Pakistan's French Subs: A Threat

[Bull]

What toys? PAF is not in the same situation as 1971 in terms of concentration of assets in Central Pakistan. We have bases in Karachi and Baluchistan (both near the coast) to ensure that there are substancial assets employed for air defence. With the establishment of Souther Air Command (SAC in the 80s), the utilization of resources is also optimized. Yes PAF would be stressed and stretched, but with the induction of MR platforms (F-16s, JF-17s), the stress is much less than what we had to face in 1971 (ill suited platforms for the multi-faceted threats)..

JF-17s will replace the older jets, so the numbers remain the same. You are expected to have 250 ( higher est) and 100 F-16. Thats 350 fighters. U have 230 MKIs alone in the western front.

Now add 100 odd maritime jaguars, and 20 + 20 Mig 29K and Harriers to it operating from Gujarat in the southern front.

Range of carriers is reduced due to the potential threat of Pakistani SSKs which this time around are armed with sub-surface AShM missiles. Air cover over Pakistan in itself is not an issue since both countries are adjacent to each other..

SSK...3 of them. 10 Kilos and 6 scorpenes....what do you think their job would be?

IN would be attempting to blockade the Pakistani coastline (which in itself is a huge task as Karachi is not the only port any longer) which would require it to extend her assets thus making its own assets vulnerable along the way. So its a matter of strategy, not really a numbers game.

Ships will stay away from a volatile port. How mnay ships does GOP operate? Does GOP has a shipping company?

 

[blain2]

JF-17s will replace the older jets, so the numbers remain the same. You are expected to have 250 ( higher est) and 100 F-16. Thats 350 fighters. U have 230 MKIs alone in the western front.

Now add 100 odd maritime jaguars, and 20 + 20 Mig 29K and Harriers to it operating from Gujarat in the southern front.

Right but the replacement is not one-for-one in terms of capabilities. The vast majority of PAF inventory is not MR right now. F-7, F-7PG and A-5s are not capable of MR operations such as Naval interdiction. Even the existing F-16s are not capable of Naval Interdiction. However JF-17s will be, as will be the new F-16s and the J-10s (when inducted but not including them here for this discussion).

Your math is rather simplistic. The 250 JF-17 number and 100 F-16 number cannot be taken in isolation alone. There will be other aircraft like J-10s, and potentially the ROSEI/II/III Mirages and some of the newer F-7PGs still available and around. The goal is not to have a number less than 400 combat aircraft. That is plenty to go around in SAC, CAC and NAC.

SSK...3 of them. 10 Kilos and 6 scorpenes....what do you think their job would be?

3 right now. By the time your 6 scorpenes are inducted expect 3 more. In any case, their job would be to enforce a blockade and interdict Pakistani shipping. They can be involved in defending the IN fleet from the PN sub-surface elements. The bottom line is that its a huge operating area, the deterrance and threat of PN sub-surface assets remains.

Ships will stay away from a volatile port. How mnay ships does GOP operate? Does GOP has a shipping company?

Yes PNSC does operate. It has 23 or so ships. However the fact of the matter is that ormara and Gwader are so further out that IN would be pretty stretched trying to enforce multi-port blockade. The insurance premiums would go up, however Pakistan also has road links to the CA, Iran and China. It is well assumed that Pakistani economy would be hurting during a war, however it wont be because IN would be able to put an air tight blockade. The bottom line is that each country thinks differently about its options and capabilities. I spoke to a PN officer about a year ago about the sub-surface capability of the PN and he said that a scenario similar to Karachi in 1971 in unlikely.

 

[Contrarian]

You do realise that no matter how far the ports are, they will be heavily susceptible to bombing runs, from the carrier as well as Gujarat bases. PN will have no JF-17's apart from the 250 being produced, and that is the maximum limit, while IAF alone has 230 Su-30's for offensive missions, if we are considering the next decade then consider about 80-90 MRCA's. I presume that at that time, the Mirage 2005's and MiG 29 SMT's would be doing homeland CAP's.

THis is all apart from the IN fleet of Jags, and the carrier complements of 2 carriers.

At the end of the day, i think Pakistan will simply run out of numbers.

 

[blain2]

You do realise that no matter how far the ports are, they will be heavily susceptible to bombing runs, from the carrier as well as Gujarat bases. PN will have no JF-17's apart from the 250 being produced, and that is the maximum limit, while IAF alone has 230 Su-30's for offensive missions, if we are considering the next decade then consider about 80-90 MRCA's. I presume that at that time, the Mirage 2005's and MiG 29 SMT's would be doing homeland CAP's.

THis is all apart from the IN fleet of Jags, and the carrier complements of 2 carriers.

At the end of the day, i think Pakistan will simply run out of numbers.

So who put the 250 max there? Even if you include your 230 Su-30, even 100 MRCA and the other IAF inventory, the ratio from a PAF planning standpoint does not change. Only the type of capability changes which seems to be happening on both sides.

Also IN does not fly Jags, it flyes Harriers which in any case are still considered in the calculation for Pakistan's airdefence by the planners in AHQ. Nobody said defending Pakistan would be easy, however the task for Indian bombers would be more difficult than it has ever been.

Pakistan will run out numbers as it will out of tanks etc. however not before hurting IA, IN and IAF pretty badly and even then to no one's clear advantage (bigger problem for India) due to the nuclear capability. Overall not worth it for India to go the distance.

 

[Contrarian]

But, you said that the only thing is changing is the capabilities of the planes in Pakistan. So its the same for India, so how are things, ratio wise, different from what they were in 71.

And my bad, i confused it for IN when i remembered it as a maritime strike aircraft.

But my point still remains, IN still has considerable assets at her disposal with 2 carriers and Harrier planes, with a third carrier comming along in a couple of years from a decade. And remember, its not necessary to have one carrier in the docks when there are three.

 

[Keysersoze]

But, you said that the only thing is changing is the capabilities of the planes in Pakistan. So its the same for India, so how are things, ratio wise, different from what they were in 71.

And my bad, i confused it for IN when i remembered it as a maritime strike aircraft.

But my point still remains, IN still has considerable assets at her disposal with 2 carriers and Harrier planes, with a third carrier comming along in a couple of years from a decade. And remember, its not necessary to have one carrier in the docks when there are three.

Actually with three carriers three means you WILL have one in dry dock. British naval doctrine was (until the cuts) to have a three carrier fleet. One in dry dock, one on station and one in transition. I think is' fair to say that the drydock won't be too close to the front line for obvious reasons.

 

[blain2]

But, you said that the only thing is changing is the capabilities of the planes in Pakistan. So its the same for India, so how are things, ratio wise, different from what they were in 71.

And my bad, i confused it for IN when i remembered it as a maritime strike aircraft.

But my point still remains, IN still has considerable assets at her disposal with 2 carriers and Harrier planes, with a third carrier comming along in a couple of years from a decade. And remember, its not necessary to have one carrier in the docks when there are three.

I never said that Indian capabilities would be any less, the difference for Pakistan is that instead of relying on a sqn of Mirage Vs/ with Exocet currently, now you have pretty much any JF-17, F-16 or J-10 sqn capable of ASh roles. This is the big difference. For Pakistan its a huge boost from a defensive standpoint, for India its an increased concern for fleet defence. The key issue is not Naval interdiction of each other's naval asset, rather the Indian attempt to blockade Pakistani ports.

 

[Bull]

Your math is rather simplistic. The 250 JF-17 number and 100 F-16 number cannot be taken in isolation alone. There will be other aircraft like J-10s, and potentially the ROSEI/II/III Mirages and some of the newer F-7PGs still available and around. The goal is not to have a number less than 400 combat aircraft. That is plenty to go around in SAC, CAC and NAC.

Isnt it beter if we keep it simple. If you add in RoseI/II/III Mirages and few F-7s then add in 40Mirages 2000, 60 Mig 29, 100 Mig 27, 100 Mig 21 Bison into it. The numbers still show PAF needs or PN needs a dedicated MR fighter squadron(s) of 60 jets apart from the current ones and planned ones.

3 right now. By the time your 6 scorpenes are inducted expect 3 more. In any case, their job would be to enforce a blockade and interdict Pakistani shipping. They can be involved in defending the IN fleet from the PN sub-surface elements. The bottom line is that its a huge operating area, the deterrance and threat of PN sub-surface assets remains..

6 PN Vs 6+6 Scorpenes,10 Kilos. 12 dedicated for 6 PN subs and what will the other 10 do?

The insurance premiums would go up, however Pakistan also has road links to the CA, Iran and China. It is well assumed that Pakistani economy would be hurting during a war, however it wont be because IN would be able to put an air tight blockade.

Road link to China and Iran? What can you get thru those roads? Oil / Spares / Food....not all can be transported thru these roads on a time of conflict. A road netwrok cant be anywhere close to efficient.

Now on the othe rhand speaing of the road link, arnt you too admitting Pakistan wud have to depend on that at a time of conflict.

 

[Contrarian]

Why the hell does it say that your from India, Nero? Kindly change that proto...

Next up, in your dreams that China will ever sell an SSBN.

 

[Contrarian]

Actually with three carriers three means you WILL have one in dry dock. British naval doctrine was (until the cuts) to have a three carrier fleet. One in dry dock, one on station and one in transition. I think is' fair to say that the drydock won't be too close to the front line for obvious reasons.

However India plans to have 3 carriers, one in the docks, while one Carrier on each of the coasts in active duty for each of the two fleets.

In the long run they wish to have four carriers, one in Indian Ocean/Andamans.

 

[Adux]

Why the hell does it say that your from India, Nero? Kindly change that proto...

Next up, in your dreams that China will ever sell an SSBN.

sarcasm!!!!!

 

[Neo]

.


there was talk of pakistani navy negotiating for the LE-triomphant SSBN with DCN

if the deal comes through then pakistan will become a hyper naval power

allah_o_akbar !!




.

Welcome aboard Nero, please introduce yourself and tell us why you have pro-Pakistan opinion?
I'm curious to learn more about you.

Thanks!

 

[bhangra12345]

.

pakistan is acquiring JIN-class SSBns from china

the JIN-class is armed with the latest DF-31 missiles

very soon pakistan will join the league of select countries like U.S.A , CHINA & russia to become only the 4th country ever to have such capabilities.

pakistan zindabad !!



.

Isnt there some treaty which says you shouldnt have transfer missiles with more than range of 300kms. I guess some countries dont ever follow rules even for their face value.

and why would china give you submarines for free? (unless Pakistan works like an a$$ for china). Frankly every one knows that Pak doesnt have dollars to buy them
and would china want to give away its submarine secrets to US, when it knows US has access to every secret of Pakistan. So until WoT is complete in Afghanistan, I wouldnt expect much on this route

 

[bhangra12345]

Welcome aboard Nero, please introduce yourself and tell us why you have pro-Pakistan opinion?
I'm curious to learn more about you.

Thanks!

Because he is a pakistani. Neo dont you see it????? You can actually check his ip to confirm it, I believe.

 

[Neo]

Because he is a pakistani. Neo dont you see it????? You can actually check his ip to confirm it, I believe.

What makes you think I haven't done it already?