Featured Pakistan Navy Type 054AP Frigates - Update, News & Discussion

[iLION12345_1]

Hi SQ,

A. Deploy this mixed bag fleet of obsolete and/or heavy fighters in a real world scenario

The three aircraft I mentioned was an example. PN can get any one of these types. These fighters are not obsolete. Even JH-7s have been modernised with AESA.

B. Manage the training and logistics of three types with two different generation engines and performance parameters?

As above. PN can select only one of these types. If PN wants to manage Indian and other threats, then unfortunately this has to be done. There is NO GAIN WITHOUT PAIN.

C. The distance to eastern India( assuming you are wanting to fly across mainland India to get to eastern India) is about 1200mi of which 90% is over hostile airspace with air defense and interceptors. That is also roughly the same distance to the southernmost IN base.

The maximum straight line radius of operations for a JH-7 is about 1000mi with refueling and assuming no AB use and forgetting any on station time for them.

The maximum radius for the J-15/J-16 is around 1500mi to 1600mi on high altitude flight with zero evasive maneuvers and no station time(meaning it goes and comes back). Adding the real life aspects of having to engage enemy aircraft on route or means this range drops down further to around 900mi or so effective range which is really why the IAF can only consider using it’s MKIs to fly around Pakistan via air refueling.

So now we need air refueling back and forth to get to South or East India with any meaningful payload - which means that considering the threat level that High value asset so far from friendly skies is going to need its own protection that needs either a J-16 or J-15 to guard it. So now for just 4 J-16s you need 2 or 4 J-15s to guard its refueller. Then, even if these aircraft get that far they need a good indication where to look for vessels otherwise they need a MPA(another HVAA that will need support) out there to advise them where to fine tune their SEA mode searches since the flight time isn’t exactly 10 minutes and ships do move even if at a stately 25 knots.

Finally, after each sortie there is maintenance time so the average servicibikity of flanker variants even in the best of airforces barely crosses 65%. Which means of your proposed 50 mix of JH-7, J-15(why you are even including a carrier variant is beyond me) ,J-16 we have About 30 at best available of which only 20 would be the flanker variants with the pilot fatigue in that mix as well.

So even if we sent a flight of 2 armed with 4 AsHMs(which could even with a 100% success rate that never happens) take 8 ships out every time to fight their way to a target and fight it out with refueling - after the first day surge we would barely have 6-8 flankers serviceable at any given time for responses which may also be required for other duties as well besides blowing the IN out of the water.

Finally, assuming the obsolete “new” JH-7s cost $25 million , J-15s at $60 and J-16s at $65 and getting 16 aircraft each puts you at $2.4 billion for the airframes alone - add in training for pilots and technicians, facilities, spares, weapons adds another $400 million easily with higher priced spares since you cant use volume discounts nor offset with local production unlike the JF-17.

So for all that money you are getting three different systems that require a lot of support to achieve a goal that has really no need to occur with a lifecycle cost that will be too much to bear for the PN budget in the first place. Would love to see what your justifications are for A,B and C

Yes there are going to be all these issues you mentioned above. Yes there are going to be some restraints, but to gain STRATEGIC Advantage, it has to be DONE. Again, WITHOUT PAIN THERE IS NO GAIN. There have been plenty of discussion on this forum about the range of these jets. Again these are issues which can be resolved.

The good news is that over the past many years, China has done a lot of work to improve these jets.

China ‘closer to perfecting its aircraft jet engines for J-15’

An improved engine for the aircraft carrier-based warplanes is close to mass production, military analysts say.

www.scmp.com

J-11, 15 and 16 are NOT OFFERED FOR EXPORT. China cannot export them due to the Russian background.
JH-7 is not worth buying, it is not future proof. They would need to replace it soon down the line. The other issues SQ8 explained already, none of this is realistic brother.

 

[Ghessan]

Yes there are going to be all these issues you mentioned above. Yes there are going to be some restraints, but to gain STRATEGIC Advantage, it has to be DONE. Again, WITHOUT PAIN THERE IS NO GAIN. There have been plenty of discussion on this forum about the range of these jets. Again these are issues which can be resolved.

The good news is that over the past many years, China has done a lot of work to improve these jets.

China ‘closer to perfecting its aircraft jet engines for J-15’

An improved engine for the aircraft carrier-based warplanes is close to mass production, military analysts say.

www.scmp.com

We only need those planes for south western ports like Gujrat, Mumbai, Nehvasheva & Kochi. for such ranges those air crafts you mentioned are fine to do the job. when your are a threat to the main port cities and the financial hub, you gain a lot without fighting.

also will keep ac at bay although naval assets in near future will be enough power but air cover with long reach jets is the need of the time which will keep Indian flotilla at safer distance.

 

[SQ8]

Hi SQ,

A. Deploy this mixed bag fleet of obsolete and/or heavy fighters in a real world scenario

The three aircraft I mentioned was an example. PN can get any one of these types. These fighters are not obsolete. Even JH-7s have been modernised with AESA.

B. Manage the training and logistics of three types with two different generation engines and performance parameters?

As above. PN can select only one of these types. If PN wants to manage Indian and other threats, then unfortunately this has to be done. There is NO GAIN WITHOUT PAIN.

C. The distance to eastern India( assuming you are wanting to fly across mainland India to get to eastern India) is about 1200mi of which 90% is over hostile airspace with air defense and interceptors. That is also roughly the same distance to the southernmost IN base.

The maximum straight line radius of operations for a JH-7 is about 1000mi with refueling and assuming no AB use and forgetting any on station time for them.

The maximum radius for the J-15/J-16 is around 1500mi to 1600mi on high altitude flight with zero evasive maneuvers and no station time(meaning it goes and comes back). Adding the real life aspects of having to engage enemy aircraft on route or means this range drops down further to around 900mi or so effective range which is really why the IAF can only consider using it’s MKIs to fly around Pakistan via air refueling.

So now we need air refueling back and forth to get to South or East India with any meaningful payload - which means that considering the threat level that High value asset so far from friendly skies is going to need its own protection that needs either a J-16 or J-15 to guard it. So now for just 4 J-16s you need 2 or 4 J-15s to guard its refueller. Then, even if these aircraft get that far they need a good indication where to look for vessels otherwise they need a MPA(another HVAA that will need support) out there to advise them where to fine tune their SEA mode searches since the flight time isn’t exactly 10 minutes and ships do move even if at a stately 25 knots.

Finally, after each sortie there is maintenance time so the average servicibikity of flanker variants even in the best of airforces barely crosses 65%. Which means of your proposed 50 mix of JH-7, J-15(why you are even including a carrier variant is beyond me) ,J-16 we have About 30 at best available of which only 20 would be the flanker variants with the pilot fatigue in that mix as well.

So even if we sent a flight of 2 armed with 4 AsHMs(which could even with a 100% success rate that never happens) take 8 ships out every time to fight their way to a target and fight it out with refueling - after the first day surge we would barely have 6-8 flankers serviceable at any given time for responses which may also be required for other duties as well besides blowing the IN out of the water.

Finally, assuming the obsolete “new” JH-7s cost $25 million , J-15s at $60 and J-16s at $65 and getting 16 aircraft each puts you at $2.4 billion for the airframes alone - add in training for pilots and technicians, facilities, spares, weapons adds another $400 million easily with higher priced spares since you cant use volume discounts nor offset with local production unlike the JF-17.

So for all that money you are getting three different systems that require a lot of support to achieve a goal that has really no need to occur with a lifecycle cost that will be too much to bear for the PN budget in the first place. Would love to see what your justifications are for A,B and C

Yes there are going to be all these issues you mentioned above. Yes there are going to be some restraints, but to gain STRATEGIC Advantage, it has to be DONE. Again, WITHOUT PAIN THERE IS NO GAIN. There have been plenty of discussion on this forum about the range of these jets. Again these are issues which can be resolved.

The good news is that over the past many years, China has done a lot of work to improve these jets.

China ‘closer to perfecting its aircraft jet engines for J-15’

An improved engine for the aircraft carrier-based warplanes is close to mass production, military analysts say.

www.scmp.com

A. you are recommending one of those fighters.

JH-7 - 1970’s design 3rd gen fighter with seriously bad kinematics and a sitting duck in air combat regardless of AESA so will usually need an escort in any case where there is anything more than equal odds or it will be putting itself into a risk of failure of mission.
Finally, for anything other than Anti-Ship, Strike or poorly done intercepts the PN will still need the PAF to support it with another asset. $1.2billion+ cost for the full package(that will eat into 5-10 year budgets for additional helis, missile and sub dev projects) and above average maintenance costs and inefficient engine still leaves the PN not independent and absolutely unable to assert the dominance you are aiming for

J-16: Great aircraft with an excellent mix of avionics, range and maneuverability. Heavy fighter that has higher maintenance, infrastructure and associated fuel costs but is capable of providing pretty much all the roles the PN needs. Cost with weapons, integration and training to touch $4 billion so a bigger chunk of the overall budget even if spread over 15-20 years - lots of pain but good gain. If only these aircraft were completely cleared for export since it will renege on a tacit understanding between them and the Russians.

J-15: carrier specific aircraft with added weight due to reinforcement and lower payload. Essentially buying dead metal weight and a lesser capable aircraft than J-16. No idea why you bring it up, lots of pain with very little gain.

But coming to the point with no pain, no gain you propose and the purpose of the exercise is to NOT have outlandish goals in the first place. You do not need to banish the IN from the oceans. You need to secure your trade routes both in peace and war and dumping all your budget into a single system isn’t the way to go. The IAF today can launch Brahmos strikes from a safe distance the southwest of Gwadar through aerial refueling - so you need to be able to see these coming hence the ZDKs. You need to be able to intercept such strikes with positioned assets or deter them, hence F-16s that deploy to Masroor or other bases in conjunction with AAR. A Jf-17 block 3 sq with dual rails or even single rail PL-15s and two external tanks can do this as well.

You need to keep an IN covered marine landing - so you put a net of land based shoot&scoot Launchers that can rain SSMs on any littoral or deep sea targets that are guided by your MPAs.

You need aircraft based weapons that can launched on any surface action group trying to flank your defending sea assets which is what a block-2 JF-17 does comfortably and where additional longer ranged aircraft capable of carrying the same number of AsHMs could do too.

You need surface assets armed with missile systems that outstick that of your enemy and eyes &ears to see the enemy before they see you - that is where the Sea sultan and to an extent the ATRs come in along with the AsHM projects that will outstick any AsHM the enemy has or will have.

And finally, you need subs that are stealthy enough to avoid detection by the most sophisticated ASW aircraft ever built known as the P-8I - and those that can push the enemy to waste time on ASW operations and keep its ships away from your trade/lifeline routes.

There is no need for unrealistic goals - those fail and fail miserably especially for a poverty ridden failed economy nation. Instead, find asymmetrical ways and smart resource management to keep the enemy from achieving its goals and their own expensive equipment and costs of sustaining a conflict against you and/or not achieving their goals within required time will frustrate them and keep them ever attempting any aggression in the first place.

26th feb to 27th was the example of this but where the Indian regime achieved its internal political goals because it underestimated the utter self delusional stupidity of its voting majority, but achieved no strategic goal at all. If anything, they emboldened a much smaller threat into trusting its training and honesty of purpose on giving knockout punches.

 

[Last starfighter]

Chinese Shipyard Launches 3rd Type 054 A/P Frigate For Pakistan Navy

Home»News»Chinese Shipyard Launches 3rd Type 054 A/P Frigate For Pakistan Navy
GE Marine Sea Air Space 2021
Chinese Shipyard Launches 3rd Type 054 A/P Frigate For Pakistan Navy
Pakistan Navy picture.
Chinese Shipyard Launches 3rd Type 054 A/P Frigate For Pakistan Navy
China's Hudong Zhonghua launched the third Type 054 A/P Frigate for Pakistan Navy on August 3rd. This is the third of four vessels on order by Pakistan.
Martin Manaranche 04 Aug 2021

Pakistan signed an initial contract for the delivery two Type 054 A/P frigates in 2017. An additional contract for two more ships was announced in June 2018. The first-in-class frigate was launched in August 2020 and started sea trials in late May, the second was floated in January 2021. As for the third one, the keel laying took place on May 1st 2021. All four units are built in China and the first two are expected to be delivered to the customer by year end.

According to a Pakistan Navy press release, the Type-054 A/P ships are state of the art frigates equipped with modern surface, subsurface and anti air weapons and sensors. Once constructed, these ships will be the most technologically advanced platforms of Pakistan Navy which will strengthen its capability to meet future challenges and maintain peace, stability & power equilibrium in the Indian Ocean Region.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1422577073567186945

The Pakistan Navy is currently undertaking an important renewal of its fleet, with the procurement of several modern platforms: In addition to these frigates from China, Pakistan will also commission new corvettes from Turkey and OPV from the Netherlands. It is also modernizing its submarine force.

About Type 054A and Type 054 A/P.

The Type 054A is a multi-role frigate and is recognized as the backbone of the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) fleet of surface combatants with 30 vessels in commission. They have a length of 134 meters, a beam of 16 meters for a displacement of 4,000 tons. They have a crew complement of 165 sailors and are fitted with:

a H/PJ-26 76mm main gun
8 C803 anti-ship missiles
32x VLS cells for HQ-16 surface to air missiles
2x Type 730 30mm CIWS
2x Triple Torpedo launchers
In PLAN service, those frigates feature a Type 382 radar which shares a close resemblance with the Russian MR-710 Fregat radar. Unlike the Pakistan Navy variant – whose first ship-in-class is fitted with a SR2410C radar – the Type 054A in Chinese Navy service do not feature a long range / metric wave radar.

Posted by : Martin Manaranche
Martin Manaranche is based in Brittany, France. He is currently studying International Relations at Lyon III university. Martin conducted an internship at the French Navy's Ecole Navale in Brest and is therefore particularly fond of naval defense issues.
Related Articles
Russian Frigate Admiral Isakov Gets Fully Domestic Diesel Gas-Turbines
Russian Frigate Admiral Isakov Gets Fully Domestic Diesel Gas-Turbines
Martin Manaranche 05 Aug 2021
The United Engine Corporation (UEC) integrated into Russia’s Rostec state hi-tech corporation has delivered a M55R seaborne diesel gas-turbine power unit to the Severnaya Verf Shipyard for the Project 22350 frigate Admiral Isakov, the Rostec press office said.
General Electric Canada Wins Contract For Support Of Halifax-Class Gas Turbines
General Electric Canada Wins Contract For Support Of Halifax-Class Gas Turbines
Martin Manaranche 05 Aug 2021
Through the National Shipbuilding Strategy, the Government of Canada is ensuring the members of the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) have safe and effective vessels required to protect Canadian sovereignty, while creating jobs and generating economic benefits for communities across Canada.
Lockheed Martin Teams With Greek Industrials For Hellenic Navy Modernization Program
Lockheed Martin Teams With Greek Industrials For Hellenic Navy Modernization Program
Martin Manaranche 03 Aug 2021
In support of the Hellenic Navy Modernization program, Lockheed Martin has entered into teaming agreements with key Greek industrial partners. These agreements include specific areas of collaboration matched to partner capabilities and will enable the Greek – U.S. industry team led by Lockheed Martin to quickly begin work on this important program.
Advertisement


Legal / Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us

Copyright © 2021 Naval News
All Rights Reserved

 

[mudas777]

To counter and engage the Indian Navy by itself your going to need a force of approx. 80 fighters the minimum and can't fall below this number -- this was per my conversation with a retired US Navy Officer (ex- F-14 pilot) when I asked him this question several months back and he has been interested in seeing how Pak Navy Modernizes.

Note: I've been trying to get him to register on this site as well, the only thing I'll say he's a Guest observer.

Bro that's the minimum number considering they will have 3 carriers soon and imagine parked outside of our short legged planes range plus other planes coming out from under the wood work to support the carriers . Some bro's here are imagining the few planes we have got are not only enough to defend our coast line but can run a riot against the Indian coastal cities and installations. The numbers and odds are stacked against us and we all know about the state of our economy and lately attention given to address the deficiencies and lets hope it continues. I can't wait for the day regardless how out numbered we can be but we must have some potent platforms to fight back and defend ourselves.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

The Chinese Delivery Model is Trustable , always "on Time"

The followup order should be executed rather then waiting for 4th ship to complete

 

[khanasifm]

Chinese Shipyard Launches 3rd Type 054 A/P Frigate For Pakistan Navy
View attachment 767674
Home»News»Chinese Shipyard Launches 3rd Type 054 A/P Frigate For Pakistan Navy
GE Marine Sea Air Space 2021
Chinese Shipyard Launches 3rd Type 054 A/P Frigate For Pakistan Navy
Pakistan Navy picture.
Chinese Shipyard Launches 3rd Type 054 A/P Frigate For Pakistan Navy
China's Hudong Zhonghua launched the third Type 054 A/P Frigate for Pakistan Navy on August 3rd. This is the third of four vessels on order by Pakistan.
Martin Manaranche 04 Aug 2021

Pakistan signed an initial contract for the delivery two Type 054 A/P frigates in 2017. An additional contract for two more ships was announced in June 2018. The first-in-class frigate was launched in August 2020 and started sea trials in late May, the second was floated in January 2021. As for the third one, the keel laying took place on May 1st 2021. All four units are built in China and the first two are expected to be delivered to the customer by year end.

According to a Pakistan Navy press release, the Type-054 A/P ships are state of the art frigates equipped with modern surface, subsurface and anti air weapons and sensors. Once constructed, these ships will be the most technologically advanced platforms of Pakistan Navy which will strengthen its capability to meet future challenges and maintain peace, stability & power equilibrium in the Indian Ocean Region.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1422577073567186945

The Pakistan Navy is currently undertaking an important renewal of its fleet, with the procurement of several modern platforms: In addition to these frigates from China, Pakistan will also commission new corvettes from Turkey and OPV from the Netherlands. It is also modernizing its submarine force.

About Type 054A and Type 054 A/P.

View attachment 767679

The Type 054A is a multi-role frigate and is recognized as the backbone of the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) fleet of surface combatants with 30 vessels in commission. They have a length of 134 meters, a beam of 16 meters for a displacement of 4,000 tons. They have a crew complement of 165 sailors and are fitted with:

a H/PJ-26 76mm main gun
8 C803 anti-ship missiles
32x VLS cells for HQ-16 surface to air missiles
2x Type 730 30mm CIWS
2x Triple Torpedo launchers
In PLAN service, those frigates feature a Type 382 radar which shares a close resemblance with the Russian MR-710 Fregat radar. Unlike the Pakistan Navy variant – whose first ship-in-class is fitted with a SR2410C radar – the Type 054A in Chinese Navy service do not feature a long range / metric wave radar.

Posted by : Martin Manaranche
Martin Manaranche is based in Brittany, France. He is currently studying International Relations at Lyon III university. Martin conducted an internship at the French Navy's Ecole Navale in Brest and is therefore particularly fond of naval defense issues.
Related Articles
Russian Frigate Admiral Isakov Gets Fully Domestic Diesel Gas-Turbines
Russian Frigate Admiral Isakov Gets Fully Domestic Diesel Gas-Turbines
Martin Manaranche 05 Aug 2021
The United Engine Corporation (UEC) integrated into Russia’s Rostec state hi-tech corporation has delivered a M55R seaborne diesel gas-turbine power unit to the Severnaya Verf Shipyard for the Project 22350 frigate Admiral Isakov, the Rostec press office said.
General Electric Canada Wins Contract For Support Of Halifax-Class Gas Turbines
General Electric Canada Wins Contract For Support Of Halifax-Class Gas Turbines
Martin Manaranche 05 Aug 2021
Through the National Shipbuilding Strategy, the Government of Canada is ensuring the members of the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) have safe and effective vessels required to protect Canadian sovereignty, while creating jobs and generating economic benefits for communities across Canada.
Lockheed Martin Teams With Greek Industrials For Hellenic Navy Modernization Program
Lockheed Martin Teams With Greek Industrials For Hellenic Navy Modernization Program
Martin Manaranche 03 Aug 2021
In support of the Hellenic Navy Modernization program, Lockheed Martin has entered into teaming agreements with key Greek industrial partners. These agreements include specific areas of collaboration matched to partner capabilities and will enable the Greek – U.S. industry team led by Lockheed Martin to quickly begin work on this important program.
Advertisement


Legal / Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us

Copyright © 2021 Naval News
All Rights Reserved

its 2x type 1130 not 730 ciws

 

[kursed]

People really need to understand that modern war will not be waged by a single ship vs another, but one system vs another.

Just comparing individual AD capacity of one type of ship, does not bode well, when most of us have no idea about the entire war-making strategy of PN and what role Type 54A/P plays in it.

What we can see with the induction of long-range naval UAVs, LRMPA, littoral water MPA, coastal batteries, long-range radar stations, combined air defense of air/sea grids, establishing above and underwater surveillance capability - is the resurgence of PN at a level that was unfathomable just a decade ago. I sincerely doubt they have not taken into account long-range interdiction of enemy ships, or that the entire idea is to wait to get hit first.

PN, in my eyes, is currently what PAF was back in the early 2000s, shifting away from the traditional mindset onto the new generation of ideas and equipment. And should things go to plan, within 3-5 years, they would be quite the force in their own backyard.

 

[MH.Yang]

Pakistan should probably invest in aircraft（J16 + JH7A）, submarines(type 041 yuan) and Missile boat（type 022 stealth missile speedboat) rather than surface ships.

1, If J16 cannot be exported, you can buy Russian su30 instead.
2, The top speed of 022 can reach 50 knots. It's invisible and hard to find.
It carries eight yj83 missiles with a range of 285 kilometers.
China has sealed up 100 022 ships (because in recent years, China's naval theory has changed from coastal defense to regional denial, this batch of 022 is almost new and only used for a short time)
China usually sells retired warships at a price of 10%, and the total price of these 100 type 022 should not exceed US $150 million.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Pakistan should probably invest in aircraft（J16 + JH7A）, submarines(type 041 yuan) and Missile boat（type 022 stealth missile speedboat) rather than surface ships.


1, If J16 cannot be exported, you can buy Russian su30 instead.
2, The top speed of 022 can reach 50 knots. It's invisible and hard to find.
It carries eight yj83 missiles with a range of 285 kilometers.
China has sealed up 100 022 ships (because in recent years, China's naval theory has changed from coastal defense to regional denial, this batch of 022 is almost new and only used for a short time)
China usually sells retired warships at a price of 10%, and the total price of these 100 type 022 should not exceed US $150 million.

Pakistan navy has its own doctrine, more factors are attached in achieving said doctrine that common folk could really understand. While We appreciate your suggestions I think you know pretty well that wanting something doesn’t lead to it being available, nor does something that sound like a good idea is always a good idea.

Chinese flankers aren’t offered for export, JH7A is an old aircraft, it’s not future-proof. I’m certain PN has taken naval strike into account and Pakistans Azm project may be coming into that role when it’s ready.
Russian SU30 aren’t exactly easy to get either, not to mention they make little logistical sense for Pakistan given the lack of past usage, no common weapons or infrastructure with current jets used in the country and a lack of priority as surface ships and submarines are currently more useful.

I don’t see how speed boats are more useful than surface ships either. Those boats are not ocean going nor do they have nearly the same amount of sensors and capability as a proper warship. They’re Definitely not invisible either, they just have a low RCS, which is not really that helpful in a defensive role when you don’t have good sensors yourself and just a bunch of missiles. They could definitely be good force multipliers and we already know PN is looking for more fast attack craft, though right now they’re working on making a local one, if these boats are really going to sell cheap I’m sure PN is already interested in them, they could certainly be a good deal.
There are certain roles only large surface warships can perform, especially ones related to AD and long range missions, PN obviously has to counter the IN. They cannot do that without buying more surface ships.

Lastly, Pakistan is already getting 8+1 Yuan class submarines, ones that are specifically configured to Pakistans needs as well. Given their delivery dates and the numbers I would easily assume they’re based off the newer Type 039C/041.

 

[Sayfullah]

Instead of jh-7, j-16 or j-15
PN can build more fast attack craft and increase the range of harbah from 750 kms to 1500 kms. It can make fast attack crafts capable of carrying 6 anti ship cruise missiles with ranges of 1500 kms +. This will allow PN fast attack craft of being able to strike IN bases in the south and east and, since the fast attack craft will be stealthy design and fast they will be hard targets and can easily strike deep in India and harass India’s trade. Additionally, fast attack craft east to maintain and cheap to induct in numbers we can build a fleet of 10 fast attack crafts.

To compliment those fast attack craft PN can induct Akinci type HALE drones and put radars and sensors on it to help detect ships and integrate missiles like cm400akg or c802a on it to help it strike Indian ships and harass their trade. Drones easy to operate cheap to maintain and even if they get shot down we won’t lose a pilot we’ll just lose a drone so it’s worth it and drones have long ranges and can fly for a long time.
We can also configure some akinci drones to fly with bvrs and fire bvrs to target Indian mpa’s since drones are slow flying low rcs hard to detect it’ll be easier for them to sneak up on Indian mpa’s and, even if they get shot down by indian fighter jet it’ll be costly for Indians to intercept these drones since a ch4 costs ~$1million with the bvr and sensors it’ll cost ~$2 million only.

 

[ARMalik]

A. you are recommending one of those fighters.

JH-7 - 1970’s design 3rd gen fighter with seriously bad kinematics and a sitting duck in air combat regardless of AESA so will usually need an escort in any case where there is anything more than equal odds or it will be putting itself into a risk of failure of mission.
Finally, for anything other than Anti-Ship, Strike or poorly done intercepts the PN will still need the PAF to support it with another asset. $1.2billion+ cost for the full package(that will eat into 5-10 year budgets for additional helis, missile and sub dev projects) and above average maintenance costs and inefficient engine still leaves the PN not independent and absolutely unable to assert the dominance you are aiming for

J-16: Great aircraft with an excellent mix of avionics, range and maneuverability. Heavy fighter that has higher maintenance, infrastructure and associated fuel costs but is capable of providing pretty much all the roles the PN needs. Cost with weapons, integration and training to touch $4 billion so a bigger chunk of the overall budget even if spread over 15-20 years - lots of pain but good gain. If only these aircraft were completely cleared for export since it will renege on a tacit understanding between them and the Russians.

J-15: carrier specific aircraft with added weight due to reinforcement and lower payload. Essentially buying dead metal weight and a lesser capable aircraft than J-16. No idea why you bring it up, lots of pain with very little gain.

But coming to the point with no pain, no gain you propose and the purpose of the exercise is to NOT have outlandish goals in the first place. You do not need to banish the IN from the oceans. You need to secure your trade routes both in peace and war and dumping all your budget into a single system isn’t the way to go. The IAF today can launch Brahmos strikes from a safe distance the southwest of Gwadar through aerial refueling - so you need to be able to see these coming hence the ZDKs. You need to be able to intercept such strikes with positioned assets or deter them, hence F-16s that deploy to Masroor or other bases in conjunction with AAR. A Jf-17 block 3 sq with dual rails or even single rail PL-15s and two external tanks can do this as well.

You need to keep an IN covered marine landing - so you put a net of land based shoot&scoot Launchers that can rain SSMs on any littoral or deep sea targets that are guided by your MPAs.

You need aircraft based weapons that can launched on any surface action group trying to flank your defending sea assets which is what a block-2 JF-17 does comfortably and where additional longer ranged aircraft capable of carrying the same number of AsHMs could do too.

You need surface assets armed with missile systems that outstick that of your enemy and eyes &ears to see the enemy before they see you - that is where the Sea sultan and to an extent the ATRs come in along with the AsHM projects that will outstick any AsHM the enemy has or will have.

And finally, you need subs that are stealthy enough to avoid detection by the most sophisticated ASW aircraft ever built known as the P-8I - and those that can push the enemy to waste time on ASW operations and keep its ships away from your trade/lifeline routes.

There is no need for unrealistic goals - those fail and fail miserably especially for a poverty ridden failed economy nation. Instead, find asymmetrical ways and smart resource management to keep the enemy from achieving its goals and their own expensive equipment and costs of sustaining a conflict against you and/or not achieving their goals within required time will frustrate them and keep them ever attempting any aggression in the first place.

26th feb to 27th was the example of this but where the Indian regime achieved its internal political goals because it underestimated the utter self delusional stupidity of its voting majority, but achieved no strategic goal at all. If anything, they emboldened a much smaller threat into trusting its training and honesty of purpose on giving knockout punches.

All you say is very true 100%. But JF-17s, old Mirages are not going to cut it. Full Stop. Mirages or JF-17 is like bringing a knife to a machine gun fight. The existing 'Defensive Posture' of PN is not going to cut it with IN - it needs offensive punch. Pakistan just cannot protect its CPEC and other Geo-strategic security interests without spending money on long range fighter jets. WHEN YOU PLAY WITH BIG BOYS and have BIG ASPIRATIONS LIKE CPEC, then you need big toys or you will be swept under the carpet like dirt. So if JH-7, J-15 or J-16 are not suitable, then go for something that is SUITABLE. But it needs to be done like YESTERDAY.

 

[MH.Yang]

Pakistan navy has its own doctrine, more factors are attached in achieving said doctrine that common folk could really understand. While We appreciate your suggestions I think you know pretty well that wanting something doesn’t lead to it being available, nor does something that sound like a good idea is always a good idea.

Chinese flankers aren’t offered for export, JH7A is an old aircraft, it’s not future-proof. I’m certain PN has taken naval strike into account and Pakistans Azm project may be coming into that role when it’s ready.
Russian SU30 aren’t exactly easy to get either, not to mention they make little logistical sense for Pakistan given the lack of past usage, no common weapons or infrastructure with current jets used in the country and a lack of priority as surface ships and submarines are currently more useful.

I don’t see how speed boats are more useful than surface ships either. Those boats are not ocean going nor do they have nearly the same amount of sensors and capability as a proper warship. They’re Definitely not invisible either, they just have a low RCS, which is not really that helpful in a defensive role when you don’t have good sensors yourself and just a bunch of missiles. They could definitely be good force multipliers and we already know PN is looking for more fast attack craft, though right now they’re working on making a local one, if these boats are really going to sell cheap I’m sure PN is already interested in them, they could certainly be a good deal.
There are certain roles only large surface warships can perform, especially ones related to AD and long range missions, PN obviously has to counter the IN. They cannot do that without buying more surface ships.

Lastly, Pakistan is already getting 8+1 Yuan class submarines, ones that are specifically configured to Pakistans needs as well. Given their delivery dates and the numbers I would easily assume they’re based off the newer Type 039C/041.

JH7 is an old aircraft, but JH7A is not. It is an active fighter of the Chinese Navy aviation force (high and low matching with j16). JH7A entered the Chinese army in 2005, and J11B joined the Chinese army in 1998. JH7A's biggest weakness is that it needs escort, but its sea control ability is very strong. And 286 are in service in the Chinese army.

Now the relationship between Russia and India is very delicate. I think it is possible to buy Su30.

Bangladesh, Myanmar and other countries have purchased China's retired type 053 warships, and their purchase price is 10% of the cost. So I guess the price of type 022 is also 10%.

Yes, the type 022 lacks air defense capability and needs radar command, but its price($1.5 million) is equivalent to that of a yacht.

And the PLAN is expanding rapidly. Soon they will come to the Indian Ocean.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

The Defensive Umberella that the Ships offer is welcomed addition to stop incoming threats at Sea instead of allowing stuff to reach the shore and land.

Very excellent purchase

I am not a big fan of just being happy at coastal defense , the Navy has to protect the shores against any build up at sea and declog the problem

Piracy , and Terrorism from India is biggest threat to security of oceans near Pakistan so the ship purchase was a timely move

 

[Tipu7]

Neither JH-7 (what ever version) nor Type 22 FACM fit Pakistan Navy requirements. So none of them will be procured.
And Pakistan will never acquire any second hand Chinese Naval vessel either.

There are better plans and options in place... So have patience and hope for best.