Featured Ex PN Chief Zafar Mehmood Abbasi highlighted PN modernization

[Max]

Ex CNS did wonderful job, May Allah reward him.

He mentioned Tabook and Haybat separately. These six he is referring to are Destroyers which one that has to be seen. Because if Pakistan is developing Ballistic Missiles which could be launched from surface ships than you could even see Type 55 becoming part of Pakistan Navy.

Or it could be both.

 

[Areesh]

He mentioned Tabook and Haybat separately. These six he is referring to are Destroyers which one that has to be seen. Because if Pakistan is developing Ballistic Missiles which could be launched from surface ships than you could even see Type 55 becoming part of Pakistan Navy.

He mentioned 6 bigger ships as follow up of PNS Yarmook and Tabook

Check at 15:20

 

[Yasser76]

Sir the waters which we have to secure and defend are no small feet. Secondly yes Navy is looking for a global role not just regional.

It's all a relative thing. In the big scheme of major navies, Pakistan does not have a very large area of responsibility. If you look at say the Indonesian and Malay Navies you will see they have to defence literally thousands and thousands of miles of coast line and hundreds of islands as well as there economic exclusion zone. A much bigger job than Pakistan Navy, but by the looks of things Pakistan Navy will dwarf even Indonesia and Malaysia in terms of size and capability.....

 

[Mrc]

For ballistic missiles in the anti ship role...a lot remains to be seen. There's no such thing as "no answer" for pretty much everything related to warfare. Here is one excellent video by covert cabal regarding China's DF21D anti ship ballistic missile...that analyzes its possible capabilities...and potential ways it can be countered.

I would disagree with one thing that ballistic missiles cannot maneuver in exo space. Nearly all Chinese and even pakistani missiles can do that.

Plus while the video does show counter measures to single missile attack it does not factor in multiple and variations in attack profile it self like time spacing etc.

Maneuvering ballistic missiles are really hard to shoot but yes they are not without counter measures I agree

But at this point they represent the most potent threat to any surface vessel.

 

[TheSnakeEatingMarkhur]

Ballistic missile under development

Bro you sure ?

 

[Mustang-87]

If so that is very interesting, it does point to us becoming more of an expiditonary Navy and moving beyon Arabian sea.

Let's face it, with a country with such a small coast line as Pakistan we will have a Navy to rival most modern countries. You do not need 13 MPAs or 6 Destroyers if you plane just coastal defence. I think this will see a emphasis not only on the Indian threat but also securing Western supply lines and more of an active participation in the Persian Gulf.

my guess:
the task force-1 based at karachi will deal with western indian ocean region
task force-3 at gwadar will have persian gulf as its area of responsibility and task force-2 will play a supporting role for the other two.

 

[Areesh]

Bro you sure ?

PN chief clearly said that

 

[JamD]

So the development of the newly named "P-282" anti-ballistic missile points to two things:
1. Obviously we are taking some cues from China with regards to doctrine.
2. We have developed, or are in the process of developing some kind of real-time sensor network to detect ships in our seas, possibly based on coastal sensors, satellites, UAVs, and LRMPAs.

 

[Cookie Monster]

I would disagree with one thing that ballistic missiles cannot maneuver in exo space. Nearly all Chinese and even pakistani missiles can do that.

At that altitude the atmosphere is pretty much non existent. The maneuverability can only be done through thrusters and not control surfaces(bcuz of the lack of earth's atmosphere). So yes maneuverability at that altitude is still possible...it just requires thrusters...which means that the warhead then has to be smaller(to accommodate additional space for those thrusters). He makes that exact point in the video.

Plus while the video does show counter measures to single missile attack it does not factor in multiple and variations in attack profile it self like time spacing etc.

It also talks about a saturation attack...and he mentions that these missiles(DF41) are expensive...and launching multiple missiles against one target is unlikely...though cannot be ruled out.

But at this point they represent the most potent threat to any surface vessel.

Yeah they are a potent threat...but a lot remains to be seen.

The main reason I linked this video isn't to talk about counter measures as much...nor about countries like China or US and their capabilities...
...the main reason was target acquisition when the missile reenters and uses its own radar. From the moment when initial target is acquired by some external sensor(and fed to the missile)...to the time missile is launched and the travel time...by then the target could have travelled a significant distance away(in any direction)...at that point if the target is out of the cone(of the missile's own radar)...it may not have enough time(due to its hypersonic speed) to search for and maneuver to the new position of said target. This is why it is thought that DF41 is a "carrier killer" missile...bcuz an aircraft carrier is a slow moving target that presents a large signature. The effectiveness of such hypersonic anti ship ballistic missiles would significantly diminish against smaller fast moving targets.

 

[JamD]

So the development of the newly named "P-282" anti-ballistic missile points to two things:
1. Obviously we are taking some cues from China with regards to doctrine.
2. We have developed, or are in the process of developing some kind of real-time sensor network to detect ships in our seas, possibly based on coastal sensors, satellites, UAVs, and LRMPAs.

@Signalian This is a complete shot in the dark but how reasonable of an idea is to "paint" a target with radar (let's say with a super focued beam from a powerful AESA radar on a jet from standoff range - lets say 200km) for a hypothetical anti-ship ballistic missile warhead armed with a radar seeker? Or is this completely impractical?

 

[Mrc]

At that altitude the atmosphere is pretty much non existent. The maneuverability can only be done through thrusters and not control surfaces(bcuz of the lack of earth's atmosphere). So yes maneuverability at that altitude is still possible...it just requires thrusters...which means that the warhead then has to be smaller(to accommodate additional space for those thrusters). He makes that exact point in the video.

It also talks about a saturation attack...and he mentions that these missiles(DF41) are expensive...and launching multiple missiles against one target is unlikely...though cannot be ruled out.

Yeah they are a potent threat...but a lot remains to be seen.

The main reason I linked this video isn't to talk about counter measures as much...nor about countries like China or US and their capabilities...
...the main reason was target acquisition when the missile reenters and uses its own radar. From the moment when initial target is acquired by some external sensor(and fed to the missile)...and by the time missile is launched and the travel time...by then the target could have travelled a significant distance away(in any direction)...at that point if the target is out of the cone(of the missile's own radar)...it may not have enough time(due to its hypersonic speed) to search for and maneuver to the new position of said target. This is why it is thought that DF41 is a "carrier killer" missile...bcuz an aircraft carrier is a slow moving target that presents a large signature. The effectiveness of such hypersonic anti ship ballistic missiles would significantly diminish against smaller fast moving targets.

One advantage of AsBM is that it does not need a large warhead to do damage as speed alone will crash through decks and cripple even a large ship... Some thing low velocity cruise missiles cannot do...


Yes how target is acquired during terminal stage remains to b seen... May use terminal update from satellite instead of radar.. Other options are optical sensors

Smaller ships will b difficult to target

The question that whether df 41 works is i think obsolete... I think they work.. We just don't know how

 

[Cookie Monster]

One advantage of AsBM is that it does not need a large warhead to do damage as speed alone will crash through decks and cripple even a large ship... Some thing low velocity cruise missiles cannot do...


Yes how target is acquired during terminal stage remains to b seen... May use terminal update from satellite instead of radar.. Other options are optical sensors

Smaller ships will b difficult to target

The question that whether df 41 works is i think obsolete... I think they work.. We just don't know how

My guess is that this missile is mainly a threat to IN destroyers and aircraft carrier...which is an excellent and cost effective counter.

 

[Areesh]

Excellent speech by Abbasi sahab

Now only way ACM mujahid sahab can counter it in his speech by announcing that we are buying 100 plus FC31

 

[Rafi]

There are also classified programs that are Navy specific that will increase capability manifold.

 

[D-day]

I do not know why they are not buying Type052D.