Indian naval aerial arm will stretch Pakistani air force

[danger007]

of course jf is not a dedicated Navel ac but remember it is a multi role single engin also long range fighters are somthing we canot affford yes it is a drawback but its the reality and becides F16 will also be there . in future J10b might get a navel role but these ac will always remain defencive fighters. to counter the Mig threat we can look in to t 504 freget system remember the HQ 9 SAM system is a big threat with the AESA CC system. another method is in a senario of war to take out the AircraftC it self with a SEAD and Strike force keep in mind in traning excercises we have defeater USS Gorge bush defences with Mirage Ac and also keep in mind a whole SEAD EW ECCM traning system has been set up to train pilots against combination of SAM AA that u guys have on ground and also on ur ships.

does pakistan have HQ-7 sam's... India too have sam is that mean maintaining jets is waste. what's the range of HQ-7 sam.

 

[T90TankGuy]

waste less thread just imagination
we already saw mig-29kub when it had been destroyed in Russia

we too saw the numerous f 16 crashes through the world .does that mean you guys will scrap it ?

try not to comment when you haven't an iota of knowledge on the subject mate.

 

[sancho]

What role does India have in mind for the naval fighters, is it only for fleet defence and other naval duties, or are they also tasked with offensively engaging other air forces? If we are talking about pakistan, would the mig 29Ks be expected to attack engage the PAF from a different front, or are those tasks going to be left solely to the IAF? Does India really need its naval aviation wing to do it?

Attacking Pakistan with carrier fighters will not be a prime role for IN, the land based targets are limited and we have way higher numbers of MKIs stationed at the border regions anyway. IN's role in a war against Pakistan would be similar to what they did in 72, achieving Sea Control and blocking Sea lanes, or ports from supplies. In this case IN carrier fighter will be used mainly for air defence of the carrier group, but also for anti ship attacks against PN vessels, while strike attacks on shore based targets might be very limited, if at all.

Found this pic recently of an Mig 29K/KUB prototype with 2 x Kh 35 missiles, which are comparable to Harpoons, or Exocets and INs versions might have similar configs:

 

[chuk-chuk]

Who says it will stretch the PN rather it will box in the PN.

 

[T90TankGuy]

Who says it will stretch the PN rather it will box in the PN.

either you are making a PJ or you did not get what it means.

 

[S-A-B-E-R->]

does pakistan have HQ-7 sam's... India too have sam is that mean maintaining jets is waste. what's the range of HQ-7 sam.

read the entire thing i am not compairing SAM sys i am stating that what can or canot be the step that PN takes to defend its navel vessels against MIG threat.

 

[danger007]

read the entire thing i am not compairing SAM sys i am stating that what can or canot be the step that PN takes to defend its navel vessels against MIG threat.

Mig threat is supposed to be SHIP's and NAVAL port's.... MIG"S main target will be in GROUND.. where i am fighting?? im just asking pakistan does have HQ-7 sam's. what's the range of HQ-7...

 

[Veeru]

India need to have 5 aircraft carrier and if we decided to go for them our navy's air wing will have about the same number of modern aircrafts as PAF.

 

[S-A-B-E-R->]

Mig threat is supposed to be SHIP's and NAVAL port's.... MIG"S main target will be in GROUND.. where i am fighting?? im just asking pakistan does have HQ-7 sam's. what's the range of HQ-7...

we have a on ship version
Missile dimensions: (length) 3.00 m; (diameter) 0.156 m; (wingspan) 0.55 m
Launch weight: 84.5 kg
Operating altitude: 30~5,000 m (HQ-7/FM-80); 15~6,000 m (FM-90)
Minimum operating range: 500 m (HQ-7/FM-80); 700 m (FM-90)
Max operating range: HQ-7/FM-80 {8,600 m (400 m/s target); 10,000 m (300 m/s target); 12,000 m (slow flying targets)}; FM-90: 15,000 m to all targets
Speed: Mach 2.3 (750 m/s)
Guidance: Command + electro-optical tracking
Warhead: HE-FRAG with proximity fuse
Radar detecting range: 18.4 km (HQ-7/FM-80); 25 km (FM-90)
Radar homing range: 17 km (HQ-7/FM-80); 20 km (FM-90)

---------- Post added at 09:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:47 PM ----------

India need to have 5 aircraft carrier and if we decided to go for them our navy's air wing will have about the same number of modern aircrafts as PAF.

5 AC thats abt 10 billion dollars a year can u spend that much ?

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

good....so now indians will understand why we continue to aim for a policy of minimal yet credible deterrence

 

[rockstarIN]

Attacking Pakistan with carrier fighters will not be a prime role for IN, the land based targets are limited and we have way higher numbers of MKIs stationed at the border regions anyway. IN's role in a war against Pakistan would be similar to what they did in 72, achieving Sea Control and blocking Sea lanes, or ports from supplies. In this case IN carrier fighter will be used mainly for air defence of the carrier group, but also for anti ship attacks against PN vessels, while strike attacks on shore based targets might be very limited, if at all.

Found this pic recently of an Mig 29K/KUB prototype with 2 x Kh 35 missiles, which are comparable to Harpoons, or Exocets and INs versions might have similar configs:

Can't understand why our carrier fighters will be mainly used only for defensive role, why can't they attack enemy harbours? Isn't one carrier and fighters enough against a PAF counter raid?

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

PN Aviation wing is primarily there for purposes such as maritime patrol & reccon, as well as for rescue operations....when they require air support they can coordinate with its sister service for any support it requires

this is the primary reason why the joint chiefs of staff committee exists in the first place...!

 

[wind]

I think the russian carrier can carry 24 mig 29k's. How effective can they be in offensive role??? It will add teeth to IN but not a serious threat to PAK

 

[Tshering22]

I think the russian carrier can carry 24 mig 29k's. How effective can they be in offensive role??? It will add teeth to IN but not a serious threat to PAK

Really? In a conventional war they're meant to pulverize battleship formations including assault formations. But you're indirectly right; they're not meant for you in first place. Once both the carriers are into service, one would likely be patrolling our part of IOR.

 

[INDIAISM]

5 AC thats abt 10 billion dollars a year can u spend that much ?

At present NO....In future Very Much Possible.....you know till 2000 nobody would have though that by 2016 India Navy will operate Atleast 2 CBG ....and Most probably we will be operating 3 CBG by 2022....so you can't count out the possibility of 5 Aircraft carriers in future....and BTw for your information Indian Navy already has Plans to operate minimum 4 Aircraft Carriers in future...