Does the PN need an aircraft carrier?

[SBD-3]

It wont be an advantage, since losing one gets to be a pretty big insult look at the Indian Aircraft Carrier during 71 war PN sent missions to search and destroy the AC of IN they hid the beast from us, we were offered an AC by France in mid 70s when ZAB visited France, but ZAB declined the offer since it would have been trouble keeping it maintained and keeping it out of the reach of the enemy, he told the than PM of France to offer it to China instead but even they declined it. An AC is advantage if you have the know how but if you don't its just a burden on the entire navy, the IN has been repairing this rust since they had it, its no good.

I agree, PN is aware of IN and is doing prett well like frigates and warships along with sub and whats more, more oriens and EC-2 hawk eyes if PN is successfully ablt to deploy hawkeyes, arial threat posed by IN AC will be minimized. PN is pursuing a better strategy; acquiring the small but fast and effective missile boats and Subs if we are able to get SLCM by Agosta or U-214 that will be pretty fine

 

[Lockheed F-16]

Additionally, Pakistan's Armed Forces are defensive forces and not offensive so our job is to protect the homeland, an AC is sth you need when you want to launch a full scale attack against another country

 

[SinoIndusFriendship]

Why go for AC? Shouldn't battle cruisers and subs be more cost effective? If getting an AC means bankruptcy for Pak then it's counter-productive. Being over ambitious is dangerous!

 

[Interceptor]

We are replacing our aging fleet with reliable fleet which we can maintain and build on so it is matter of time when we will produce a sea deterrent to the IN build up, so far as Lockheed F-16 has said our aim is to approach it defensively and we can see there are big plans we bought C-802 anti ship cruise missiles and constantly searching for advance sea surveillance system like the various successful attempt to build anti ship system from UAV's produced in Pakistan and testing foreign UAV's. The PN situation looks dire at the moment but in reality there has been real catalyst increase in effort to get infrastructure to house Pakistan's new Navy fleet for the future. Further more until we are not ready to get the new fleet a defensive approach has been deployed by the navy the navy migh be able to get few AWACS from the AF to operate to cover the its grounds until better fleets are available.

 

[TOPGUN]

No need for it as we have talked about this before a million times we need to come up on numbers on our surface fleet , subs and work towards armimg our air arm this will perhaps in the future and far future that is maybe we can use a small heli carrier other then that no need for one now or years to come but we must build up our navy soon as it is in need.

 

[proud_indian]

Why go for AC? Shouldn't battle cruisers and subs be more cost effective? If getting an AC means bankruptcy for Pak then it's counter-productive. Being over ambitious is dangerous!

Sir
I read all of your post throughout entire day.
When almost everybody is just putting fanboy kinda stuff (from both side) ur posts seems really practical and close to reality.
I really appreciate it.

Great to have a nice member like u on this forum

thanks

 

[sancho]

Additionally, Pakistan's Armed Forces are defensive forces and not offensive so our job is to protect the homeland, an AC is sth you need when you want to launch a full scale attack against another country

That's not totally true, because the use of a carrier is not only offensive. Of course attacking is one part, but sea control and defending costlines is another.
India for example has a large costline and instead of defending it only with aircrafts from land bases and ships, you can put a carrier group way before it as the first line of defense against sea and air threats. Pakistan don't have this kind of large costline, that's why it's easier to defend it with a lower number of ships and aircrafts. A carrier would be only wasting of money and resources that can be used better.

 

[TOPGUN]

Well we exactly don't have very small coast line look at the map! again its at no where big as India but as per size of Pakistan its whole southern part is a coast line check up on it ! now once again no need for AC as i have writen in my earlier post buliding up or surface fleet and subs is needed also arming and upgrading and expanding the numbers in the air arm will help and is well needed inshallah the day is near the navy needs this change and it has already been started.

 

[Penguin]

Assuming PN needs a carrier, let's think this through: what are we talking about here? Specifically, what type of aircraft would this carrier be operating ('jump jet' like Harrier orF-35B or conventional jet like F-35C, F/A-18, Rafale, navalised J10) > what type/size of carrier.

Harrier > nearing end of service life
F-35B > under development, not likely to end up in PN service.
F-35C > under development, not likely to end up in PN service
Carrier version of J-10 > yet to be developed (if ever).
new F/A-18E/F > very remote possibility of ending up in PN service
used F/A-18A/B or C/D > slightly larger but still remote likelihood of ending up in PN service
Rafale > how's Pakistan's record of trying to obtain Rafale been so far?

In sum, without a suitable aircraft available, there is no chance for a PN carrier, assuming PN would need this (and, IMHO, PN needs it about as much as the Royal Thai Navy really needs its Chakri Naruebet i.e. not!).

Then, there's the issue of carrier escort group as well.

 

[Patriot]

Well impossible for us to buy carrier but even if we do INdians will use full force to destroy it to insult us so its better to buy more jets and operate them From AFB.

 

[paritosh]

PN does not have the best of diesel electric submarines and neither plenty of them. The Augusta 90B's are the only ones in the PN's inventory that can be classified as good, and there are just three of them. The presence of 10 Kilo class submarines with the IN alone are more than a match for the PN submarine fleet as well as its surface fleet. The arrival of P8I's in a couple of years is likely to alter this balance more in the IN's favor.

the ratio of the no. of subs of pakistan to the strenght of their surface fleet is better than our case..while as you point out,their subs are not as many as india's but recent acquisition trends suggest an increasing buying of subs.
the reason why i find this clever is simple...an ideal sub is a)untracable,
b)self-sustaining,
and
c)capable of 2-dimensional ship kills(most can launch ballistic missiles now along with torpedos)
the recent acquisition of the P3c-orions is a step taken by us to counter the growing PN sub fleet.
there are ways to kill a sub...like the active sonic measures(the use of sonar convergence zones,etc)
but a good sub with a good crew can sink many a ships...the capabilities of subs are tremendous.

 

[Tomahawk]

the ratio of the no. of subs of pakistan to the strenght of their surface fleet is better than our case.

I think India's sub fleet has improved when you look back into history, during 1965 and 1971 IN had no Submarine.
In 1965 PN had 1 Submarine (PNS Ghazi) and in 1971 PN had 5 Submarines (1 Ghazi and 4 Daphne Class).

Now lets us talk about the present situation, IN now has 14 Submarines (10 Kilo Class and 4 Type 209), whereas the no. of Submarines in PN's fleet is still 5 (3 Agosta-90B and 2 Agosta-70).

The point is that in the past PN had not been given due importance and given our current fleet we cannot think of having an Aircraft carrier, instead PN's surface and sub-surface capability should be enhanced. F-22P and German U-214 is the beginning and a step towards the long awaited attention that PN required for a long time.

 

[IceCold]

Instead of acquiring an AC and which by the way will not serve any purpose as far as PN is concerned other then a mere symbol of power projection, we should instead emphasize on acquiring a nuclear ballistic sub inorder to attain a nuclear triad capability. We have always relied on Sub warfare, its about time we take it to a new level and acquire a nuclear sub something we should have had done by now.

 

[sancho]

Well we exactly don't have very small coast line look at the map! again its at no where big as India but as per size of Pakistan its whole southern part is a coast line check up on it !

As I said compared to India, but also to other countries in that area Pakistans coastline is not so big.

India coastline 7000+ Km
Iran coastline 2400+ Km
Oman coastline 2000+ Km
UAE coastline 1300+ Km
Pakistan coastline 1000+ Km

Intute - World Guide - United Arab Emirates

Nothing that could not be defended with destroyes, frigate, subs and aircrafts.

Instead of acquiring an AC and which by the way will not serve any purpose as far as PN is concerned other then a mere symbol of power projection, we should instead emphasize on acquiring a nuclear ballistic sub inorder to attain a nuclear triad capability. We have always relied on Sub warfare, its about time we take it to a new level and acquire a nuclear sub something we should have had done by now.

Again the cost is an issue, for one nuclear sub you can get more numbers of U 214 for example, another issue is who would sell you one? I would say only China and even that with some doubts, because they might only have a few of them (not much known about the actual number). More realistic would be to develop it by your own like India is doing it now, but it takes some time of course.

 

[SBD-3]

Instead of acquiring an AC and which by the way will not serve any purpose as far as PN is concerned other then a mere symbol of power projection, we should instead emphasize on acquiring a nuclear ballistic sub inorder to attain a nuclear triad capability. We have always relied on Sub warfare, its about time we take it to a new level and acquire a nuclear sub something we should have had done by now.

getting a Nuke Sub! a simple answer would be BIG NO!
do you really think that US,France or Germany would give us their silent Knights? think practically dude, what is on offer for PN are basically export versions of subs.French no longer use agosta; and german U-214 is reportedly inferior to their locally used U-212 which is derived from U-214 but is far more capable.India on the other hand had an opertunity for NukeSub but russians ment money and a lot of it which india couldnt afford.only hope for pakistan is the when China can fully evolve its home grown Nuke sub type 093 or 094 and then eventually offer them to Pakistan which seems highly unlikly