What's new

Featured How Pakistan Is Preparing to Kill India’s New Aircraft Carriers

Bilal Khan (Quwa)

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 22, 2016
5,887
73
22,967
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
Currently PN is focusing long rang subsonic missiles and Supersonic and Hypersonic missiles are underdevelopment

So in other word PN is relying on different missiles as counter weapon to possible attempt of Indian to distrub Pakistan's SLOC.

The thing required to be noted here is that long rang subsonic and in future supersonic missiles are integrated with Surface Fleet which might not be used in offensive operations, therefore we can say that surface fleet will mainly be employed in Anti- Access operation.

On the other hand submarine fleet of Pakistan is always employed in offensive manner but at least no open source information indicates that the current Agosta or 8 Hangoor class submarines would get supersonic missiles as part of their arsnal in this case Area Denial platforms will rely on old fashion subsonic missiles namely SLCM Harba and Babur.

As indicated in my previous post if India deploy its carrier group at +1,000-1,200 KM then we would have to solely rely on submarines to deny freedom of operations to Indian Navy but with growing Air defence capabilities of Indian Navy and the nature of threat Indian Navy at such distance would face would come only from one direction i.e. submarines of PN would make the defence "comparatively" easy and predictable for them.

At such distance the Air element from PN is completely missing, therefore Area denial strategy seem unidimensional, though it will get strengthen when Hypersonic Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile will be introduced but we should keep in mind its employment would require 24/7 ISR and satellite based real time tracking of IN ships this capability is "still" missing in PN as of now as per open source.

Another option in which PN seems not interested could be the introduction of Long Range Naval Bombers like H-6 in Pakistan Navy.

And if H-6 is acquried and integrated with local long rang subsonic and supersonic missiles then this will introduce a new capability in PN a long range operational capability specially in area denial domain.

PN could employ these in offensive role where IN ships would not have aerial cover.
It's interesting that like half of the navies that sail 20+ big ships have an aircraft carrier (either in service or planned) of some type. The other half are seriously thinking about it. The PN is aiming to have 20+ frigates and large ships too, so, I wonder...
 

Cookie Monster

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 31, 2016
3,735
6
5,723
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
It's interesting that like half of the navies that sail 20+ big ships have an aircraft carrier (either in service or planned) of some type. The other half are seriously thinking about it. The PN is aiming to have 20+ frigates and large ships too, so, I wonder...
PN happens to be in that weird in between position...
...where it has to have a rather large fleet(comparatively speaking) bcuz it faces a massive IN...while simultaneously PN has no ambitions/plans of power projections. If the fight is to happen with the neighbor next door...then PN with submarines, fighter jets, surface vessels(Frigates, Corvettes, FACs), Antiship ballistic and cruise missiles, etc. can handle IN in a defensive manner out to a few hundred KMs...
...which is sufficient.

An aircraft carrier...on its own wouldn't accomplish much...and would instead be a sitting duck. If PN was to acquire one...it would have to acquire additional assets to make that aircraft carrier effective in its role. Not to mention a change in doctrine...tactics/strategy. Considering Pakistan's specific scenario...I think an aircraft carrier is a waste of money. Pak military can spend that money in other areas that will yield a lot better value in terms of effectively tackling India. For that kind of money...a couple of boomers will be a lot better.
...or shooting lower than a boomer...how about developing something analogous to CBU105, indigenously? Equipping hundreds of PAF jets...with something like that...would be an instant force multiplier that would pose a huge threat to advancing Indian armoured columns.
 
Last edited:

Gripen9

FULL MEMBER
Apr 15, 2019
475
1
840
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
An aircraft carrier...on its own wouldn't accomplish much...and would instead be a sitting duck.
Agree with your statement. A Carrier is a purely offensive weapon and requires a major strike group to accompany it when encountering a credible opposing force. When a US CSG tranits in theater, it's CAG controls over 250 nm of airspace around it.

1627421459344.png
 

HRK

PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Sep 24, 2010
12,568
99
32,622
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
It's interesting that like half of the navies that sail 20+ big ships have an aircraft carrier (either in service or planned) of some type. The other half are seriously thinking about it. The PN is aiming to have 20+ frigates and large ships too, so, I wonder...
First of all we must understand 2 things

- All the major Naval powers who operate Aircraft Carrier have their Naval bases either on foreign Soil or well beyond their main land for example USA, UK, France, Russia and China

- Secondly their area of interest lies at such far distance that conventional Naval resources could not provide security to their interests for example Farance and UK have Naval bases in Indian Ocean

In my opinion in our case its more related to our area of Interest and Operations which are limitted from Gulf region to the Horn of Africa and due to the blessing of our geography this area is accessible to us with our conventional Naval resources.

Our SLOC are not as stretch as the SLOC of USA is stretch or SLOC of UK was stretched.

We can observe even though France, UK, Russia and China have Aircraft carriers but their utility are limited due to the limit of their political interests in different regions of the world.

In our case if we could secure permenant Joint Forces bases in our areas of Interest than we could maintain our continues presence even with conventional Naval Resources and under this approche I don't see PN going for Aircraft carrier in its fleet for a very long time unless our Naval traffic come under threat beyond the Suez Canal or area around Malaca strait .... Only then presence of Air craft carrier in PN could be justified but as long as PN does not operate Naval base on foreign soil there will be no Aircraft carrier in PN
 

Cookie Monster

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 31, 2016
3,735
6
5,723
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Agree with your statement. A Carrier is a purely offensive weapon and requires a major strike group to accompany it when encountering a credible opposing force. When a US CSG tranits in theater, it's CAG controls over 250 nm of airspace around it.

View attachment 765659
I think US spy satellites also add to the effectiveness of USN(not only for it's carrier battle group...but in general). I'm not saying that an aircraft carrier would be useless for PN...I'm saying that for it to be useful...Pak will have to spend a lot of money...in addition to the money spent on the carrier itself.
 
Last edited:

Bilal Khan (Quwa)

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 22, 2016
5,887
73
22,967
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
First of all we must understand 2 things

- All the major Naval powers who operate Aircraft Carrier have their Naval bases either on foreign Soil or well beyond their main land for example USA, UK, France, Russia and China

- Secondly their area of interest lies at such far distance that conventional Naval resources could not provide security to their interests for example Farance and UK have Naval bases in Indian Ocean

In my opinion in our case its more related to our area of Interest and Operations which are limitted from Gulf region to the Horn of Africa and due to the blessing of our geography this area is accessible to us with our conventional Naval resources.

Our SLOC are not as stretch as the SLOC of USA is stretch or SLOC of UK was stretched.

We can observe even though France, UK, Russia and China have Aircraft carriers but their utility are limited due to the limit of their political interests in different regions of the world.

In our case if we could secure permenant Joint Forces bases in our areas of Interest than we could maintain our continues presence even with conventional Naval Resources and under this approche I don't see PN going for Aircraft carrier in its fleet for a very long time unless our Naval traffic come under threat beyond the Suez Canal or area around Malaca strait .... Only then presence of Air craft carrier in PN could be justified but as long as PN does not operate Naval base on foreign soil there will be no Aircraft carrier in PN
...but what about LHDs that deploy UCAVs or short-ranged fighters?

I think the concept of naval air power deploying is changing. Yes, I agree, the 'big powers' have distant interests to defend, but others -- like South Korea and Japan -- are doing it to reinforce their existing naval interests. Australia is thinking about it as well but the RAAF doesn't want the RAN to have fixed-wing fighter assets.

If the carrier designs continue to get smaller (e.g., 24,000 ton to 32,000 ton displacement), I think we'll see more countries (at least those with 20+ major surface vessels) see them as real options.
 

HRK

PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Sep 24, 2010
12,568
99
32,622
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
...but what about LHDs that deploy UCAVs or short-ranged fighters?

I think the concept of naval air power deploying is changing. Yes, I agree, the 'big powers' have distant interests to defend, but others -- like South Korea and Japan -- are doing it to reinforce their existing naval interests. Australia is thinking about it as well but the RAAF doesn't want the RAN to have fixed-wing fighter assets.

If the carrier designs continue to get smaller (e.g., 24,000 ton to 32,000 ton displacement), I think we'll see more countries (at least those with 20+ major surface vessels) see them as real options.
LHDs and such vessels which could deploy UCAVs, USV and UUVs would find their place in almost every midsize Navy as they will act as force multiplier

Simillarly we might see a new class something bigger than Cruiser Ships but smaller than Conventional Aircraft carriers similar to LHDs in size but as dedicated drone carriers could be reals possibility within this decade Turkey already is experimenting with LHDs

But In my opinion which might be wrong we should not expect these vessels as tool of power projection in conventional sense as the concept of power projection is associated with Conventional Aircraft Carriers.
 

TOPGUN

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Jun 6, 2006
8,519
1
8,094
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
LHDs and such vessels which could deploy UCAVs, USV and UUVs would find their place in almost every midsize Navy as they will act as force multiplier

Simillarly we might see a new class something bigger than Cruiser Ships but smaller than Conventional Aircraft carriers similar to LHDs in size but as dedicated drone carriers could be reals possibility within this decade Turkey already is experimenting with LHDs

But In my opinion which might be wrong we should not expect these vessels as tool of power projection in conventional sense as the concept of power projection is associated with Conventional Aircraft Carriers.
Agreed bro do you think we can see PN in the near future with a LHD ?
 

Syed_Adeel

FULL MEMBER
Aug 7, 2015
475
1
313
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Arab Emirates
Dear distance of Duqam port from Gawadar port is around 500 miles while from Karachi its around 700 miles thing need to be understand here is that Duqam is mention here as reference point not as exact location where Indian Navy would deploy its carrier they will obviously deploy its at some distance let say 200-300 miles so overall IN carrier group would be deployed at acdistance of around 800-100 miles from the coast of Pakistan

In this case even with IFR JF-17 would have some limitations keep in mind JF-17 with 3 extarnal fuel tank and two 1000 pound bombs have have combat radius of 1000 KM

Plz also note

- Around 79 JF-17 are not IFR capable

- With 2 C-802 or CM-400 AKG it will have smaller combat radius due to the absence of 2 external fuel tank

- In that scenario Indian carrier group would be deployed +1200 to 1600 km away from coast of Pakistan

- Inflight refuelears either have to fly earlier than strick package to reach the refueling point with will put them in danger against Indian interceptors

So comparatively indian navy would be in less danger zone

1 PAF has plan to equip 1 missile with two drop tanks also. although it will reduce the free will to fire at target because only one missile will be available but it may provide some extra range to jet. Moreover if really needed then jets may compromise their fuel and go beyond the combat range IF an IFR is promise in mid way while they are returning.

2 We need to add the range of C802 and CM400 as well. If we assume it as ~200KM for both missiles then PAF jets will release them while remaining 100KM+ away at least.

3 P3 Orions could also provide a long range attack with Harpoons but they will definitely need some air cover to mitigate the interception risk. But note that due to the much longer range/loiter time of P3Cs, PN could use them from unexpected sides of Indian Carriers while using PAF jets from the shortest available distances. These jets could provide air cover, decoy, or added attack layer.

4 PN/PAF Naval arm needs longer range jets to counter this threat ultimately. I am not sure how much J10 could help(If inducted and used in naval role.)

5 EEZ has also increased the area of responsibility for PAF and PN so an artificial island for PAF and PN Defense and Offense (similar to Chinese ) could also help PAF. Although its expensive to make and maintain but concerning the future CPEC trade and its benefits, this could be a feasible option..
 
Last edited:

WarKa DaNG

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 26, 2014
2,056
0
805
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
If 25 years ago we had capability to surprise Americans we can surely surprise india with these less capable aircraft carriers.
Can you provide me any link to that exercise, I tried to find any report but still no luck
A few days ago watched a video of DCS game made by GrimReaper (i think!?) USN Fleet AC getting destroyed by a swarm of older silkworm missiles.
So yeah i think swarms of anti ship missiles will definitely put the AC out of action
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom