet by acquiring the Su-30MK2, a derivative of the Su-30MKK, with a rated maximum takeoff weight of 85,000 lb. The Su-30MK2 has an enhanced weapon system optimized for maritime strike_, built around the N-001VEP radar. The radar will target the supersonic Kh-31A variant, equipped with an active radar seeker for anti-shipping strike. A radar guided derivative of the Kh-59M, the Kh-59Mk, was also developed for the PLA-N Flanker G. Chinese sources claim that 36 Su-30MK2 aircraft were ordered, with deployment as yet undisclosed.
> 
> The Russians were reported to be developing a third PLA variant of the Su-30, the Su-30MK3. This subtype was to incorporate the 'Panda' upgrade package for the N-001 radar, including a signal processor upgrade based on COTS software and a Ts-100 processor, and the new Pero phased array. The Pero, developed by NIIP and Ryazan GRPZ, is a reflective passive phased array antenna, replacing the legacy cassegrain design. It is lighter than the legacy design, but offers similar beamsteering agility to the latest Western AESAs. There have been no disclosed orders to date, and some reports suggest this program is no longer funded.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sanchez

Penguin said:


> See: International Assessment and Strategy Center > Research > The Flanker Fleet -The PLA's 'Big Stick'



Lol, you use worthless article as your answer? What I said were comments from Chinese pilots who flew both Su-30MKK and JH-7A. JH-7A is the first platform to have full digital systems on flight as well as fire control in PLAAF. JH-7a can fly autopilot mode under 100 meters in land and on sea. Which Su-30 can do it? JH-7A is inferior in aerodynamics, payload and dog fight to Su-30MKK.

Original plan was to have 48 Su-30MKK2 and then large numbers of Su-30MKK3. But now you see that we only bought 24 MKK2. There're no more Chinese interests in complete Russian systems (only in sub systems).


----------



## Penguin

Sanchez said:


> Lol, you use worthless article as your answer? What I said were comments from Chinese pilots who flew both Su-30MKK and JH-7A.



Of course ;-) 



> it [jh-7] was rejected by PLAAF who is in favor of Su-30MKK and has become the first dedicated maritime attack aircraft for PLA Naval Aviation.
> ...
> Nonetheless, engineers at 603 Institute ... making various improvements on JH-7
> ...
> The result is the upgraded JH-7A ... , capable of delivering a variety of PGMs and stand-off missiles. Its export version is dubbed FBC-1 (Fighter/Bomber Export-1), which was unveiled at Zhuhai International Airshow in November 1998, but has yet to attract any foreign customers.
> ...
> The precision strike capability is believed to be a major requirement JH-7A has to meet in order to attract orders from PLAAF.


http://cnair.top81.cn/q-5_jh-7_h-6.htm



> Based on J-11B, this tandem-seat trainer/strike version has been speculated to be in the same class of Su-30MKK
> ...
> Besides PL-8 and PL-12 AAMs, it could also carry the same precision guided weapons being carried by JH-7A
> ...
> Compared to JH-7A, J-11BS is expected to have a more powerful radar, a greater weapon load and a longer range. Once in production, the aircraft could eventually replace the earlier Su-30MKK.


http://cnair.top81.cn/J-10_J-11_FC-1.htm


----------



## Sanchez

Penguin said:


> Of course ;-)
> 
> 
> Chinese Military Aviation | China Air Force
> 
> 
> Chinese Military Aviation | China Air Force



lol, whatever.


----------



## pakistantiger

jh-a for maritime strike duties better dan mirage-5


----------



## letsbefriends

Proud to be Pakistani said:


> What is IN Avaiation?
> 
> Some recked BAE Harriers i think only half a dozen are operational since they crashed 16.
> 
> MIG-29K, come on.... Its not a Super Jet by any means!



r u kiddin me..we have atleast 8 of sea harriers n abt mig 29 k's they r the most potent naval aircraft around asia..the capabilities include..ZHUK ME radar which can trck 10 targets in air and lock 4 at the same time.
its armaments include air to surface missiles like
kh25ml/mp
kh29t
kh31b/31g
unguided rockets
laser guided bombs like KAB 500BR

KH31P is used as a passive radar seeker anti radiation missile
kh 35 and kh 31a r used as anti ship missile..
anti air missile includes
R 27,R 73AND R77

WE HAVE 45 OF THOSE ON ORDER AND INDIAN NAVY HAS ISSUED A RFP FOR 40 MORE FIGHTER AIRCRAFT WITH AN OPTION OF UPTO 20 MORE TO FOLLOWING
1)RAFALE
2)JSF
3)GRIPEN(CARRIER VERSION)
4)f 18..

these planes can be seen around 2020 in the indian navy

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

letsbefriends said:


> r u kiddin me..we have atleast 8 of sea harriers n abt mig 29 k's they r the most potent naval aircraft around asia..the capabilities include..ZHUK ME radar which can trck 10 targets in air and lock 4 at the same time.
> its armaments include air to surface missiles like
> kh25ml/mp
> kh29t
> kh31b/31g
> unguided rockets
> laser guided bombs like KAB 500BR
> 
> KH31P is used as a passive radar seeker anti radiation missile
> kh 35 and kh 31a r used as anti ship missile..
> anti air missile includes
> R 27,R 73AND R77
> 
> WE HAVE 45 OF THOSE ON ORDER AND INDIAN NAVY HAS ISSUED A RFP FOR 40 MORE FIGHTER AIRCRAFT WITH AN OPTION OF UPTO 20 MORE TO FOLLOWING
> 1)RAFALE
> 2)JSF
> 3)GRIPEN(CARRIER VERSION)
> 4)f 18..
> 
> these planes can be seen around 2020 in the indian navy





7 Mirage vs 90 Indian crafts and india is ordering more  over kill nahi ?


----------



## letsbefriends

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> 7 Mirage vs 90 Indian crafts and india is ordering more  over kill nahi ?



buddy not against any country specifically...


----------



## Aamir Hussain

letsbefriends said:


> buddy not against any country specifically...



Let us try to figure out who is out to get India:

1. Pakistan -- already bulk of ground forces stationed against Pakistan and same is the case with the air force
2. China -- Bulk of the air force is not on the Chinese border! Similarly armored formations are not engaged there as the border is not tank able country.
3. Nepal -- !!!!!!!
4. Bhutan -- !!!!
5. Bangladesh -- Light Infantry formations and very little air force elements are committed to any kind of defense on the those borders.
6. Burma -- !!!!!
7. Siri Lanka -- Yeah the naval buildup is for ultimate endgame battle with Siri Lanka.

Let us stop kidding ourselves -- Indian State has hegemonic designs in the area and all else is BS/window dressing. 

With neighbors like the above five -- you do not need SU's or anything close to that. Since today, India and for that matter Russia or US do not have a hope to get away with a limited military victory against China in any conflict -- I do not think India is also under no illusion to think otherwise. Therefore, the equation balances out to the logical conclusion -- draw Pakistan into an arms race by leveraging ones own economic strength (This was done by the Reagan Admin against the Soviets -- Star Wars etc.) and finish off the country by an economic implosion.

That is why all the "Over kill" in all areas of defense buildup.

The trick for us would be not to get sucked in to this race and remain in the minimum credible defense posture. Therefore, no Aircraft Carriers, no Grippens or Raphael's or Leapord II's but more affordable, sustainable, effective, localized (progressively manufactured in Pakistan) hardware with smaller mobile structuring on all deployed manpower and hardware.

My two cents!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Penguin

Sanchez said:


> lol, whatever.



versus unsubstatiated hearsay (my third cousin's sister's boyfriend who is in the airforce)


----------



## Aamir Hussain

It would not be wise to keep on inducting different platforms for various roles (JH-7 for Naval Attack etc). Remember, India suffered from this problem all its operational life -- Soviet, French, British a/c and at one point had over 10 +different platforms from transport to fighter a/c -- it was an operational nightmare for the air force -- not counting helos.

Pakistan on the other hand in 1965 used just five platforms including transport, trainer a/c. In 71' there were the Sabers, Mirages ( just coming into operational units), and the Mig 19. 

It would be advisable for the Air Force to keep the number of platforms down to bare minimum for ease of crew training, maintenance, depot support, spare inventory etc. 

A better alternative would be a souped up JF-17 or using the F-16 as the naval strike element.

The force should be structured around F-16, JF-17, J-10 and various other a/c on their way out by 2013.


----------



## letsbefriends

Aamir Hussain said:


> Let us try to figure out who is out to get India:
> 
> 1. Pakistan -- already bulk of ground forces stationed against Pakistan and same is the case with the air force
> 2. China -- Bulk of the air force is not on the Chinese border! Similarly armored formations are not engaged there as the border is not tank able country.
> 3. Nepal -- !!!!!!!
> 4. Bhutan -- !!!!
> 5. Bangladesh -- Light Infantry formations and very little air force elements are committed to any kind of defense on the those borders.
> 6. Burma -- !!!!!
> 7. Siri Lanka -- Yeah the naval buildup is for ultimate endgame battle with Siri Lanka.
> 
> Let us stop kidding ourselves -- Indian State has hegemonic designs in the area and all else is BS/window dressing.
> 
> With neighbors like the above five -- you do not need SU's or anything close to that. Since today, India and for that matter Russia or US do not have a hope to get away with a limited military victory against China in any conflict -- I do not think India is also under no illusion to think otherwise. Therefore, the equation balances out to the logical conclusion -- draw Pakistan into an arms race by leveraging ones own economic strength (This was done by the Reagan Admin against the Soviets -- Star Wars etc.) and finish off the country by an economic implosion.
> 
> That is why all the "Over kill" in all areas of defense buildup.
> 
> The trick for us would be not to get sucked in to this race and remain in the minimum credible defense posture. Therefore, no Aircraft Carriers, no Grippens or Raphael's or Leapord II's but more affordable, sustainable, effective, localized (progressively manufactured in Pakistan) hardware with smaller mobile structuring on all deployed manpower and hardware.
> 
> My two cents!!!



but u can also see that the modernisation drive has started recently..indian army didnt purchased any artillery guns since the bofors scam in 1988 also india only purchased the t-90 when pakistan purchased t-80..apart from sukhoi's all our aircraft needs immediate upradation,so we r doing it and also looking at the threat perception we have the mighty china on our NE who has bigger air force,army and navy then us,so we r buildig ourselves up to the minimum credible defence level..if we sit down idle and hope dat US or russia will come to our aid it will be nothing less than suicidal...so we have to take the initiative now.slowly and steadily our babus r getting aware of the situation and doing a bit to change it


----------



## Aamir Hussain

letsbefriends said:


> but u can also see that the modernisation drive has started recently..indian army didnt purchased any artillery guns since the bofors scam in 1988 also india only purchased the t-90 when pakistan purchased t-80..apart from sukhoi's all our aircraft needs immediate upradation,so we r doing it and also looking at the threat perception we have the mighty china on our NE who has bigger air force,army and navy then us,so we r buildig ourselves up to the minimum credible defence level..if we sit down idle and hope dat US or russia will come to our aid it will be nothing less than suicidal...so we have to take the initiative now.slowly and steadily our babus r getting aware of the situation and doing a bit to change it



We bought the T-80UD's since you had T-72 against our T-59's! See how silly it sounds?

Do you really think that China would want to take over 400 million people who live below the poverty line? They have their own problems to solve. 

Do you think that any Indian or Chinese leader how imbecile they might become (for arguments sake) would want to go to war when both countries have nuclear weapons?

Who are you kidding!!! The sheer number of your armed forces, with all their obsolete hardware, is enough for five of your neighbors.

India today is going into an overkill mode in its weapons acquisition -- arming itself to teeth to eventually fight someone else's war! Spending India's hard earned money to buy western hardware to fight future natural allies is crass stupidity. But when one is on a crest of a rising wave -- stupidity just happens!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## nakodo

Aamir Hussain said:


> arming itself to teeth to eventually fight someone else's war



Is the current war in the west that Pakistan is engaged in considered to be Pakistan's war? '65,'71.'99 were all Pakistan's wars in the sense that Pakistan initiated them.


----------



## letsbefriends

Aamir Hussain said:


> We bought the T-80UD's since you had T-72 against our T-59's! See how silly it sounds?
> 
> Do you really think that China would want to take over 400 million people who live below the poverty line? They have their own problems to solve.
> 
> Do you think that any Indian or Chinese leader how imbecile they might become (for arguments sake) would want to go to war when both countries have nuclear weapons?
> 
> Who are you kidding!!! The sheer number of your armed forces, with all their obsolete hardware, is enough for five of your neighbors.
> 
> India today is going into an overkill mode in its weapons acquisition -- arming itself to teeth to eventually fight someone else's war! Spending India's hard earned money to buy western hardware to fight future natural allies is crass stupidity. But when one is on a crest of a rising wave -- stupidity just happens!



r u kiddin me..we had nuclear weapons when kargil happened..so jst havin nuclear weapons u cannot say u wont have to fight a war,ya the obsolete hardware needs to be modernised,do u have a problem with dat???fighting someone's else war is not into consideration,we r not a proxy state,may be u look at ur words carefully.its pakistan who is fighting someone else's war


----------



## niaz

Why do all discussions end up being India versus Pakistan? India is no doubt our main threat but our most recent war; war on terror, is not against India. To have a meaning discussion on the requirements of Pakistan Navy; let us start with the question "What is PN required to do?"

Answer to this is pretty straight forward: Main task of Pakistan Navy is to keep sea lanes open during hostilities so that essential supplies to the country can get thru

Second question:

What is the threat perception? India is the obvious answer. But what about USA, Iran or suicide bombers getting thru and escaping via sea route after performing their dastardly deeds? Possible money and material aid to Baluch insurgents and to TTP via sea route cannot be ruled out either.

Third question:

What is our wish list to counter any possible threat from the sea borne hostile forces?

Final question:

What can we really afford given our meager financial resources?

Once we thrash these points out, we would be able to reach meaningful conclusions regarding the future build up of Pakistan Navy including Naval Aviation.


----------



## satishkumarcsc

More frigates, more subs, more FACs and missile boats. For the Air wing...a squadron of J 11 and an dedicated AWACS and some grabbing of mirages from the AF equipped with AShM. C'mon your navy is poverty stricken..infuse some funds and it will be an awesome navy.

Paul Van Riper is awesome...


----------



## Aamir Hussain

nakodo said:


> Is the current war in the west that Pakistan is engaged in considered to be Pakistan's war? '65,'71.'99 were all Pakistan's wars in the sense that Pakistan initiated them.



My friend, are you willing to go the same route we went? -- Some ones else's war was turned into our war???? Or is it because we did it so it has to be done by you all as well!

Someone else's bogey is very soon going to be turned into your headache if you continue on this path of self destruction. And BTW you are going to pay for this whole shebang out of your noses! At least we are getting paid for this - India the great can afford to fund this adventure and the honeymoon out of its own pocket. 

You hard earned money is better spent on looking after the 400M below poverty line Indians. I am sure they would appreciate it more than Uncle Sam.

Honestly, you guys should have stuck to the Ruskies - you will learn the hard way the "Way of the West!"


----------



## nakodo

Aamir Hussain said:


> Some ones else's war was turned into our war????



But if you continue fighting WoT as some1 else's war then victory will be difficult.



> Someone else's bogey is very soon going to be turned into your headache if you continue on this path of self destruction. And BTW you are going to pay for this whole shebang out of your noses! At least we are getting paid for this - India the great can afford to fund this adventure and the honeymoon out of its own pocket.



what is being referred to here? What path?



> You hard earned money is better spent on looking after the 400M below poverty line Indians. I am sure they would appreciate it more than Uncle Sam.



Really!! Do they alleviate poverty in Pakistan by doling out wads of cash? There is nothing the Govt can do for the poor unless the poor help themselves and it is starting to happen. Any number of rags to riches success stories in the Indian dream.



> Honestly, you guys should have stuck to the Ruskies - you will learn the hard way the "Way of the West!"


----------



## zulfiqar74

Pakistan being a defensive country does not require an aircraft carrier to support its navy its a waste of money. Although it does need to expand its marines unit from 2000 to atleast 5000 men, providing them training by the SSGN. PN should change its strategy to aquiring greater number of malgiam type corvette and 1000 ton missile boats. 

I do believe they should have their own fighter wing of jets to provide air support to its ships at sea. We have 2 main bases plus malir base as well in khi, malir and Masroor bases are huge, it can be extanded a bit, an a naval wing could be constructed, which will not cost at all. Cadets pilots/ engineers ground staff will apply to join navy but all their training will be carried out at PAF training installations as per normal, after training they will pass out as naval airman etc etc from Risalpur. just like the SSGN. 
PN could use more mirages they are using some right now but the number is 12 jets or so i read some where. this should be raised to at least 60 jets. This will basically take the load of the PAF, and navy will have air superiority in the arabian sea.....


----------



## jagjitnatt

zulfiqar74 said:


> Pakistan being a *defensive *country


I doubt this claim after kargil, 1948 and 1965


zulfiqar74 said:


> *does not require* an aircraft carrier to support its navy its a waste of money.



Pak does require an aircraft carrier but going in for one right now is not an option considering the economic scenario. 

India's naval power is increasing day by day and PN needs something to counter the NLCA, and Mig29K. Soon we will have a second carrier and in next ten years two more, making the count to three after retiring our current carrier.

Right now PN is in a lot of problem. It does not have a single destroyer, let alone an AC. It needs to redevelop itself soon. I miracle like JF-17 would help a lot. I believe the next 15-20 years would be crucial. You can make or break the navy in these years.

China would be willing to sell you some of its destroyers and in future an AC. You should go in for those. Also try some second hand destroyers for the near term.

Pakistan's trade is dependent solely on ports and in case of a war, logistical support would be cut off completely if PN fails to secure the ports. You need to get the navy some toys and soon.

Good Luck

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aamir Hussain

Would beg to differ from Jagjitnatt on the A/c thing. The requirement for PN's subsurface, surface and air fleet is based upon possible threats that it will have to face in case of war. He has rightly pointed out that one of them is maritime blockade of our ports. The others can be interception/inspection of cargo vessels, overall sea denial, possible naval bombardment of major ports, both by A/craft and missile. Launch of commando type raids to take out our main sea surveillance radar near Karachi. etc.

What would India use to achieve this in terms of Naval Assets? In my opinion the following:

Air carrier group for sea denial, launching attacks on Port facilities (Naval SU's/Sea Harrier), Naval blockade in conjunction with its submarines etc. 

The inspection/interception of vessels can be done by both submarines and frigates/corvettes.

Hunter/killer patrols by submarines.

What would we need to counter this if we deploy on a purely defensive posture. 

Our mission, in my mind, would be primarily hinged around sea denial, and escort of merchant ships/keeping the sea lanes open.

To do this we would need the following:

1. Early Warning Patrol/Maritime Recon Aircraft (This can be done through the P3c Orion -- the need is to enhance the number of planes to atleas 15)

2. Defensive line of patrol submarines for hunter killer role against surface combatants and against other hunter killer submarines. (We have the A90B's -- we need longer range submarines with more on station endurance &#8211; a total of at least 12) 

3. Interdiction Standoff Strike at far ranges (both P3C Orion&#8217;s and Extended range CFT equipped or air refueled F-16 can perform this role with a range of 200 miles -- one-way range -- for f-16 c/d) We need to invest in the J-10 and its naval version to supplement and release the f-16 for Air superiority duties ASAP.

4. Patrolling of the sea lanes/trade routes should be done by Frigates (at least 14 to 16. Half of them ASW and the other half AShM equipped with short range anti missile defense weapons i.e. Rolling Airframe or similar and Phalanx etc.) This force can be supplemented by the proper use of Shipboard helos which will enhance the patrol range of these frigates and have far off ASW and second strike AShM capability.

It would also be advisable to use near shore sea lanes for the merchant vessels during the time of conflict to ensure availability of air cover for the merchant men and the escort vessel. 

5. The Air threat from the carrier group should be tackled by the F-16 while conducting the sea denial patrols. Or the F-16 can provide the cover for the P3C to launch its Harpoons against the carriers/carrier group.

6. The near shore air cover of 100 to 150 miles can be provided by the Mirage Interdiction Squadron(s) at least two-- to be replaced by JF-17 with air refueling capability to ensure higher loiter time on target.

7. The second tier or defensive layer should be formed by Fast Missile boats/corvettes that currently PN lacks. We must have atleas 20 of these vessels. 


All of the above needs to be tackled with improvements in the following area:

1. Development of Gawader as a "Real" Alternative port.
2. Buildup of Pak Marines as a strong quick reaction force of brigade level at least with its own organic helo support, ICMAV's, updated man pads SAM's and light artillery (Mechanized).
3. Development of Surveillance satellites. The game would be to get the first shot on the Carrier group.
4. Enhancement in strategic stocks to atleas 45 days. 
5. Development of sub launched cruise missile.

The above is bare minimum. The real gap is the hunt for the hunter /killer sub groups of India as all our assets would be deployed to either hunt for surface vessels or deal with their defensive screens or escort of merchant vessels. Ideally, the surface fleet should have at least two hunter/killer ASW groups and enhanced number of submarines beyond the 12 or buy more Maritime Surveillance and ASW aircraft (This is the most cost effective option.) 

The weak link in our naval doctrine, today, is the net centric capability or lack of it to gather process and assimilate all information bits to deploy a comprehensive flexible response to all types of threat dynamics. Remember, by the very nature of Naval warfare, launching a response will have an inherent lag time. Therefore, the need for &#8220;EYES & EARS&#8221;&#8212;AWACS????? 

Why I am writing what I am writing??? Lessons based upon the writing on 71' (When I saw the naval blockade with my own eyes and the air raids by Indian A/c on our port facilities etc.) conflict, the Falklands war, and the overall Soviet and US doctrine on denial and use of Carrier groups during the height of Cold War. The US was really worried about the Soviet land based bombers and submarine launched cruise missiles.

My spin &#8211; cheers!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## zulfiqar74

i agree with amir


----------



## zulfiqar74

What should be PN combat vessels inventory......


----------



## Aamir Hussain

In my opinion:

8 OHP's
4 F22P's
4 Chinese F54
20 Fast Missile Attack Crafts (Most probably Turkish with Harpoons)
3 Fleet Replenishment Ships
8 Mine Hunters

The Type 21's can be retired in tranches of three once the first three OHP are delivered and assimilated in to the fleet.

3 A 90B Subs All retorfitted with MESMA
3 Further A90B all with MESMA (To be built in Pakistan while we wait for "Things" to happen) This is easier said than done -- lots of negotiations -- it would be wiser to peg down the Marlin deal now.
2 A70's with sensor upgrades -- relegated to inshore duties with requirment for shallower divinig depths.

The Marlin deal needs to be pegged down quickly. There is a serious gap in our undersea capability and one does not see the light at the end of the tunnel at this point in time.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Wat about Milgem corvette?
And tht FT-2000?
And our 10 plus PC-3 orions with hawkeyes systems?


----------



## Aamir Hussain

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> Wat about Milgem corvette?
> And tht FT-2000?
> And our 10 plus PC-3 orions with hawkeyes systems?



My friend you are right. However the question was about vessels.

In my opinion we should have at least 15 orions to mount a round the clock surveillance during times of conflict. We are thankfully getting close to this number very soon. This number needs to be backed up by AEW aircrafts.

As far as the Turkish platforms are concerned, they are yet to be proven. It is one thing to build major surface vessels -- it is altogether a different thing to properly equip them and get the best out of them during times of conflict and under increasingly hostile environments.

Furthermore, I suppose that most of the critical components of the frigates would be western and would require clearance from the OEM country. This would bring a new dimension to the deal.

The construction and systems integration of a new concept platform will take a number of years.


----------



## T-Rex

Aamir Hussain said:


> In my opinion:
> 
> 8 OHP's
> 4 F22P's
> 4 Chinese F54
> 20 Fast Missile Attack Crafts (Most probably Turkish with Harpoons)
> 3 Fleet Replenishment Ships
> 8 Mine Hunters
> 
> The Type 21's can be retired in tranches of three once the first three OHP are delivered and assimilated in to the fleet.
> 
> 3 A 90B Subs All retorfitted with MESMA
> 3 Further A90B all with MESMA (To be built in Pakistan while we wait for "Things" to happen) This is easier said than done -- lots of negotiations -- it would be wiser to peg down the Marlin deal now.
> 2 A70's with sensor upgrades -- relegated to inshore duties with requirment for shallower divinig depths.
> 
> The Marlin deal needs to be pegged down quickly. There is a serious gap in our undersea capability and one does not see the light at the end of the tunnel at this point in time.



What PN needs is three squadrons of naval figher aircraft to protect the naval assets from any aerial attack. These squadrons can be comprised of the naval version of the JF-17s. An airbase should be allocated for PN.


----------



## Aamir Hussain

T-Rex said:


> What PN needs is three squadrons of naval figher aircraft to protect the naval assets from any aerial attack. These squadrons can be comprised of the naval version of the JF-17s. An airbase should be allocated for PN.




T-Rex; There is already one dedicated maritime strike element for PN based out of Masroor Airbase in Karachi.

Once enough F-16 or JF-17 are available, the number of maritime strike elements would be increased. This is a logical presumption. Coupled with Air-refueling capability, their operating ranges can than be enhanced. 

Furthermore, some detachments would also be housed at Ormara/Gawader/Pasni etc. for wartime duties.

In my opinion there is no need for a dedicated Airbase for PN -- it just eats up into their budget -- Air force facilities (Two airbase in Karachi and other bases being upgraded on the Makran coastline to handle nighttime landings and fighter aircraft are enough) are more than adequate for the time being.


----------



## Super Falcon

i personallly think pn must have atleast 50 jets dedicated to naval air war becoz we have to defend from gawadar tooo and indian aircraft carrier may intrude and they will so we have reliable jets to intersept them mirages, JF 17 can do the job both air to air and air to naval roles but we neeed 50 + jets for navy and seprate air defence systems for naval bases in navy command


----------



## TheWarriorIndian

go for J-11 guys, Thats a good fighter aircraft


----------



## Aamir Hussain

TheWarriorIndian said:


> go for J-11 guys, Thats a good fighter aircraft



Yes and add to further integration, training, maintenance, spare/inventory, nightmares!!!!! PAF has its hands full trying its best to absorb the JF-17 & Block 50/52's, SAAB Erieye, The IL76 etc. In fact there is talk of delaying the acquisition of J-10 to give time for complete integration of the existing/in-the-pipline platforms.

J-11 will just add to more confusion. No thanks, at this point in time let us stick to what we have and enhance our capability and tailor them to our mission requirments. This will also give time for our pilots to train and excell on these platforms. 

Sorry, but bad idea

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Babur Han

Aamir Hussain said:


> In my opinion:
> 
> 8 OHP's
> 4 F22P's
> 4 Chinese F54
> *20 Fast Missile Attack Crafts (Most probably Turkish with Harpoons)*
> 3 Fleet Replenishment Ships
> 8 Mine Hunters
> 
> The Type 21's can be retired in tranches of three once the first three OHP are delivered and assimilated in to the fleet.
> 
> 3 A 90B Subs All retorfitted with MESMA
> 3 Further A90B all with MESMA (To be built in Pakistan while we wait for "Things" to happen) This is easier said than done -- lots of negotiations -- it would be wiser to peg down the Marlin deal now.
> 2 A70's with sensor upgrades -- relegated to inshore duties with requirment for shallower divinig depths.
> 
> The Marlin deal needs to be pegged down quickly. There is a serious gap in our undersea capability and one does not see the light at the end of the tunnel at this point in time.




I think you mean the planned "Atmaca" ASHM with turkish Harpoon, that's right ?

The Development of "Atmaca" startet in 2008 and the of Development of the Missile need a Time of seven Years. Atmaca would become available in 2015, for Export probably later. 

You mentioned 4 chinese Type-54 Destroyer, as far I know they are equippt with some russian Subsystems. It is likely possible that Russia deny the delivery of these Subsystems to Pakistan in Favor to one of it's most important Arms Customer India.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pakistantiger

60 fighter jets into three squadrons
4 to 5 AWACS
4 refulers
15-20 Anti sub helicopters
4-8 destroyers
16-20 frigates
20 subs
20 FAS
6-8 mine hunters
6 SAR helicopters
submarines must be equpied with cruise missiles becasue we hav to fight with larger enemy and we hav to defend our self agianst too many and heavy odds


----------



## umair86

PN should get a sqdn of JF-17s as dedicated fighters and JH-7As as their Antiship strike fighters with secondary AA role.


----------



## Aamir Hussain

Skywalker1983 said:


> I think you mean the planned "Atmaca" ASHM with turkish Harpoon, that's right ?
> 
> The Development of "Atmaca" startet in 2008 and the of Development of the Missile need a Time of seven Years. Atmaca would become available in 2015, for Export probably later.
> 
> You mentioned 4 chinese Type-54 Destroyer, as far I know they are equippt with some russian Subsystems. It is likely possible that Russia deny the delivery of these Subsystems to Pakistan in Favor to one of it's most important Arms Customer India.




PN, at this point in time, has a number of Harpoon II's and launchers in their inventory and would want to make use of them. It would be a good idea to induct MRTP -33 like platforms and equip them with these missiles for inshore littoral defense. 


Furthermore, PN is also investing in training simulators for these missiles and would want to use them for a while.

This would basically mean integration of a "Known" weapon system with cost effective surface platform. The only concern would be AAW suite on these platforms.

As a far as the Russian systems are concerned on the Type 54, I agree with your assessment -- it could cause unnecessary delays and in end the we might not receive optimal weapons suite because of this very reason.

I would rather see induction of Frigates with strong AAW capabilities for fleet defense.

BTW, very much impressed by Turkish Defence Products!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Babur Han

@Aamir Hussain



> PN, at this point in time, has a number of Harpoon II's and launchers in their inventory and would want to make use of them. It would be a good idea to induct MRTP -33 like platforms and equip them with these missiles for inshore littoral defense.



PN has already recieved 2 Onuk MRTP-33 PNS Karrar and PNS Zarrar, both entered in 2008 in Service. PN have a Requirement for 8 MRTP-33 from Turkey. In last Time I did not hear anything about the remaining 6 Vessels. Sometimes I read Rumors that PN Shows interest to more greater and Advanced MRTP Platforms like MRTP-40 or 44 which are in the Development Phase, there are also Rumors that PN have shown inerest on YTKB-400 ASW Harbor Patrol Boats.




> As a far as the Russian systems are concerned on the Type 54, I agree with your assessment -- it could cause unnecessary delays and in end the we might not receive optimal weapons suite because of this very reason.
> 
> *I would rather see induction of Frigates with strong AAW capabilities for fleet defense.*
> 
> BTW, very much impressed by Turkish Defence Products!!



At first Perry FFG come in to my Mind, this Frigate provide limited Area Air Defence Capabillity with it's SM-1 Missiles. When the MK-13 Launcher get removed the Integration of MK-41 Launcher with ESSM is also possible, 4 of 8 TN Perry get equippt with MK-41 Launcher and ESSM Capabillity under GENESIS Upgrade. Perry can be equippt with an 8 Cell VLS Launcher and 32 ESSM AD - Missiles. But this need the Permission of Uncle Sam.

MILGEM is not a Frigate, but PN have allready shown interest on MILGEM. When MILGEM get egquippt with MK-41 and ESSM, the Corvette could also provide limited AAW Capabillity. If PN decide to induct MILGEM it will be something different than MILGEM in TN Configuration and probably have more enhanced AD Capabillity.

I must also mentoin that Aselsan - Roketsan Team is in Progress to Develop short and medium Range AD Missiles. The Short - Range Missiles should have a Range up to 12 km and the Medium - Range up to 25 km, the Integration on Naval Platforms could be possible like the VL launched french MICA which are deployed on Naval Platforms.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## zulfiqar74

hay amir what do u think is it possible


----------



## zulfiqar74

would like to know will PN have its own fighter craft in huge numbers


----------



## zulfiqar74

The blue color camo in pak marines uniform does not look very professional, neither it looks very marine sorry but it looks stupid. they should make digital pattern based on different shades of sand color and touch of light gray


This is just an analysis,of what PN has and will aquire in the next 4 years through various deals already in place. This makes up to 70&#37; of the inventory. The remaining 30% is just a further analysis of what PN should aquire/produce or add to their inventory. We can do better but I guess this is initial minimum requirement. for navy, marines and the coastguards. plus we need some new docks and modern ship building facilities

PAKISTAN NAVY By Dec 2014

8 OHP class
4 F22P
3 Type 54 or meko frigates.
1 melgiam corvette. 
7 Mine hunters Current 4
20 missile boats. Visby class, G&#246;teborg class, Hamina class, Houbei class,Gepard class.
(current 12)
10 MRTB mix of MRTB 33 and/or YTKB-400 or YTKB 44, (current 4, required 10) 
12 Submarine mix of agosta 70/ 90b, marlins, Yuan class, (current 5 required 12)
12 Auxiliary ships (current 8)
3 Training vassals (current 1)
6 Hovercraft (current4)
25 patrol boat (current 17) mix of boats like armadale class, kingston class
Astral APB 48, APB47Illiria class, combat boat 90. half of these should be transfered to coastguard

PN AVIATION

(This is including what we already have) 

60 Mirages/jf17, j10 even J11 (current 12+)
10 Eurocopter NH-90NFH, phasing out Sea Kings transport, search/rescue (current 6.
8 Eurocopter EC-130B4 naval helicopter phasing out 8 Alouette III .
15 Lockheed P-3C Orion (Current 4) 11 to be inducted
3 Breguet Atlantique I Maritime Surveillance, transfer to coastguards while inducting more P-3C Orion.
6 Harbin Z-9 (current 6)
8 helicopters (kitted with the ships inducted in PN Mix of Harbin Z-9 and or NH90 or sea hawks.

PN AVIATION BASE

Pakistan Navy also need it own base to run its own and coast guard operations. Either Masroor base be extended and a naval aviation wing be founded or a new base should be developed somewhere pass hub or any area pass steel mill which ever is more strategically better for our defence. Or Base Faisal can be transfered to the navy. 

COAST GUARDS

Current plus future induction

1 Destroyer (Current 1)
5 Corvette (current 4)
8 Petrol Boats(Current3) Astral patrol APB57, Armadale class, Kingston Class,
illiria class (require 5 more
8 Small boats. Astral patrol APB38, 30 , gulf crafts ( current ?)
4 Sea kings. surveillance/ transport/ rescue ( current ?)
3 bells 412 surveillance and rescue(current ?)
4 Breguet Atlantique. phasing out current 4 Britten-Norman Defender


SSGN 

Their number should be increased from 1000 to 2000+. They should have at least 10 + transport helicopters, plus boats and heavy vehicles in their inventory.

PAK MARINES

Currently they are 2000 strong in the PK marines. They need to be increased to maintain at least 20000 men in next 5 years. They should par the same level as the french foreign legion or UK marines. PK marines should be given special training on the same training methods as the SSGN emphasising on boarding of vessels during combat, capturing ships, raiding ashore in support of the naval objectives. campaign ashore in support of the military objective, amphibious day and night assault. counter-improvision explosive device techniques, convoy operations, combat formations, fireteam assaults, patrolling, MOUT, reporting military intelligence, land navigation, survival skills. 

They need to be provided with better equipments rather then the old G3, something like type 81, type 101 or AUG, with granade launcher and dot scopes, night vision, snipers rifles, FN Minimi. With other complimenting equipments like helicopters, artilary, armour vehicles and amphibious assault boats. Ofcourse it sounds all to much and very expensive, but technically it is possible if total fund of 20000 men and complimenting equipment be allocated to the navyplus recruitment help from the army. The army can transfer equipments and men innitially. Most of the main schools and training installations have already been stablished and running, all they just need is advancement in their training methods and upgrades.

I hope the pak armforces invest on research and future developments in every dept and sub dept. Also investigate in developing in other conventional and nonconventinal weapons. Invest on more platforms like ship yards, aeronotical complex and defence industries to upgrade them with modern and latest technology. Employ weapons designers, scientists or coproduce new equipment with foreign companies. Tot that we might get like U214, plus more we already have F22p, JF17, Agosta 90, we should do further experiments and research to make them more effective or bigger or better and should be self sufficient in production while fulfilling our requirements are exporting rather then relying on other countries..


----------



## Aamir Hussain

zulfiqar74 said:


> hay amir what do u think is it possible



Z74 Check out very usefull threads and posts by both Growler and Pengiun at "Pakistan to US frigate by Aug 31st" and "Upgarde of PN FFG's" started by Growler.

Loads of info. and options for upgrades. Mant thanks to both of them. 

As a far as Genesis is concerned let us find out from our Turkish friend what is the cost of such upgrades (Rough Estimate) that will really be the pivotal issue with PN for an interim/plug-in/gap filler type of program.

Cheers!


----------



## zulfiqar74

Aamir Hussain said:


> Z74 Check out very usefull threads and posts by both Growler and Pengiun at "Pakistan to US frigate by Aug 31st" and "Upgarde of PN FFG's" started by Growler.
> 
> Loads of info. and options for upgrades. Mant thanks to both of them.
> 
> As a far as Genesis is concerned let us find out from our Turkish friend what is the cost of such upgrades (Rough Estimate) that will really be the pivotal issue with PN for an interim/plug-in/gap filler type of program.
> 
> Cheers!



ifyou read my previous thread on PN inventory by 2014, what are your views on that... do u think its possible or bit too much on the plate


----------



## Myth_buster_1

The C-295 MPA and C-295 MPA/ASW could be good replacement for PN obsolete Fokker and Atlantic MPA.


----------



## zulfiqar74

ya thats a neat aircraft to replace or even this one 

http://www.haltecenterprises.com/consulting/projects/page3/images/Telephonics_NIMROD2000.jpg
http://www.airsceneuk.org.uk/airshow00/waddo/nimrod.JPG
http://www.airforceworld.com/others/gfx/nimrod/nimrod_mra4_1.jpg


----------



## ThunderCat

Myth_buster_1 said:


> ?PN P-8 ex-PIA 737?



I know this is an old thread but PIA does not have the B737-800. It could be a good idea for retired 737-300s with wiglets but i doubt it since they were inducted in 1985 and 86 and are extremely old.


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Structure of Pakistan Navy 2016 

Type 054 Class Destroyer---?????
F22P Frigates --------------4 (Origionals) 
F22P+ Frigates --------------6 (4 Built in China , 2 in Pakistan) 
Tariq Class Frigates ---------6 
OHP Frigate (Genesis) ------1 (If we can get 2 more OHP would be decent deal?????)
Missile Boats --------------20 


Navy Wings: 

*36 J11 , Ideally navy should get these birds for Navy *
12 JF17 Thunder , navy 
12 Mirages 
12 K-8 Training and Coast Guard survailence 
20 Airlift Helicopters (Support Role) 

8 P3C Orions


Submarines : Existing fleet 6 
New Addition 1 Nuclear Submarine

Future Addition: 5 New submarines from China


----------



## Viper0011.

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Structure of Pakistan Navy 2016
> 
> Type 054 Class Destroyer---?????
> F22P Frigates --------------4 (Origionals)
> F22P+ Frigates --------------6 (4 Built in China , 2 in Pakistan)
> Tariq Class Frigates ---------6
> OHP Frigate (Genesis) ------1 (If we can get 2 more OHP would be decent deal?????)
> Missile Boats --------------20
> 
> 
> Navy Wings:
> 
> *36 J11 , Ideally navy should get these birds for Navy *
> 12 JF17 Thunder , navy
> 12 Mirages
> 12 K-8 Training and Coast Guard survailence
> 20 Airlift Helicopters (Support Role)
> 
> 8 P3C Orions
> 
> 
> Submarines : Existing fleet 6
> New Addition 1 Nuclear Submarine
> 
> Future Addition: 5 New submarines from China



- Along with ships defined above, Pakistan needs 6 large conventional and 2 atomic submarines (or with nucs for second strike)
- Needs at least 2 dedicated Naval JFT squadrons. Either 2 (1 J-16 and 2nd J-31) squadrons of 2 J-16 at the least)
- Multiple options (sea based and land based) for long range SAM coverage out to over 100 miles


----------



## Zarvan

orangzaib said:


> - Along with ships defined above, Pakistan needs 6 large conventional and 2 atomic submarines (or with nucs for second strike)
> - Needs at least 2 dedicated Naval JFT squadrons. Either 2 (1 J-16 and 2nd J-31) squadrons of 2 J-16 at the least)
> - Multiple options (sea based and land based) for long range SAM coverage out to over 100 miles


Also need at least 10 to 12 more Frigates with at least 150 Fighter Planes to back them up and around 12 Submarines needed with many many Missile Boats


----------



## Dr. Strangelove

wait till elections ........................i will kill my self if ppp or pmln won

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MST

Zarvan said:


> Also need at least 10 to 12 more Frigates with at least 150 Fighter Planes to back them up and around 12 Submarines needed with many many Missile Boats



Wow. Do you even have a big enough coastline to park all these assets? Otherwise you may have to build a multi level parking in sea.


----------



## mjnaushad

Rebuild economy.....If you want to rebuild navy aviation....There are lot of options out there but with economy as fragile as ours it doesn't matter.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Economy will rebuild itself when people are forced to pay taxes on entertainment and bollywood movies and other cosmetics 

Frigates are must to move out troolling navies of other countries and pirates who get lost and find themselves on Pakistani waters quite often


----------



## Tehmasib

which bomb is for Z-9


----------



## Luftwaffe

Aamir Hussain said:


> In my opinion we should have at least 15 orions to mount a round the clock surveillance during times of conflict. *We are thankfully getting close to this number very soon.* This number needs to be backed up by AEW aircrafts.



Are we getting more Orions that's News to me? currently we have 7 I believe...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dr. Strangelove

Tehmasib said:


> which bomb is for Z-9


i dont remember the name but i saw it some where in a thread by imran khan i think its pakistani made

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## muse

What kinds of capabilities ought the PN possess?


----------



## Imran Khan

wasm95 said:


> i dont remember the name but i saw it some where in a thread by imran khan i think its pakistani made



its not that one but its torpedo bro ET-52 i think


----------



## Nishan_101

They really require:
11 ATR-72 MPAs/Y-9MPAs
07 CN-295 MPAs/Chinese alternatives
3-5 Y-9 AEW&Cs
Good nos. of UAVs.... for 24/7 duties...


----------



## muse

Nishan_101 said:


> They really require:
> 11 ATR-72 MPAs/Y-9MPAs
> 07 CN-295 MPAs/Chinese alternatives
> 3-5 Y-9 AEW&Cs
> Good nos. of UAVs.... for 24/7 duties...



Perhaps we may move from specific equipment to Capabilities - What kinds of capabilities should PN possess or develop?


----------



## Secur

muse said:


> Perhaps we may move from specific equipment to Capabilities - What kinds of capabilities should PN possess or develop?



About time they establish their very own JFT squadron armed with C400AKG and C802A ! ... Low cost but a very capable platform , the need of the hour I must say ...



MST said:


> Wow. Do you even have a big enough coastline to park all these assets?



Do Navies around the world park their air assets along coastlines ?  Or aircrafts are kept on bases or carried on AC's ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Scrap the surface fleet except fast missile boats.
Invest everything in high class submarines in numbers.
Protect harbours with shore based batteries and aircraft.Surface fleet too small to be of any use,dead weight.


----------



## muse

OK - so we have 1 squadron of JFT and scrap the surface fleet and invest in Submarines - Well, what kinds of threats is PN likely to face? for instance, is 1 squadron enough for those powers who will threaten us with AC and submarines and surface ships that can launch hundred of cruise missiles against us?

Should PN develop a strategy along the lines that PLAN have developed? one of "Denial" ? to not allow the adversaries to use their capabilities against us?

I for one am persuaded that Indian Navy is that the threat we have to worry about. it is the navy of non-Asian countries who along with their Middle Eastern allies who are the real threat, in my opinion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Contrarian

muse said:


> OK - so we have 1 squadron of JFT and scrap the surface fleet and invest in Submarines - Well, what kinds of threats is PN likely to face? for instance, is 1 squadron enough for those powers who will threaten us with AC and submarines and surface ships that can launch hundred of cruise missiles against us?
> 
> Should PN develop a strategy along the lines that PLAN have developed? one of "Denial" ? to not allow the adversaries to use their capabilities against us?
> 
> I for one am persuaded that Indian Navy is that the threat we have to worry about. it is the navy of non-Asian countries who along with their Middle Eastern allies who are the real threat, in my opinion.


With a limited budget, the only effective way is high number Submarines and combat aircraft along with MPA's - Sea Denial instead of Sea Dominance/Projection

Surface fleet is just sacrificial lamb against any strong Navy. Unless you plan to go the whole hog in developing surface capabilities, having a few medium category frigates is a bad decision.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tehmasib



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Penguin

Contrarian said:


> With a limited budget, the only effective way is high number Submarines and combat aircraft along with MPA's - Sea Denial instead of Sea Dominance/Projection
> 
> Surface fleet is just sacrificial lamb against any strong Navy. Unless you plan to go the whole hog in developing surface capabilities, having a few medium category frigates is a bad decision.



A very one-dimensional perspective on the navy's purpose and mission.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Penguin

Tehmasib said:


> which bomb is for Z-9


Air dropped depth charge. Likely Mk11 Mod3 (UK) or possibly Mk54 (US) or similar/derivative


----------



## Thorough Pro

One depth charge? what the heck.


----------



## Contrarian

Penguin said:


> A very one-dimensional perspective on the navy's purpose and mission.



Your opinion?
If PN was starting from absolute scratch, but had the same budget it does not. What force structure would you recommend?


----------



## fatman17

whats there to rebuild...

2 P3C's which were lost will not be replaced.
Z9EC's have replaced the Lynx and the Alouette's in the ASW role.
SeaKings are being upgraded.
F27's are being replaced with ATR-42 in MSA role.
PAF will continue to provide Maritime Strike role.
other options are being considered.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Jango

fatman17 said:


> F27's are being replaced with ATR-42 in MSA role.



This is confirmed now? Any links or anything (not that i dont believe you!)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## fatman17

nuclearpak said:


> This is confirmed now? Any links or anything (not that i dont believe you!)



its in the naval aviation update thread

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Contrarian

fatman17 said:


> whats there to rebuild...


Rebuild as in reset/reboot.

Hypothetical situation mate. How and what strategy and force structure would you have put up for PN if you had a clean slate but the same amount of money that PN has.


----------



## muse

Penguin said:


> A very one-dimensional perspective on the navy's purpose and mission.




Certainly a valid point, perhaps you could elaborate, within the context of budgetary constraints, what kinds of threats and capabilities PN ought to develop

For instance, do you agree with the proposition that India are not the priority threat and that it the threat is a non_Asian power which has most recently acted and will more than likely continue to act with enthusiasm (along with their ME/Gulf allies), against states such as Pakistan

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jango

muse said:


> For instance, do you agree with the proposition that India are not the priority threat and that it the threat is a non_Asian power which has most recently acted and will more than likely continue to act with enthusiasm (along with their ME/Gulf allies), against states such as Pakistan



On what basis do you make this assumption sir? The OBL operation was certainly involving a aircraft carrier, but then again, it was not a real USN against PN scenario. The USN fleet has been in this region for a decade plus now, increasing significantly because of the WoT in Afg. Middle Eastern countries do not pose such a big threat that a force much larger than the current one is needed to counter. Secondly, ME countries would not be having a real reason to come in and stand against us in the Arabian sea. Sure they are having their concerns about Gwadar and the changing geo-political situation in Balochistan, but I don't think it would escalate to such an extent that their navies would come out at sea. At best IMO, they would be playing a base camp role, like they are playing for Afg (Qatari bases for US etc).

IMO, the imminent threat, and one for the next 5 years or so will remain India. The US and other countries will make their presence felt, and also sometimes do aggressive postures, but not to the extent that PN as to drastically rethink it's policy and revamp it's fleet.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## muse

Thank you for your post - I would ask if you know where Bahrain is and whether you are aware of which fleet is head quartered there, Are also aware of the GCC's role in conjunction with US/NATO in Syria??

Human rights and political rights in Syria good - Jihad in Syria good -- Human rights and political rights in Bahrain and and other Wahabi tyrannies, bad?? Jihad in Afghanistan, bad?? - you bet

Indian armed forces continue to develop capabilities, not once used against Pakistan, whereas threats both verbal, physical continue to emanate from the "Coalition" --- Salalah, Abbottabad -- fact of the matter is that to many Pakistanis, a servile attitude is something that they cannot imagine ever getting rid of, that's why they are unable to acknowledge the threat right before them and instead focus on distant make believe threats of Indian this and that.


----------



## Jango

muse said:


> Thank you for your post - I would ask if you know where Bahrain is and whether you are aware of which fleet is head quartered there, Are also aware of the GCC's role in conjunction with US/NATO in Syria??
> 
> Human rights and political rights in Syria good - Jihad in Syria good -- Human rights and political rights in Bahrain and and other Wahabi tyrannies, bad?? Jihad in Afghanistan, bad?? - you bet



I am well aware of the US presence in this region. And 5th fleet is in Bahrain!

IMO, Syria and Libya are different cases. So called oppressive dictators ruling over the countries, a hype created, people mobilized and voila, you have a mess there. But Pakistan is different. We are not giving out a strong face to the US or the world community with our foreign policies (like Iran), nor are we really threatening anybody, and we have a so called democratic system in place for the time being. So not alot in common between us and Libya/Syria.



> Indian armed forces continue to develop capabilities, not once used against Pakistan, whereas threats both verbal, physical continue to emanate from the "Coalition" --- Salalah, Abbottabad -- fact of the matter is that to many Pakistanis, a servile attitude is something that they cannot imagine ever getting rid of, that's why they are unable to acknowledge the threat right before them and instead focus on distant make believe threats of Indian this and that.



Not once used but developed with Pakistan in mind.

Those threats will remain threats for sometime to come, and won't escalate to a situation where a mass mobilization takes place, and a standoff occurs. The US is always on the mind of the military forces in Pakistan, and there is always a thought in the back of their minds, but the imminent threat is India for the next 5 years. India want to move on to bigger things and try to project it's power on a bigger world scale, but we are still it's neighbors with a bitter history, and neither they, nor we can afford to let each other off the hook and be looking onto other things. India in spite of it's ambitions on the global scale, keeps us in mind, and we need to keep them in mind, along with US ofcourse.

I am agreeing with you on the part that US is not our biggest ally and will be a major opposing force for us in the near future, but it won't escalate the situation to such an extent that we have to change our focus from India to US. Both will be kept in mind, and India will be on top priority.

Anyways, let's think of this scenario that we indeed will be at loggerheads with the US in say 3-4 years, what do you suggest we do with the navy?


----------



## muse

Nukilla


You fail to understand what "Strategic partnership" mean in the context of Israel and India to the US -- but live and learn - We will continue to live under this threat, with the sword at our throats (slings and arrows of outrageous fortune) unless of course, (by opposing end them) - which is nobler, for Pakistanis to decide

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Jango

muse said:


> Nukilla
> 
> 
> You fail to understand what "Strategic partnership" mean in the context of Israel and India to the US -- but live and learn - We will continue to live under this threat, with the sword at our throats (slings and arrows of outrageous fortune) unless of course, (by opposing end them) - which is nobler, for Pakistanis to decide



We have been living under this threat for quite sometime now, and I am sure that folks in the higher echelons have some kind of plan for this.

But there isn't much we could do if this group of countries did decide to jump on us. Pak just can't match US power at this time, or counter it, be it through military means or others.


----------



## muse

nuclearpak said:


> We have been living under this threat for quite sometime now, and I am sure that folks in the higher echelons have some kind of plan for this.
> 
> But there isn't much we could do if this group of countries did decide to jump on us. Pak just can't match US power at this time, or counter it, be it through military means or others.



This is exactly the attitude I was referring to in my earlier post - BTW, you are mistaken on both counts - folks at higher echelons? which folks are these? the one that gave us Mehran?? that allow Kamra, even when the fact that these installations were going to be attacked was published int he freaking newspapers, those higher echelons? Be real, mere Saeb.

As for this attitude where w tell ourselves, we have no option but to enjoy the rape, again, you are much mistaken.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Penguin

Contrarian said:


> Your opinion?
> If PN was starting from absolute scratch, but had the same budget it does not. What force structure would you recommend?



Well, obviously some attention to IN but with the realization that head-to-head IN will always have numerical advantage. In addition to IN, focus on SLOC in general i.e. anti-piracy ops a long way from home. I'ld end up pretty much with a similar for structure: 3-6 subs, 6-12 (light)frigates and corvettes, a bunch (maybe a dozen) of coastal craft and some mine hunters. Just because IN will have superior numbers doesn't mean all other tasks short of combat with IN willl go away.


----------



## Penguin

Conceal Carry said:


> One depth charge? what the heck.



P-3C Orion Weapons:


> Armament
> Guns: None
> Hardpoints: 10 wing stations in total (3x on each wing and 2x on each wing root) and eight internal bomb bay stations with a capacity of 20,000 lb (9,100 kg)[1] and provisions to carry combinations of:
> Rockets: None
> Missiles: ***Air-to-surface missile: AGM-65 Maverick, AGM-84 Harpoon, AGM-84 Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM-ER)[1]
> Bombs: ****Depth charges*, MK20 Rockeye, MK80 Series (MK82, MK83, MK84) general purpose bombs, B57 nuclear bomb (US service only, retired 1993)
> Other: ***Mk 44 (mostly retired from service), Mk 46,[1] Mk 50, Mk 54 or MU90 Impact torpedoes
> Mk 25, Mk 39, Mk 55, Mk 56, Mk 60 CAPTOR or Mk 65 Quickstrike naval mines[66]
> Stonefish naval mine (in Australian service)
> Active and passive Sonobuoys



Westland Sea King


> Armament
> 4× Mark 44, Mark 46 or Sting Ray torpedos, or *4× Depth charges*



Westland Sea Lynx


> Armament
> Naval: 2 x torpedoes or 4x Sea Skua missiles or *2 x depth charges*.
> Attack: 2 x 20mm cannons, 2 x 70mm rocket pods CRV7, 8 x TOW ATGM[71]
> General: 7.62mm General Purpose Machine Guns (AH.7 and AH.9), Browning AN/M3M .50 calibre heavy machine gun (HAS.3 and HMA.8)


----------



## Donatello

muse said:


> This is exactly the attitude I was referring to in my earlier post - BTW, you are mistaken on both counts - folks at higher echelons? which folks are these? the one that gave us Mehran?? that allow Kamra, even when the fact that these installations were going to be attacked was published int he freaking newspapers, those higher echelons? Be real, mere Saeb.
> 
> As for this attitude where w tell ourselves, we have no option but to enjoy the rape, again, you are much mistaken.




Muse, ma man!

Where have you been? Hibernating?  I always enjoy your posts.

Where is Sapper, someone bring him back as well! 

All the best !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jango

muse said:


> This is exactly the attitude I was referring to in my earlier post - BTW, you are mistaken on both counts - folks at higher echelons? which folks are these? the one that gave us Mehran?? that allow Kamra, even when the fact that these installations were going to be attacked was published int he freaking newspapers, those higher echelons? Be real, mere Saeb.
> 
> As for this attitude where w tell ourselves, we have no option but to enjoy the rape, again, you are much mistaken.



These folks are what we unfortunately have at this moment.


----------



## Penguin

Tehmasib said:


> which bomb is for Z-9



By comparison, same weapon on Alouette III of PN (IN uses similar weapon on similar chopper Hal Chetak, see ACIG Exclusives : Aero India 2005)






By comparison, Alouette III with lightweight ASW torpedo. And Z-9E with chinese ET-52C ASW torpedo






[/IMG]





Three of the weapons used by the Sea Lynx helicopter. The top-far object is an air dropped Stingray ASW torpedo, in the middle is a Sea Skua light anti-ship missile, and bottom/forground is a helicopter dropped depth charge.





This WASP carries a Mk44 ASW torpedo (back) and a depthcharge (front). As you can see, the DC is much smaller than the torp.





I´m inclined to think it is a British Mk11 DC
http://c69011.r11.cf3.rackcdn.com/47ed4d6e474f47389c950b6e80684a44-0x0.jpg
http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=42347&#entry449160 (2 pics)

This is the DESTO (Defence Science & Technology Organization) manufactured &#8216;Sea Surge&#8217; air launched anti-submarine depth charge at the IDEAS 2002 &#8211; Defence Exhibition 




Copyright: Usman Shabbir

The Defence Science and Technology Organization, best known as DESTO, is a government agency of responsible for the development military technology use by the military, as well as promotion of military funding of science, located in Rawalpindi, Punjab province of Pakistan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_Science_and_Technology_Organization

Not to be confused with the Australian counterpart
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_Science_and_Technology_Organisation

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Teeta

Is Pakistani navy inducting some submarines anytime soon? A lethal submarine punch is the best thing a small naval force like PN can have.


----------



## ushikra

Are there any plans to transfer the Jet Squadron (Mirages) completely to PN that currently is operated for it by the PAF?


----------



## Nishan_101

I am on that side that PN should give away its fixed wing duties to PAF as they can do it well along with AEW&Cs...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nishan_101

I am quite sure that then the PAF might have gone for 7 Saab-2000 AEW&Cs(for PAF and Navy) along with 11 Saab-2000 MPAs and 5-7 Saab-340 MSAs that would have help replace the older fleet.


----------



## batmannow

nuclearpak said:


> These folks are what we unfortunately have at this moment.



Lot of security structure updates already done & in place, anything thrown again will be engaged & destroyed!
Well, those attacks brought real day practice & what we really lacking was, todys PN chief is a hawk, thts what I can tell you, 
For now!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------

