Pak Navy able to repel border attack’

[newdelhinsa]

India do not need ACC for Pakistan navy. You guys have wasted your money on some thing which will be irrelevant in any naval warfare with India. Rest of our fleet is too agile for any of these hit or miss missiles.

BTW anyone know how far from your coast ACC will operates and what is its operational doctrine ? Your air assets plus the range of these missiles are short legged to reach before either they will be detected, shot down or may ran out of breaths while returning back.

Also I would ask members who are posting some self made naval doctrine of PN 'shoot and scoot' 'deny blockade' blah blah to refer to declared PN naval doctrine if they know it. In my assessment your army is good for littoral naval warfare excluding your submarine fleet. Hitting ACC with whatever air assets you have is a fictional dream I can say.

 

[Contrarian]

^^^Arent these missiles fitted with a shaped charge warhead?
That will slice through the ship's structure as a blow torch..

They are. And they should slice through regular hulls like a blow torch. But Carriers are made differently. They use much higher thickness of steel coupled with very very high compartmentalization systems and designs - much more so than regular warships. One of the reasons why it is much more expensive to make an aircraft carrier. It has much more redundancy built in - purposely built to take damage from AShM's and remain afloat, if not operational.
It would take multiple hits before it gets operationally dead.

 

[Abingdonboy]

I cn understand how these comments came about and the PN chief said all he could and what was expected of him to say- you'd expect nothing less.


The PN though certainly is the most neglected of the 3 services and needs to be given much more funds to meet growing maritime threats to Paksitan. IIRC the IN was in a similar postion up and till a few years back.

 

[Jango]

You don't necessarily have to make a big hole in the hull to render a A/C in-operational.

A rocket at the top surface (they are also hardened AFAIK) or the island would also render flight ops inactive.

There are alot of ways, but then again there are alot of redundancies built in as well. They also have active counter measures.

 

[Safriz]

Yup..
Too bad our 'grey haired' navy bosses....who spent decades in Pakistan navy , dont know what you lot just wrote here and bought the wrong type of weaponery..
I will pass on the message...

 

[Contrarian]

Its not the Pakistani's Naval Chief's fault - its the Pakistani Army generals fault. They are the ones who decide on everything with respect to the budget that each service gets.

PN will only buy from the funds available - and what is needed to defend against a Navy being funded like IN, it is simply not enough. That is the crux of the issue.

 

[newdelhinsa]

Yup..
Too bad out 'grey haired' navy bosses....who spent decades in Pakistan navy , dont know what you lot just wrote here and bought the wrong type of weaponery..
I will pass on the message...

May be they had different plans but its real usage is lost in translation because of fan boys like you who can self made naval doctrine like shoot and scoot; don't know if talking about surface fleet or air fighters or both.

BTW its still a hit or miss missile with unknown test record.

 

[Safriz]

You don't necessarily have to make a big hole in the hull to render a A/C in-operational.

A rocket at the top surface (they are also hardened AFAIK) or the island would also render flight ops inactive.

There are alot of ways, but then again there are alot of redundancies built in as well. They also have active counter measures.

It always depends where the missile hits...
Two keywords have to be googled here.
Metacentre and free surface effect..
Once water enters the ship,the ship's CG shifts and she lists to one side...For being operational the ship needs to be upright or within a certain degrees to port or starboard...if the ship lists more than permssable limit even without sinking she is useless for war...
All ships have pumps to get rid of incoming water in case of hull breach,but it depends how big the hole is and where it is...if the pump capacity is less than incoming water,the ship will keep tilting to one side
In aircraft carriers they have large unpartitioned continuous decks below the top weather deck..
If water enters such a deck and the ship is rolling or pitching,it will cause significant metacentric height loss and the ship may end up at 'angle of loll' or capsize...
In both cases it will be useless even if it doesnt sink as you cant launch jets or missiles from a heavily tilted ship.
In another scenarion if the missile hits a little to the forward of the ship at a slanting angle and cuts through major girdirs,and the weather us a bit rough...nature will do the rest and under the stresses caused by buoyancy pushing upwards,gravity pulling downward and sea waves increasing and decreasing buoyancy all the time,the rest of the ship structure may break off and sink the ship..

So it really depends on many things and prevailing circumstances at the time....

You don't necessarily have to make a big hole in the hull to render a A/C in-operational.

A rocket at the top surface (they are also hardened AFAIK) or the island would also render flight ops inactive.

There are alot of ways, but then again there are alot of redundancies built in as well. They also have active counter measures.

It always depends where the missile hits...
Two keywords have to be googled here.
Metacentre and free surface effect..
Once water enters the ship,the ship's CG shifts and she lists to one side...For being operational the ship needs to be upright or within a certain degrees to port or starboard...if the ship lists more than permssable limit even without sinking she is useless for war...
All ships have pumps to get rid of incoming water in case of hull breach,but it depends how big the hole is and where it is...if the pump capacity is less than incoming water,the ship will keep tilting to one side
In aircraft carriers they have large unpartitioned continuous decks below the top weather deck..
If water enters such a deck and the ship is rolling or pitching,it will cause significant metacentric height loss and the ship may end up at 'angle of loll' or capsize...
In both cases it will be useless even if it doesnt sink as you cant launch jets or missiles from a heavily tilted ship.
In another scenarion if the missile hits a little to the forward of the ship at a slanting angle and cuts through major girdirs,and the weather us a bit rough...nature will do the rest and under the stresses caused by buoyancy pushing upwards,gravity pulling downward and sea waves increasing and decreasing buoyancy all the time,the rest of the ship structure may break off and sink the ship..

So it really depends on many things and prevailing circumstances at the time....

 

[SQ8]

May be they had different plans but its real usage is lost in translation because of fan boys like you who can self made naval doctrine like shoot and scoot; don't know if talking about surface fleet or air fighters or both.

BTW its still a hit or miss missile with unknown test record.

In that case,
The R-77 variants, the Brahmos, the Astra.. and whole bunch of weapons in service with India have unknown test records since all we have is Indian or Russian words for their success.
Then why do you even bother with a post... unknown test record means an unverifiable result.
After all, THERE IS NO REAL WORLD CONFLICT verification data for either of these weapons.
Maybe the Shaheen missile never really flies and Pakistanis have just perfected video CGI.

If are going to be blockheaded .. let be proper ones.

 

[saiyan0321]

On open ground India would win the naval battle 8 out of 10 times and an army based on defence cannot launch an offensive strike with such potency. However what is could do is meet the defensive needs as the naval chief is not talking of an invasion. He is talking of defensive maneuvers, Which can be done. Remember our navy is not as weak as it was in 1971. At that time it was extremely neglected but now it has its teeth and can bear it. However any naval offense or defence without the support of the Air force or air arm would be useless. With our Air force and Naval working together i feel we can repel a full Indian assault. However our weakness is that the outfits of the army don't tend to work together well, which should be worked upon alot..

 

[Secur]

What guidance system does it employ?

After denial , comes confusion , perhaps ? ...

 

[Skull and Bones]

After denial , comes confusion , perhaps ? ...

No, some sources says it employs IR seekers and some says it's guided by Beidou and some Chini blogs say it has semi-active/active homing.

Sometimes one has to use his brain, and seek answers for confusions, rather than being a poodle's tail.

 

[DARKY]

I don't understand what has happened to the quality of this forum specially members from other side... claims such as CK-400 can fly upto 400 miles and cannot be shot down since it was launched beyond the range of SAMs... by the esteemed think tanks is as stupid as it can get... some even claim that at 5.5 Mach they can hit a moving target without an Active seeker...

AFIK this missile take a parabolic flight path.. reaching an altitude of upto 50km... with sustained flight for some period of time before diving in.... near the target... providing ample time for any SAM system to track its co-ordinates well and hit it with precision while its diving towards the target... similar to what is done with ballistic missile... lack of TVC nozzles and proper control fins which can make it maneuver...[Although its quiet stupid to think that a rocket motor near sea level or low altitude would allow much maneuverability at 5.5 mach.].. makes it an easy target for age old CIWS systems... let alone a maneuvering SAM with vectoring nozzles, dual-pulse motor and an active radar seeker to go with it.

Russian Navy had a similar missile Kh-15 during 80s on their naval bombers which so far has been replaced by subsonic ones which can dive in low at stand off ranges and maintain a low profile near sea level and upto the target...mainly due the development of advanced Radars, SAM systems and better CIWS... It has been a lot easier to shoot down such missile in mid air and at much longer distance.

Now coming to guidance.... unless the missile has a proper active guidance to go with proper mid-course guidance it would have a hard time locating the target and easy target for countermeasures too... we can rule to any chance of IIR seeker as It would fail at such temperature[5.5mach near sealevel] besides I don't think any aircraft in PAF has the capability of taking an IR picture of target from stand off distances which is out of the range of enemy SAM systems.

Finally about Aircraft carrier's vulnerability I would like to point out here to the knowledgeable members and think tanks that... Pakistan is not 1000s of NM away from India... even the most short legged aircraft in IAF/IN can reach Pakistani coasts and return with a few hundred gallons remaining in the fuel tanks... Hence using an Aircraft carrier in that case makes no sense risking a Big machine where none is required... IN aviation wing which would in future consist of about 100+ 4th and 4.5th gen about 3 dozen or so bombers etc... aircraft would be a force of its own to be reckon with while countering any mischief or ambitious move by PAF in the Arabian sea along with IAF support[Which includes Su30MKI and maritime Jaguars]... I would not like to exaggerate the figure here but by 2020 It could perhaps have over 200 4th and 4.5th gen. combat planes... It already has 2-3 squadrons ready with each squadron with as many planes as a normal F-16 squadron in PAF has.[IAF squadron have higher number].

At last I would ask the think tank to verify his claim about 400 miles range of this missile... which is almost 650km.

 

[DARKY]

On open ground India would win the naval battle 8 out of 10 times and an army based on defence cannot launch an offensive strike with such potency. However what is could do is meet the defensive needs as the naval chief is not talking of an invasion. He is talking of defensive maneuvers, Which can be done. Remember our navy is not as weak as it was in 1971. At that time it was extremely neglected but now it has its teeth and can bear it. However any naval offense or defence without the support of the Air force or air arm would be useless. With our Air force and Naval working together i feel we can repel a full Indian assault. However our weakness is that the outfits of the army don't tend to work together well, which should be worked upon alot..

Quiet wrong... in 1971 PN was in better position than today... It had better destroyers... and long range submarine fleet which In lacked.. during that time.

Today IN operates SSN and SSBN to go with an advanced fleet of SSKs which are and would be far better than PN after the addition of Scorpene under construction and follow on Subs... SSNs and SSBN.

Along with far better air-defense fleet in both point and area defense and area defense to go with a fleet of advanced bombers and submarine hunters along with a good strength in Air-air combat with 5-6 combat squadrons in a couple of years or so.

The difference in naval strength between IN and PN has never been more and stands to increase exponentially in future irrespective of the addition of X-Y-Z Chinese missiles.

 

[Contrarian]

Yup, well, within a decade, IN technological superiority over any South Asian Navy will be greatest in history. A Navy is built in decades, ours is being built in shipyards as we speak.