Moderinization and increasing PN Fleet size ...

[Keysersoze]

we should develop Jf17 with vertical landing/take off capability

Yeah the harrier jump jet cost roughly 2 billion to develop (never mind the cost of the F35B) I am sure it will be easy....

 

[Yaseen1]

aircraft carriers are needed to keep buildup in region and to dominate enemy in peace time

AC Carriers are too vulnerable in modern warfare against an advanced enemy. PN does not need an AC carrier. Those resources are better devoted to coastal defense and commerce warfare.

Large land based AC today have enough range with air refueling and modern missiles to take off from Pakistani airbases and threaten most of India's Western coast. PN needs more large land based strike AC...the Flanker series would be perfect for PN.

like jf17 is cheaper than f16,similarly jf17 with such capability will be much cheaper than western jets if we develop indigenously

Yeah the harrier jump jet cost roughly 2 billion to develop (never mind the cost of the F35B) I am sure it will be easy....

 

[Armchair]

Pak doesn't need an assault aircraft carrier - what aircraft carriers are today. It needs a defensive carrier similar to the Soviet and Italian concept. It needs a carrier to use as a foreign power tool to get funds from Gulf and other rich states (Gunboat diplomacy).

So, the real question is, how can Pakistan get a low-cost, defensive aircraft carrier?

The first is to understand that modern carriers are built for fast, heavy jets. If you lower the requirements, you can build a cheap and small aircraft carrier.

You can convert a small tanker into an aircraft carrier. A carrier where fast supersonic jets will not land, but one where light, small aircraft can. Aircraft like an armed turboprop, a small turbo-prop transport, helicopters. These armed turboprops would be able to perform like the S-3s, low cost, cheap and endurance basic air defense, anti-ship, anti-submarine, and close air support.

Those functions alone would be a gigantic boost in capabilty and would allow Pakistan, for instance, to become an instant regional power that can bomb dysfunctional countries. For instance, Yemen, at the behest of Saudi.

What would such a low-end aircraft carrier cost?

Weighing at only 10,000 tons, and built from a small used oil tanker, such an aircraft could cost between 100 million to 200 million USD. They would be easy to maintain, as the main cost of an aircraft carrier is the fuel and upkeep of fast jets.

4 helicopters, 6 armed turbo props, two transport turbo props, 8 UAVs and you have a solid capability that can add to any medium sized fleet. At pennies to the dollar - couldn't ask for a cheaper rate.

Some additional advantages

1. Since anti ship missiles are subsonic, they would be able to pick them off long before such missiles would get close to our own fleet. So, they would be a serious long range air defense capability
2. The fleet would be able to base large and capable UAVs in a wide variety of roles, something even destroyers cannot do effectively.
3. They can do anti submarine warfare for a huge area and very effectively. Saving on ASW platforms.


And imagine the prestige of owning an aircraft carrier.

 

[maverick1977]

Are you kidding? Do you have any idea how much that would cost? A ship of this size would also need escorts and air cover (Do you think the opposition will just cede the air to attack helicopters?) it would just be a very expensive target sitting in the ocean. And you would need at least two to ensure you have capability when you need it.

This is a total flight of fantasy.


Why? I think a lot of people have missed why the PN is buying a lot of maritime security type ships and their general purpose. It is to protect the silk road and keep it open.

Then suck your marines for cock sucking on Pakistani main land... u need to be an offensive force .., of course you need aircover and submarines at the front of wasps...
“ are u kidding me” ... no I am damn serious, to relieve pressure on Punjab this is the best strategy, open up a front with amphibious landing..

 

[CrazyZ]

aircraft carriers are needed to keep buildup in region and to dominate enemy in peace time


like jf17 is cheaper than f16,similarly jf17 with such capability will be much cheaper than western jets if we develop indigenously

AC carriers are needed to project offensive power over long distances. Missile equipped subs and large AC can do the same for Pakistan against India in lower cost and more survival platforms than an AC carrier.

PN can play a key strategic role in conflict with India. It should not be kept defensive. India will be a major energy importer for the foreseeable future. If PN can cut Indian oil, natural gas, and coal imports...by attacking shipping and coastal infrastructure. PN could strategically hamper Indias ability to sustain a fight.

 

[Tamiyah]

we should develop Jf17 with vertical landing/take off capability

Are we economically stable? or Do we have billion worth of oil in our land?
In simple worlds we cant.

 

[Yaseen1]

we should develop joint ventures with oil rich gulf nations,if they are providing us billion of dollars in loan why they cannot fund such programs if we show them that we are committed and capable.

Are we economically stable? or Do we have billion worth of oil in our land?
In simple worlds we cant.

 

[Tamiyah]

they wont they get developed and tested aircrafts from west

we should develop joint ventures with oil rich gulf nations,if they are providing us billion of dollars in loan why they cannot fund such programs if we show them that we are committed and capable.

 

[CHI RULES]

We may go for FACs with stealth features and like Israel Sa'ar 6 class corvettes we may get economical butt effective weaponry from both China and Russia. Modernization doesn't always means costly heavy ships. Even we may build a sufficient fleet small cameramen like boats armed with torpedoes or light ASHMs i.e following Iranian model.

We should have got F22Ps with capable AD capabilities instead of mid life upgrades as rumors are there. Similarly we should not induct Turkish corvettes in our fleet until and unless they are at least armed with capable medium range SAM. The strategy of protecting naval assets by fighter jets is totally imperfect specially in case of Pakistan. As in case of war at best for now only one squadron of JF17 is available along with Mirage Vs only armed with WVR and perhaps not suited for interception missions.

 

[Yaseen1]

west is unreliable partner and not sell them f35 and latest jets,after kashoggi murder u.s has blocked weapons sale to saudis .Saudis funded our nuclear program which was much difficult than forming joint venture s for fighter jets and other defense equipment.Only thing needed is political courage

they wont they get developed and tested aircrafts from west

 

[Keysersoze]

Then suck your marines for cock sucking on Pakistani main land... u need to be an offensive force .., of course you need aircover and submarines at the front of wasps...
“ are u kidding me” ... no I am damn serious, to relieve pressure on Punjab this is the best strategy, open up a front with amphibious landing..

Oh dear you clearly have no idea. This would not be like the Inchon landings. You would have to face land based air attack. Sea based air attack from enemy carrier assets. Submarine based attacks and then when you have got past all those, you will have to face enemy assets on the ground. Now your typical LHD can hold roughly 1000 marines and if you have two of them you have just landed roughly 2 battalions with light vehicles and limited air support. you then have to support them with supplies (Because you can be damn sure you burn through a lot of ammo attacking a position ) and keep a corridor open using up all the assets you have to do so to keep the ground forces supplied.

So in conclusion

1)Learn what Marines do.
2)Understand tactics and more importantly logistics
3)Understand how much things cost (Important when you don't have a massive budget)
4)Learn how to use Quotation marks correctly.

 

[scionofPakwattan]

Well india isn't that mighty and their Aircraft carrier is just an old piece of scrap and the new one being build has been declared Useless by US Officials(don't know exactly when but i recall that i read an article about it) , half of their SUBS are falling apart(27 feb intrusion by indian sub and its detection) ...


Well in some areas there is corruption in the navy to some extent , i mean how the hell is navy building 1st class bungalows retired officers and they are selling to civilians too ...

The new IN carrier had issues with catapult launch system i think and americans agreed to share their tech with indians so i suppose that issue shouldve been taken care of

 

[Keysersoze]

The new IN carrier had issues with catapult launch system i think and americans agreed to share their tech with indians so i suppose that issue shouldve been taken care of

No the new one thats arriving in 2023 (it's already 5 years late)is a smaller version of the Russian one and only has a ski jump. It doesn't have a catapult. They have plans for larger carrier but that's scheduled for sometime in the 2030's

 

[khanasifm]

Ships operate in flotillas and apart with picket duty etc apart 5 mile 10 mile etc to cover area, air defense of 054 with will provide medium range coverage with each ship short range providing last defence and finally close in weapons under 3-5 km, not every ship is support to carry layer defence but rather Multiple ships together form defensive layers pn like many other navy even in US navy not every ship has long range, medium range and short range weapons to cover every ship lastly pn cannot afford to put every weapon on each ship

Turkish ship major role is anti ship and anti sub plus self defensive so is f22p while 054 provide area coverage to flotilla for air, surface and anti sub long range, rest all are costal defense missile boats and corvette with limited role or single role

https://www.navyrecognition.com/ind...ed-defense-naval-solutions-for-the-world.html


Danish ships major role is maritime security, intel and rescue in peace time and anti ship in war role

 

[Tank131]

I would hope that PN doesnt get specialized ships or moves away from this concept in future acquisitions or upgrades. They should go for the smaller low cost multimission vessels. Even USN is doing this with the FFG(X). Every ship should be able to operate independently amd as a group. With respect to the air defense, i hope PN would consider approaching Russia about acquiring the Redut (with the 9m96e or e2 depending on the length of the vls tubes) and making it the standard for PN (Instead of Hq-16). It has more range and both missiles are quad-packed. If you you look at F-22p, a VLS (12-16 cell) can fit where the current HQ-7A sits. A Redut system would set you up with 48-64 missiles (60-120km in range). Change its radar to Smart S MK2 and you would make the F-22P a very versatile survivable ship. A 12-16 cell vls in MILGEM with the same Missile would be great. The Type 054A could also be fit with the 9M96E2 (120km range) and 16 cells could utilize these (64 missiles with the remainder loaded with Yu-8 ASROC and 8 LACM. The redut could be am answer to Barak-8 except with more missiles and possibly better range.