Should Saudi Arabia buy an aircraft carrier?

[Philip the Arab]

yes it is a good power projection. they got big sea front and global interests to defend along the sea routes specially when oil is their main export.

this should be multi stage process of course as aircraft carrier cant be defended or deployed on its own. in order to reach that they need to build the navy assets that support the air craft carrier and they have the funds and the political clout and favors of the west to achieve that

Do you think a small aircraft carrier would be good for Saudi Arabia than can still hold F-35s or a big aircraft carrier or multiple small ones in one group?

Saudis are in no position to build an aircraft carrier
Exactly what I told him. China took 20 years to build theirs even when it was halfway built.

 

[BHarwana]

You know how hard it is to build one? China took like 20 some years to commission their ship and they didn't fully build it even it was bought 68% built from Ukraine.


Pakistan would want to keep a favorable relationship with Iran I think. They don't know who would win right away so they might stay neutral.


It would be an advantage because they can attack different sides of the country such as the eastern part without being detected as easily if launched from a sea facing the eastern part they can fly from.

If they place an order with USA they will not get a nuclear power carrier but a conventionally powered one so Saudis should build one them selves. Russia has one out of operation chassis which Saudis can buy and develop. USA will also deliver a carrier in not less than 10 years.

 

[dBSPL]

It's not just a matter of money. The mixed task force operation on the deck is one of the most difficult areas of naval operations.

Apart from that, the primary issue is the doctrinal infrastructure. Only those who approach the event on the basis of inventory do not have a deep understanding of the military structures. As far as I know, they are feeding a giant army of advisors who have a very serious US influence in the SA's navy structure. They have a similar picture in the air force. In fact, we know that the shortage of trained personel in the Saudi Arabia has been accompanied by the support of friendly states like Pakistan from time to time.

The second important problem is the logistics flow. The logistic dependence of these systems destroys the entire strategic multiplier effect. If you can support this system yourself and operate it with your own staff, it carries a power factor.

Operational experience and capability
Doctrinal compliance and navy organization
Independent logistics and back services
Powerful economy.

Even if you have dealt with these 4 issues, it should be kept in mind that CSG presence means power projection capability, and that this is a parallel issue with the power in the global political arena.

 

[BHarwana]

Saudis are not getting F-35 until 3 decades so they should go for ramped version.

 

[Damir877]

There is a use though. It provides a attack capability from the sea closer to Iranian cities than some of their bases are located and flying in from a different position such as from Pakistani waters and attacking Iranian locations with the F-35B or Harrier jets.

I highly doubt they will attack Iran,not even if US coalition does.And bombing Iran will serve them what purpose exactly,what would they achieve by it,except receive few ballistic missiles in return...Aircraft carrier is too expensive,especially if it only serves just for dropping few bombs on Iran.

 

[BHarwana]

Saudis are in no position to build an aircraft carrier.

Why do you think so? They are the only country in the region to build one.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Do you think a small aircraft carrier would be good for Saudi Arabia than can still hold F-35s or a big aircraft carrier or multiple small ones in one group?

to answer that I need to know the scope of their threat perception and their interests and Saudis want to achieve with it? ultimately take the responsibility from American Navy in patrolling this region?. trillions is at stake so building an own Navy to safeguard its sea routes and its trade should be paramount.

 

[T-123456]

They could buy some from France. I think it would take a number of years to assemble the whole group but it would be possible but I know Saudi Arabia could afford it.

To even think of starting a carrier group,you have to have decades of naval experience,at least have something of a navy,which the KSA never had.
You can buy a navy(the ''toys'') but you cant just be a naval force.
So,its not about money

 

[Philip the Arab]

I

It's not just a matter of money. The mixed task force operation on the deck is one of the most difficult areas of naval operations.

Apart from that, the primary issue is the doctrinal infrastructure. Only those who approach the event on the basis of inventory do not have a deep understanding of the military structures. As far as I know, they are feeding a giant army of advisors who have a very serious US influence in the SA's navy structure. We have a similar picture in the air force. In fact, we know that the shortage of trained personel in the Saudi Arabia has been accompanied by the support of friendly states like Pakistan from time to time.

The second important problem is the logistics flow. The logistic dependence of these systems destroys the entire strategic multiplier effect. If you can support this system yourself and operate it with your own staff, it carries a power factor.

Operational experience and capability
Doctrinal compliance and navy organization
Independent logistics and back services
Powerful economy.

Even if you have dealt with these 4 issues, it should be kept in mind that CSG presence means power transfer capability, and that this is a parallel issue with the power in the global political arena.

I agree it would be difficult to support them but with enough

I highly doubt they will attack Iran,not even if US coalition does.And bombing Iran will serve them what purpose exactly,what would they achieve by it,except receive few ballistic missiles in return...Aircraft carrier is too expensive,especially if it only serves just for dropping few bombs on Iran.

That wouldn't be its only purpose but it would be an important one. Saudi Arabia can defend themselves from Iranians ballistic missiles especially because they in no way have enough TELS to launch them all at the same time and THAAD and PAC-3 are adequate. They could just show of that they have an aircraft carrier and maybe help a country being attacked.

 

[UKBengali]

Why do you think so? They are the only country in the region to build one.

Lacking industrial capability.

 

[Philip the Arab]

To even think of starting a carrier group,you have to have decades of naval experience,at least have something of a navy,which the KSA never had.
You can buy a navy(the ''toys'') but you cant just be a naval force.
So,its not about money

A lot of training would be needed your right. They can do it, but it would be costly in hours to train everyone but with help from the U.S. they could get it right.

to answer that I need to know the scope of their threat perception and their interests and Saudis want to achieve with it? ultimately take the responsibility from American Navy in patrolling this region?. trillions is at stake so building an own Navy to safeguard its sea routes and its trade should be paramount.

Exactly what if the U.S. pulls out from the Persian gulf? Who will defend the sea routes from being closed by Iran? No one except Saudi Arabia and their allies near the gulf.

 

[LeGenD]

KSA need a proper navy first.

An aircraft carrier sound good on paper, but it is very difficult to maintain, and require a high degree of naval + aviation expertise to be effective in combat operations. I do not think KSA is ready for this kind of investment yet.

 

[Philip the Arab]

Why do you think so? They are the only country in the region to build one.

They cant build one without serious help, trust me.

KSA need a proper navy first.

An aircraft carrier sound good on paper, but it is very difficult to maintain, and require a high degree of naval + aviation expertise to be effective in combat operations. I do not think KSA is ready for this kind of investment yet.

Don't you think with support from the U.S. they could do it? Training and expertise would take time though I agree.

 

[haman10]

There is a use though. It provides a attack capability from the sea closer to Iranian cities than some of their bases are located and flying in from a different position such as from Pakistani waters and attacking Iranian locations with the F-35B or Harrier jets.

Aircraft carriers are for blue-water navies you dumbass. if saudia wants ACs, they should go ahead and buy 20 of them. trust me, we will cheer for them since they're useless for them.

You simply are dumb Fook if you use ACs against your neighboring country. but go ahead, buy more and more and make us all happy.

We're happy, the Americans are happy and you're happy. so why not?

 

[BHarwana]

to answer that I need to know the scope of their threat perception and their interests and Saudis want to achieve with it? ultimately take the responsibility from American Navy in patrolling this region?. trillions is at stake so building an own Navy to safeguard its sea routes and its trade should be paramount.

Air ship carrier in the Arabian gulf would be sitting duck. Saudis don't need air ship carrier for Iran and air ship carrier is also not needed to safe guard shipping lanes. F-15 have enough combat radius for Iran. Air ship carrier of Saudis will be useful against Israel.