What's new

Pak Navy Should Reduce The # of Subs To Buy Type 054 Frigates

araz

PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Jun 14, 2006
7,930
64
12,515
PN needs to develop its off/def assets in the coming years.
The deployment should be based from 3 coastal bases, Karachi, JNB and Gwadar.
All these bases have both ports and airports, so both sea and air assets can be deployed effectively.
Specially the Gwadar port can prove very strategic.
The offensive assets can be Subs, MBs and LRMPs.
As soon as the Subs start coming in, the next focus is towards more surface platforms to replace the Type-21s.
Missile Boats will be added slowly and gradually along the way.
There is also a debate going on for adding a fighter squadron to the Naval Aviation. These can be deployed from JNB & Gwadar.
Thank you for your update. Do you think we will have more of type 22s( with more advances like a better MR SAM) or do you think we will acquire something a little bit bigger with a little more punch and staying power. Also when in your opinion do you see the PN going for more frigates. The forum has been having intermittent smattering of possible order of 4 more F22p. Do you think this has already happened or is going to happen in the future and is it worthwhile going for a slightly different platform. There has also been talk on the forum regarding 054s and also a 3500 ton new frigate which china has revealed recently. What are the difficulties if at all apart from financial ones in acquiring newer platfroms. As always ignore any bit you are not happy sharing but we do need to pick your brain to understand naval doctrine and acquisition cycle more thoroughly.
Regards
 

waz

SENIOR MODERATOR
Sep 15, 2006
16,501
68
42,193
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
60 is too much. We need deterrence, which when needed can go on the offense. This means a squadron of JF-17s along with a squadron of heavies....(18+14) units would be more than enough. Heavies can be JH-7, J-10 or if lucky, flankers from China/Russia.
The heavies are needed, It would be pointless to send the JF-17's with a counter squadron of Mig 29's or Flankers meeting them.
 

Rashid Mahmood

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Nov 19, 2013
3,709
35
12,261
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Thank you for your update. Do you think we will have more of type 22s( with more advances like a better MR SAM) or do you think we will acquire something a little bit bigger with a little more punch and staying power. Also when in your opinion do you see the PN going for more frigates. The forum has been having intermittent smattering of possible order of 4 more F22p. Do you think this has already happened or is going to happen in the future and is it worthwhile going for a slightly different platform. There has also been talk on the forum regarding 054s and also a 3500 ton new frigate which china has revealed recently. What are the difficulties if at all apart from financial ones in acquiring newer platfroms. As always ignore any bit you are not happy sharing but we do need to pick your brain to understand naval doctrine and acquisition cycle more thoroughly.
Regards
PN will go for more frigates, not specifically F-22's.
Subs were the priority at this time and was pending for some time.
KSEW is being geared up for building the Subs.

Ships will follow, but I can't name a specific type.

The difficulties in picking new platforms are many, specially in the Chinese platforms..
NATO has a standard of parts numbers (NSN) for its spares for its platforms and there is a system of documentation for all these thousands of items, but the Chinese lack that, which causes many issues. The T-22 FFGs deal was also delayed due to this. The sub deal also faced the same.
But PN developed a system to handle this with the Chinese, it took some time, but everything comes in line eventually after a lot of hard work.
 

Gufi

RETIRED TTA
Dec 3, 2014
2,899
36
5,009
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
The heavies are needed, It would be pointless to send the JF-17's with a counter squadron of Mig 29's or Flankers meeting them.
We need to buy time, some how the next 5 years need to go event less... We need to spend an awful lot on our navy and air force both, not to mention new tanks....

Subs were the priority at this time and was pending for some time.
Submarines will be for second strike capability, hopefully preventing any foolish endeavours by the Indians
 

Rashid Mahmood

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Nov 19, 2013
3,709
35
12,261
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
mmm well... i was mentioning the SLCM sir. 800 Km is the range of Babur and even if we get that (obviously a SLCM with same specs i mean) will be able to strike 400 Km inside when launched 400 Km FROM the land i-e shore line, 400 Km deep inside sea.
Why do think PN is going for a strong Sub force.....:-)

We need to buy time, some how the next 5 years need to go event less... We need to spend an awful lot on our navy and air force both, not to mention new tanks....


Submarines will be for second strike capability, hopefully preventing any foolish endeavours by the Indians
I would say that they should be our first strike......
 

Gufi

RETIRED TTA
Dec 3, 2014
2,899
36
5,009
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
I would say that they should be our first strike......
Yes but India and 'others' should know that come what may, they will not survive if they try to wipe us out we shall return the favour in kind. Once they understand that, war will be a distant dream for them.
 

MastanKhan

PDF VETERAN
Dec 26, 2005
19,562
160
53,667
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Hi,

Adjusting the number of subs to surface ships is easy and it is not taking anything away from the total number of subs to be procured at the end of the day---what it is, is the diversion of a certain amount of funds for another project and and adding the needed amount back to the funds on a later date.

All 8 subs are not going to be delivered tomorrow---but in around 6 to 8 years time. So---if 20% is taken from that loan and re-adjusted to surface vessels-he road---then where is the issue.

Now you still have the subs being built and the surface vessels being built----and then 5 years down the road you can add additional funds for the rest of the subs---.

You have not lost anything---but gained the surface fleet from those funds---so technically---you have come ahead of the game.

I really did not think that was so difficult for the readers to understand.

The subs are still going to do what they are designed to do---nothing was being taken away from the overall number of subs except for playing and adjusting the numbers.
 

Abingdonboy

ELITE MEMBER
Jun 4, 2010
29,604
46
55,437
Country
India
Location
United Kingdom
Okay, there seems to be many theories here. But the reality of the submarines we are purchasing from China is for our second strike capability. No amount of frigates or surface vessels would be as deterrent as the ability to strike deep into India with nuclear weapons.
To match at an effective level the direction the Indian navy is headed will take more then a few frigates or destroyers and to mix the objectives of the two would be foolish. The first step we need is a second strike capability which would ensure that war between India and Pakistan is even less likely than now.
Our longer term goals will include a strong surface navy, but that will come with time and as Gwadar blossoms, so shall our surface navy and associated wings including flankers etc....

@MastanKhan
The answer to all of Pakistan's problems= MORE NUKES!


It would be funny if it wasn't so predictable and terribly cliche.
 

Gufi

RETIRED TTA
Dec 3, 2014
2,899
36
5,009
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
The answer to all of Pakistan's problems= MORE NUKES!


It would be funny if it wasn't so predictable and terribly cliche
The cheaper solution with much more deterring effect. The Indians are preparing the same second strike capability it is logical next step. Childish post really...Things are cliché because they work
 

Abingdonboy

ELITE MEMBER
Jun 4, 2010
29,604
46
55,437
Country
India
Location
United Kingdom
The cheaper solution with much more deterring effect. The Indians are preparing the same second strike capability it is logical next step. Childish post really...Things are cliché because they work
India is developing a second strike capability whilst also developing a conventional military edge- by putting all of Pakistan's eggs in one basket (nukes) you are reducing your options in a time of crisis to a few horrific choices especially when Pakistan doesn't even have a declared no first use policy. To me, this isn't a very smart way to go. If you are going to develop such weapons then you have to be prepared to use them.
 

Gufi

RETIRED TTA
Dec 3, 2014
2,899
36
5,009
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
India is developing a second strike capability whilst also developing a conventional military edge- by putting all of Pakistan's eggs in one basket (nukes) you are reducing your options in a time of crisis to a few horrific choices especially when Pakistan doesn't even have a declared no first use policy. To me, this isn't a very smart way to go. If you are going to develop such weapons then you have to be prepared to use them.
Your closest ally at one time says that if it is overwhelmed by conventional means it can also use nuclear weapons.
The whole point of nuclear weapons is to use them, and not to continuously aim to match every plane or every ship for a ship which is impossible for us. Our whole nuclear policy is to resist with conventional weapons but when a line(main battle line) breaks we will use our nuclear weapons. It is clearly understood in our doctrine and the Indian army also knows this.
This will prevent any major wars between the nations saving lives and keeping the region stable.
If it was not for these weapons at least one war would have been fought dragging both nations back 10 years at the least.So thank our nucs and hope they keep the peace because leaders otherwise can be so impulsive.
 

HRK

PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Sep 24, 2010
11,743
92
29,428
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
The answer to all of Pakistan's problems= MORE NUKES!

It would be funny if it wasn't so predictable and terribly cliche.
Which country introduced nuckes in South Asia ... ?? India

Which country introduced Missile Programme in S. Asia ... ?? India

Which country introduced Sea based Nuclear weapon in S. Asia ... ?? India

Which country introduced Nuclear submarine programme in S. Asia ... ?? India

Which country have more number of Nuclear plant in S. Asia ... ?? India

Which country have the biggest Fissile material stockpile in S. Asia ... ?? India

Which country have the ambition of Introducing Nuclear powered Aircraft Carrier in S. Asia ... ?? India

& we have 'some' hypocrites who always post such predictable nonsense ...
 

Abingdonboy

ELITE MEMBER
Jun 4, 2010
29,604
46
55,437
Country
India
Location
United Kingdom
Your closest ally at one time says that if it is overwhelmed by conventional means it can also use nuclear weapons.
The whole point of nuclear weapons is to use them, and not to continuously aim to match every plane or every ship for a ship which is impossible for us. Our whole nuclear policy is to resist with conventional weapons but when a line(main battle line) breaks we will use our nuclear weapons. It is clearly understood in our doctrine and the Indian army also knows this.
This will prevent any major wars between the nations saving lives and keeping the region stable.
If it was not for these weapons at least one war would have been fought dragging both nations back 10 years at the least.So thank our nucs and hope they keep the peace because leaders otherwise can be so impulsive.
I can't say I agree with any of the rationale in this post, we have clearly seen how Pakistan has used its nuclear umbrella to make the region far more unstable than it otherwise would be.


On objective reading of history will show you that India is a status quo seeking nation and thus if it had nuclear weapons and Pakistan did not, it would not be looking to change the status quo by force i.e. it would be unlikely to be starting wars that took either nation back a decade. The past 20 or so years have shown India (its leadership and people) is FAR more interested in economic development and prosperity and I just can't understand why anyone would think India would seek to undermine this agenda by engaging in a bloody conflict with a lesser nation (lesser in the sense it has little India would be particularly interested in taking).

Which country introduced nuckes in South Asia ... ?? India

Which country introduced Missile Programme in S. Asia ... ?? India

Which country introduced Sea based Nuclear weapon in S. Asia ... ?? India

Which country introduced Nuclear submarine programme in S. Asia ... ?? India

Which country have more number of Nuclear plant in S. Asia ... ?? India

Which country have the biggest Fissile material stockpile in S. Asia ... ?? India

Which country have the ambition of Introducing Nuclear powered Aircraft Carrier in S. Asia ... ?? India

& we have 'some' hypocrites who always post such predictable nonsense ...
How about you contextualise this- which country prompted India to pursue all of the aforementioned policies? China. India didn't just wake up one day and start building all this technology for the sake of it.


Let's just leave it at that, I don't feel like playing this game of "who is more guilty of X".
 

Gufi

RETIRED TTA
Dec 3, 2014
2,899
36
5,009
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
I can't say I agree with any of the rationale in this post, we have clearly seen how Pakistan has used its nuclear umbrella to make the region far more unstable than it otherwise would be.
unstable is another way of saying not accepting Indian supremacy and bowing to its wishes :)

But nuclear deterrence and MOD is not my term or my logic but something two super powers introduced which kept peace even when things were very fragile, all throughout the Cold war and the collapse of USSR America did not attack Russia. History proves it works, it just leaves India with no military options which is why it is claimed to destabilize.
 

Shotgunner51

RETIRED INTL MOD
Jan 6, 2015
6,131
46
20,172
Country
China
Location
China
The heavies are needed, It would be pointless to send the JF-17's with a counter squadron of Mig 29's or Flankers meeting them.
Good point that you mention heavies in the air. While most pay attention to the subs or their subsystem like AIP or LACM, a complete sea-based second strike capability that PN is building with China now should cover at least 5 dimensions: undersea assets (the 8 AIP equipped SSG, and weaponry), air-bourne support, surface fleet (e.g. sub logistics/support/tender vessels, frigates or others), Satcom, and E&M sphere.

Other than the payload, PN is creating a whole new capability here.
 
Last edited:

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


Top Bottom