Beating the Indian Navy without going broke

Star Wars

Well-Known member
Dec 1, 2017
484
506
Bangalore
Beating the Indian Navy without going broke - Global Village Space

Shahid Raza

A brief look at the history of warfare is enough to establish the dominant role of a naval force in defining the outcome of a limited or full scale shooting war. All great powers throughout human history, relied heavily on their naval might, be it the Viking raiders, the Chinese, the Ottomans, the British, the Soviets, the Americans and others. The Second World War saw intense naval combat and it defined the outcome of the war in all major theaters. This dynamic hasn’t changed since, and all aspiring powers in the 21st century, India included are looking to build a very expensive but powerful ‘blue water navy’ to project their power well into the future.

Unfortunately for reasons I can’t explore in this article, Pakistan will find itself at the receiving end of India’s ambitious naval build up in the immediate future. The author is willing to acknowledge that it is simply impossible for Pakistan to be able to match the offensive power the Indian navy is projected to have in the coming decade, however there are smart counter strategies based on the concept of ‘disruptive innovation’ to ensure that while Pakistan won’t be able to match the power projection capabilities of the Indian navy with its own, it can maintain a reliable and potent defensive naval strategy to keep its ports and Sea Lines of Communications (SLOCs) open during a limited or full scale three dimensional war with India. This article will therefore explore what Pakistan can do in the future to guarantee its defense from its most powerful enemy; the Indian Navy.

Kill the Carriers

The Indian navy plans to build up to 4 aircraft carries in the coming decade, which will form the centerpiece of its ‘Carrier Battle Groups’. The Indian naval carriers will be equipped with fighter aircraft, attack helicopters and Short Take off Vertical Landing (STOVL) aircraft to maintain operational flexibility. The construction, armament, training and operational costs of Indian carriers will cost Indian taxpayers around $30-50 billion eventually, which makes these carriers an asset, too expensive to lose and too important to fail during battle. The Indian carriers on one hand will form the crown jewel of the Indian navy but on the other hand, a prime target for Pakistan navy during a future conflict. India, due to its complex geo-security dynamics cannot afford to field all of its carriers against Pakistan.

Building a credible deterrence against the Indian carrier fleet would give Pakistan navy ample flexibility to realize its dream of eventually becoming a force to be reckoned with not just in the Arabian Sea but also in the Indian Ocean Region.

At best the number of carriers deployed against Pakistan will be either one or two because at least one carrier will always be in the dry dock for maintenance and repairs at any given time and the remaining one or two carriers will have to be kept available for the Chinese navy which is expanding its influence in the Indian Ocean Region with Pakistan’s help. The Indian carriers will be absolutely indispensible to the survival of the Indian surface and submarine fleet deployed in the ‘Carrier Battle Group’, because without the carrier air wing, the surface and submarine assets will become easy targets and the CBG will lose its mission critical standoff attack capability. Having established the critical role of the aircraft carriers to the Indian naval operations against Pakistan in the future, it therefore becomes critical that Pakistan develops capabilities to effectively detect, target, damage, disable or destroy the Indian carriers during the first phase of the war.

The loss of carriers alone will not only deplete and deprive the Indian navy off of its offensive capabilities but will also make its surface and submerged fleet immensely demoralized and easier to destroy or neutralize. Losing a carrier will cost India, thousands of highly trained sailors, crew and billions of dollars in monetary terms. The loss of a prized war fighting capability will make India much more exposed to its other rivals like China as the destruction of Indian carriers will result in a massive – overnight – gap in war fighting capabilities vis-à-vis Chinese navy. So now that we’ve established the Indian carriers as our prime target, I will address the question of how those carriers can be removed from the battlespace.

Build a Sensor Network

The first step of developing a ‘carrier killing capability’ is to develop an advanced sensor network to collect strategic intelligence on the capabilities and deployments of the Indian carriers. To develop such a capability, existing resources and assets would have to be tuned for the job. Such a sensor network will guarantee timely detection of enemy vessels, provide reliable all weather targeting capability and real time intelligence to the naval command for adapting its naval defense strategy under adverse circumstances. Here are some of the elements which will come into play for developing such a sensor network.

HUMINT: Human Intelligence has always been a critical part of Pakistan’s war-fighting psychology and in this instance; it retains its central position in providing intelligence on India’s carrier operations, technical intelligence (TECHINT), forecast and early warning. Pakistan maintains an extensive HUMINT network inside India which has proven its capabilities time and again. Such a HUMINT network will be critical in providing situational awareness.

IMINT: Pakistan has access to various surveillance satellites for procuring high definition imagery for analysis of enemy capabilities and installations. For ensuring the constant supply of Image Intelligence (IMINT) during war time, plans are being made to develop or acquire a native spy satellite. The IMINT will prove to be a reliable source of information on the Indian navy, thus helping to generate another layer of Strategic Intelligence.

AEW&C: Airborne Early Warning and Control assets will form another layer of providing Strategic Intelligence (STRATINT) against the Indian naval movements and deployments. Pakistan already possesses a handful of AEW&C assets to do just that, however as things move forward, it would be wise to add numbers and capabilities to the AEW&C fleet, especially by purchasing High Altitude, Long Endurance (HALE) Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) like the ‘Divine Eagle’ currently being developed by China. A small number of unmanned submarines, equipped with early warning and communication sensors would be a smart investment.

The Indian carriers on one hand will form the crown jewel of the Indian navy but on the other hand, a prime target for Pakistan navy during a future conflict. India, due to its complex geo-security dynamics cannot afford to field all of its carriers against Pakistan.

Coastal Surveillance Network: Just like India has commissioned a large scale Coastal Surveillance Network in 2015, it is also imperative for Pakistan to slowly but steadily build up a sophisticated Coastal Surveillance Network with short to long range capabilities. Such a network ought to be geographically dispersed along the entire length of the Makran coast.

It might also be wise to diversify the Coastal Surveillance capabilities by deploying these sensors on littoral vessels as well as road mobile vehicles, to increase its survivability.

Build an Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile System

A modern frigate can cost anywhere close to $500 million, but such an expensive vessel remains vulnerable to enemy surface warfare, airborne and submarine assets. The author acknowledges that an advanced fleet of surface vessels is absolutely critical for any navy and their role cannot be replaced by an Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile System (ASBMS), regardless of how advanced the later system is the surface fleet would have to be needed. Pakistan navy is making efforts to acquire and build new surface vessels, however it still lacks the capability to attack and kill the Indian aircraft carriers. That job would have to be taken care of by the ASBMS. China developed its DF-21D ASBMS to counter the carrier threat from the US Navy; Pakistan will face the exact same threat from the Indian navy in the near term. Therefore it is logical for Pakistan to invest efforts and resources into developing an ASBMS based on its tried and tested Shaheen series of Ballistic Missiles, with a standoff range of between 1000 -1500km.

That effective range would be sufficient to keep the Indian carriers far enough from Pakistan’s coastline to ensure the survivability of our ports and Sea Lines of Communications (SLOCs) so Pakistan can keep its trade and energy routes open during the period of war. Building such an ASBMS would also mean that the Indian carrier air-wing operating from a standoff ranges would require mid air refueling if it attempted to attack the Pakistani coastal assets or our surface fleet, which is an unfeasible proposition unless India can establish total air-dominance over Pakistan, which is simply not going to happen. In simple terms, the Indian carrier borne jets would run out of combat worthy fuel before they even reach their intended targets close to or at the Pakistani coastline.

Building an ASBMS is economically and technologically feasible for Pakistan because such a system will be built upon existing and available technologies and the technological breakthroughs needed to develop such a system are not significant as most of the technological parameters required to develop this system are either already available or in the development pipeline

According to the US Naval War College, the unit cost of the DF-21D is between $5-10 million, which in layman terms means that Pakistan can develop and deploy a potent arsenal of 50 -100 Sensor Network Enabled, all terrain, road mobile ASBM systems with shoot and scoot capability in the cost of buying a new AAW Frigate. If we compare it to the cost and battlefield value of an Indian aircraft carrier, it certainly proves to be a very cost effective solution to a very powerful problem. Developing such an ASBMS is a wiser move not only from the technological and economic stand point but it also emerges as ‘strategic trump card’ which can become an ultimate weapon of blackmail and deterrence against a much larger and more powerful adversary. Importantly there is no reliable countermeasure against such a system available to the Indian navy, nor is it likely to come anytime soon.

That effective range would be sufficient to keep the Indian carriers far enough from Pakistan’s coastline to ensure the survivability of our ports and Sea Lines of Communications (SLOCs) so Pakistan can keep its trade and energy routes open during the period of war.

During a war when a Pakistani ASBMS scores a carrier kill or succeeds in damaging and disabling one or potentially more Indian carriers including the helicopter carriers, thus sending them out of the battlespace, it will mark an abrupt end to the Indian naval campaign against Pakistan because the rest of their surface and submerged fleet will also take heavy losses without the air wing of their carriers.

With the loss of their carriers, they will lose their eyes and ears, standoff interception capabilities, would suffer from a decline in combat morale, and would become vulnerable to attacks from Land, Surface, Air and by Submarines. Thus it is established that developing an indigenous ASBMS meets the ‘disruptive innovation’ criteria and remains an attractive option for Pakistan’s defense planners.

Build a Cruise Missile System Architecture

Thanks to the foresight of its defense planners, Pakistan is fortunate to be among the select few countries in the world which possess the capability to research, develop, manufacture and deploy highly advanced, medium – long range Cruise Missile systems. The Cruise Missiles can form a daunting deterrence against even the most powerful and well equipped adversaries like the Indian navy. Keeping this in view, Pakistan has already been developing a range of different Cruise Missile systems which are capable of keeping the Indian navy far away from our shores, despite all of its might and capabilities. Here is a brief introduction of Pakistan’s Cruise Missile arsenal.

Babur-I Land Attack Variant: In the context of Coastal Defense, the Babur-1 LACM can be instrumental as a weapon of deterrence because India’s major peripheral military ports from Gujrat to Mumbai fall within its operational range. In simple terms, Babur LACM can neutralize high value stationary targets located between the states of Gujrat and Maharashtra. These targets include military communications, ports, fuel, radars, runways and other high priority targets which would be essential for the Indian navy to mount an offensive campaign against Pakistan as well as for replenishments, repairs and supplies.

Babur-II Multi Role Variant: Pakistan possesses an advanced version of Babur-I LACM dubbed ‘Babur Weapon System Version-2’ which brings a very unique capability for Pakistan as this particular Cruise Missile system not only has upgraded avionics and guidance system but is also capable of targeting moving surface targets like aircraft carriers, frigates, destroyers and other naval surface assets. Thus this system with its outstanding range and capabilities will form a credible deterrence against the fast growing Indian surface fleet, as well as against high value land based targets.

Babur-III Submarine Launched Variant: Although Pakistan’s Babur-III SLCM variant is meant for carrying out a second nuclear strike, it however can be used as a conventionally armed weapon to attack large surface vessels of the Indian navy. Under such a scenario, Pakistan’s air independent propulsion equipped submarines, armed with a conventional variant of the Babur-III can plausibly infiltrate close to the home ports of the Indian carriers and attack those carriers while they are still a long distance away from posing a threat to Pakistan. Similarly, the conventional version of Babur-III can also be deployed against high value coastal targets in India which do not fall within the range of Pakistan’s Babur-I/II LACMs due to the long range of Pakistan’s Submarines.

Harba Cruise Missile: Pakistan recently test fired a new variant of the Babur Cruise Missile called ‘Harba’ from the domestically developed Fast Attack Craft (Missile) PNS HIMMAT. This new missile system reportedly has a strike range of 700km, which is almost 3 times more than the strike range offered by the Harpoon and C-802 missiles, currently in service with Pakistan navy. Harba is also dual mode and is capable of attacking both surface and land targets which gives it a great operational flexibility.

The system is also considered to be quite survivable since it is mounted on a Fast Attack Craft which operates in littoral waters where radar clutter makes it hard to find and attack this system. So essentially, Harba gives Pakistan the capability to maintain effective area denial capability only if this system is produced in enough strong numbers to make a dent in the overall war-fighting strategy.

Developing such an ASBMS is a wiser move not only from the technological and economic stand point but it also emerges as ‘strategic trump card’ which can become an ultimate weapon of blackmail and deterrence against a much larger and more powerful adversary.

Zarb Cruise Missile: The Zarb Cruise Missile System essentially is a locally produced version of the Chinese C-602A Coastal Defense System. This missile carries a very powerful 400kg warhead and is capable of destroying surface targets for up to 290km. Zarb is a Coastal Defense System which means it is similar to Boeing’s Harpoon Coastal Defense system, which is designed to protect the coastline from enemy intruders or a marine landing.

Since it appears that Pakistan is producing this system locally, its further development of operational capability and range is expected and it will certainly make another potent layer of coastal defense for Pakistan’s coastline. It is also worthy to note that Pakistan also possesses a sizeable arsenal of air, sea and submarine based Harpoon, Exocet and C-802 anti Ship missiles which form another layer of Pakistan navy’s defense strategy. In this domain, Pakistan navy is doing fairly well as opposed to many regional navies because of its unique capability to acquire cutting edge Cruise Missile Systems, tailored for its own requirements without being limited by the international missile export standards as defined by MTCR.

Build a Potent Surface, Air & Submarine Fleet

After having developed a powerful sensor network to detect enemy mobilization, a long range Anti Ship Ballistic Missile System and a third layer of up to 8 different Cruise Missile systems to develop a credible attack capability, it becomes imperative to also build a strong fleet of new advanced Anti Air Warfare Frigates, Littoral Patrol Ships, a sizeable fleet of AIP Submarines, a Nuclear Powered SSBN for completing the nuclear triad and air-borne attack assets including fixed, rotary wing aircraft and unmanned systems. The author acknowledges the limited budget available to the Navy; however the defense planners and the Govt must find a way to finance the acquisition or development of these assets for the navy in the future, because most of navy’s surface, submerged and airborne assets are aging and some are due for retirement.

The new acquisitions have to be made under a broader strategy to not only transfer technology of these systems to Pakistani industry but they must also retain the capability to work with the existing sensor network as well as offering potential for future upgrades and integration with new sensors and weapons. In the given context, the surface, submerged and airborne fleet of the navy will form the last line of defense against a massive Indian naval advance and therefore it must be carefully planned to narrow the capability gap vis-à-vis the Indian navy while keeping the budgetary limitations in mind.

Concluding Thoughts

The Indian Aircraft carrier fleet will pose a balance of power altering challenge to Pakistan’s overall defense strategy and not just to the Pakistan navy. Indian navy will almost certainly be deployed against Pakistan should the Indian ‘Cold Start’ doctrine turn hot in the future. It has to be acknowledged that while able to defend Pakistan’s naval frontiers for now, the Pakistan navy remains the weakest arm of the state’s war fighting machine and it is becoming increasingly outnumbered and outgunned. It would not be wise for Pakistan to try and match the Indian naval might pound for pound because it will be a very expensive exercise which an economy like Pakistan can ill afford.

The author believes that Pakistan’s naval strategy should be based on the concept of ‘disruptive innovation’ which can offset the Indian naval advantage while remaining inside our national spending and technological envelope and more importantly without relying heavily on foreign assistance, be it financial or technological. The author strongly believes that Pakistan ought to build further upon its inherent strengths, like it’s rather potent capability to design, develop and manufacture highly advanced ballistic and cruise missile systems which will not only reduce cost but also reduce our dependence on foreign suppliers.

If Russia’s Sarmat and Iskander missiles are an example to go by, it is not hard to understand that the future battlefield is likely to remain dominated by countries which can design, develop and manufacture advance ballistic and cruise missile systems as well as associated technologies like propulsion, target guidance like radiation homing, flight control, mission computing and advance warheads like hypersonic glide vehicles and electromagnetic pulse (EMP). Pakistan finds itself in a position to develop those cutting edge technologies which can overwhelm India’s carrier fleet in a limited or full scale shooting war, at a very manageable cost; thus deterring a more powerful and aggressive adversary by neutralizing its tactical and strategic advantage from the battlespace.

The author also believes that Pakistan can maintain its naval defenses while remaining inside its budgetary limitations by developing an indigenous capability to design, develop and manufacture unmanned aerial and submarine systems, artificial intelligence based guidance systems for its ballistic and cruise missiles as well as by building a sizeable number of littoral Fast Attack Crafts which are armed with long range weapons like Harba. The unmanned systems will cut development, manufacturing and operational costs so they can also be deployed in strong numbers. Such unmanned systems can also be operated in high risk environments due to their long endurance and the capability to operate beyond the physical capabilities of human operators. Thus unmanned systems and other emerging technologies like the artificial intelligence can help maintain the naval balance of power without sending the national economy into crisis.

Read more: Indian Army, Navy and Air forces join hands: who is the…

Pakistan must also muster its diplomatic muscle to acquire naval bases in friendly peripheral countries under collective security agreements, so the Pakistan navy has diverse options to deploy and disperse its forces as required during a naval war scenario with India. There are countries which are strategically located and will be sympathetic to Pakistan’s security concerns while benefiting from the collective defense agreement with Pakistan.

The author believes that Pakistan will benefit immensely by opening a strategic dialogue with friendly countries like Maldives, Indonesia, Somalia, Yemen and Sudan to grant naval bases or rotation and replenishment rights from their own installations. Building a credible deterrence against the Indian carrier fleet would give Pakistan navy ample flexibility to realize its dream of eventually becoming a force to be reckoned with not just in the Arabian Sea but also in the Indian Ocean Region.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shahid Raza is Assistant Editor (Strategic Affairs) with Global Village Space. He serves as the Director of Geopolitical Research at Command Eleven consulting. His area of expertise is the analysis of hybrid warfare strategies involving Pakistan, India, China, Russia, Central Asia and South Asia, North America and the Middle East. Shahid frequently contributes to Moscow based, Radio Sputnik international, Katehon and the Geopolitical think tanks. He can be followed on twitter: @schaheid, [email protected] The views expressed in this article are authors own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Global Village Space.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------



Put long story short, his idea is to develop a sensor network and use that to locate and target the Carrier using ASBM and cruise missiles. I just have a few simple questions..

1. What makes him think we don't already know the locations of these sensor network and won't target them at the beginning of the war ?
2. Could these sensor networks be prone to ECM ?
3. What is the range of their costal surveillance assets, and can they really be used to attack CBG's in a manner it proves as an effective deterrence(unlikely) ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nilgiri and Ashwin
The main question here is from where will these beggars be getting money to build such a vast ecosystem of sensors and missiles. They don't have academic and institutional foundation and all these things are going to cost them billions of dollars. Not to mention our carriers will never get close enough to be targetted by Ashms.
 
Most of the things mentioned in the article are already there.
Pakistan's own GIDS makes Towed array sonars for surface ships and submarines. :: GIDS - SLTA ::
The towed array can detect enemy ships and submarines from very long distances.
Pakistan has one of the longest range Anti ship cruise missiles in the world, the Babur-II with 700 Km range.
Pakistan doesnt have anti ship ballistic missiles right now, but a Quasiballistic missile carried by JF-17 thunder, the Mach 5 CM-400AKG. PAF specially bought 55 of these for the one Indian Aircraft carrier. Each JF-17 can carry and fire two of these. Fire from 200-250 Km.
Then PN flies a fairly big fleet of relatively inexpensive drones for sea area and coastal surveillance. Then long range P-3c Orions and ZDK-03 AWACS in maritime role. All networked together.
So we are alright at the moment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Milspec
So the author has no idea that Carrier is not an alone ship ? It moves with a group 5-6 other ships which are there to protect it, one CBG is equal to 50% of Pakistani navy currently. But the point is IN will not waste CBG on PN. Operation Trindent-2 with 3-4 small frigate ships e.g Talwars with Brahmos & other ASMs are more than enough to kill their Zulfi's, let alone Kolkata class.

I think Anti-ship ballistic missile are of no use as Indian ACs are not as big as USAN ACs, so it will be an over-kill to buy them for PN.

But a smart network and some key strategic weapons like P-3C, AWACS,JF-17s & Zulfis can be put in proper place to make CBGs job little harder. Also not to forget IN also has P-8Is, A-50I,Su-MKIs & Kolkata which can annihilate PN any day they want to, and why am I forgetting those 20 odd Mig-29Ks.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Angel Eyes
Most of the things mentioned in the article are already there.
Pakistan's own GIDS makes Towed array sonars for surface ships and submarines. :: GIDS - SLTA ::
The towed array can detect enemy ships and submarines from very long distances.
Pakistan has one of the longest range Anti ship cruise missiles in the world, the Babur-II with 700 Km range.
Pakistan doesnt have anti ship ballistic missiles right now, but a Quasiballistic missile carried by JF-17 thunder, the Mach 5 CM-400AKG. PAF specially bought 55 of these for the one Indian Aircraft carrier. Each JF-17 can carry and fire two of these. Fire from 200-250 Km.
Then PN flies a fairly big fleet of relatively inexpensive drones for sea area and coastal surveillance. Then long range P-3c Orions and ZDK-03 AWACS in maritime role. All networked together.
So we are alright at the moment.

Carrier assets will be extremely well protected. They’re too important for a casual risk exposure. Even in 1971 the deployment of vikrant was done in a highly calculated manner. We’ll neutralize any major threat and only then bring it in. When it finally comes in of course everything changes.
 
Most of the things mentioned in the article are already there.
Pakistan's own GIDS makes Towed array sonars for surface ships and submarines. :: GIDS - SLTA ::
Towed array sonar is old technology and is meant for detecting submarines, not ships! SONARS are for underwater vessels only.

Pakistan has one of the longest range Anti ship cruise missiles in the world, the Babur-II with 700 Km range.
When did babur get homing seeker? Without seeker, it is not a anti-ship missile. Ships move at 30-60kmph and a missile that can't track is useless

Pakistan doesnt have anti ship ballistic missiles right now, but a Quasiballistic missile carried by JF-17 thunder, the Mach 5 CM-400AKG.
Each JF-17 can carry and fire two of these. Fire from 200-250 Km.
These weigh 2.5ton. Carrying even 1 of then on JF17 will break its pylon. There is a reason India uses Su30 to carry Brahmos and not any other plane. JF17 does not have the ability to carry 2.5ton on any hardpoint. The total payload itself is 4tons and that too in 7 hardpoints.

Next, no carrier will come too close to the shore. Carriers are meant to carry planes, not attack on their own. The planes on the carrier attack enemy assets. The carrier only carries weapons for defensive use only. So, assuming that you can simply attack carriers easily is not correct.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Angel Eyes and Amal
great powers throughout human history, relied heavily on their naval might, be it the Viking raiders

Lol. The hell is this person even on about? The Vikings a great power? They weren't even a unified force.

And if the intent is to not go broke, then the author forgot to take that into account in their analysis. What they're proposing is expensive. Sensor networks for surveillance and tracking aren't cheap. The sensor network necessary for long-range targeting for ballistic missiles is even more costly, that's why neither the US nor Soviet Union pursued them despite both developing them (Pershing II, Zyb-K). Only now is the US revisiting the concept with an ATACMS ASBM.

MGM-140_ATACMS.jpg


And during RIMPAC 2018 I got to personally witness GMLRS rockets being used as anti-ship weapons.

image


Cruise missiles are more cost effective as many coastal batteries can operate independent of a unified network, but their effectiveness against a networked adversary is significantly diminished. Look at the Houthi's record against the USN. 0-3, while scoring several hits against a less well organized Saudi Navy.

Their only major success has been targeting international shipping and gutting commercial fast craft like HSV-2.

dc5_0.jpg


Without a unified control structure lone AShM launchers are quickly defeated and their payloads destroyed through a combination of kinetic defences and electronic countermeasures, both of which contributed to the three thwarted attacks against the USN.

Networking an AShM or cruise missile battery together makes for a larger footprint, but more effective force against an enemy that's equally as integrated. It's just very costly to support such an architecture.

Fig.15-A.jpg


Towed array sonar is old technology and is meant for detecting submarines, not ships! SONARS are for underwater vessels only.

SODAR works though, but isn't widely used due to the prevalence of alternative sensors like radar, IIR, and other remote sensing alternatives. SODAR is above-water SOnic Detection and Ranging. SODAR is also known as an acoustic radar.

And yes, towed arrays work for detecting surface ships too.

These weigh 2.5ton. Carrying even 1 of then on JF17 will break its pylon.

Your mistaking YJ-12 for CM-400AKG.

Carriers are meant to carry planes, not attack on their own.

Not always. Russia's Kuznetsov actually has anti-ship missile launchers on its flight deck. They're scheduled to be removed during Kuznetsov's refitting, if it actually goes through, to make room for additional storage space, but right now they're housing P-700s.

jSvBQXk.jpg


419714d431f21dedf9ad0d4f42258445.jpg


It's for this reason that both Kuznetsov and Kiev are "aviation cruisers" and not aircraft carriers, an important political distinction for treaty purposes.

LLSc2qB.jpg


kiev_class_01.jpg


Brazil's São Paulo (decommissioned in 2017), a former French Navy Clemenceau-class aircraft carrier, also has guns for shore bombardment or self-defence. Others like Giuseppe Garibaldi carry torpedo tubes, a decidedly offensive outfitting, and Otomat anti-ship missiles (removed in 2003).

1280px-551-esdragonhammer90-08.jpg


Many aircraft carrying ships, especially the smaller classes, do carry weapons to both defend themselves and attack hostile shipping or land targets.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
1. How many intelligence/remote-sensing satellites does Pakistan have and how many they are planning to launch? Last I checked they have just one launched by China.

2. ASBM systems need an extremely accurate terminal guidance system powered by multiple satellites and air-borne assets and a high manoeuvring MARV. Even then it is hard to hit a smaller carrier like those India is planning to deploy against Pakistan. Needless to say, Pakistan does not have enough space assets nor enough airborne assets. Presence of S-400s will make it even more complicated. Owing to the geography of the region, Pakistan may find Indian attack group operating under the cover of coastal S-400 SAMs, taking out any of their airborne assets. Unlike China in South China Sea and its east coast, Pakistan cannot hope for a control of airspace over Arabian Sea, lets not even talk about IOR. Heck, with a few bases near the coastline, even IAF's retarded son Tejas can be an effective air-cover of 500 KM over the Arabian sea. A fuel tanker can extend this reach. The author completely missed the point of land-based air-power playing a crucial role in the Arabian sea theatre.

3. Author's entire narrative is based around Indian Aircraft carriers. If I were a Pakistani, I would have been more worried about Indian destroyers and missile boats taking out Pakistan's ports, fuel deposits and coastal defence from a distance of 600 KM or so using Brahmos missiles. Remember, Pakistan is not exactly 3000 KM away from Indian coastal waters. Its more like 300 to 1500 KM away, depending if you are hitting Gwadar or Karachi. With coastal defences down, India could affect an amphibious landing and open a new front in case of war. Plus a naval blockade could be implemented if the Indian destroyers and subs remain unchallenged. The author completely missed the point of naval blockade using destroyers and subs.

4. Pakistan's new subs will only start joining in 2022. By that time, I expect DRDO to drag its feet and equip currently deployed Kalvaris with AIP modules during refit and India to induct more AIP equipped subs. Not to mention a few more anti-sub aircraft that India is planning to induct. I am not aware of the capabilities of Indian SSN, but I do hear the rumour of India leasing one more SSN from Russia. Meanwhile, it is unlikely Pakistan will operate any SSN in near future.

5. As far as Pakistani cruise missiles go, Indian destroyers are expected to carry potent Arrow anti-air system to shoot down these annoyances. There is nothing even similar in PN.

India should do one thing however, demonstrate and deploy anti-satellite capability. Blinding Pakistan by taking out few existing of the Pakistani sats over the region will ensure they don't get real-time updates of the theatre.
 
No such thing as cheap superweapon concept. Everything has counters and counter-counters etc....you overall long term get what you invest in.
Well, it is possible to defend against a superpower using limited resources. Finnish and Vietnamese have done that in the past. So the premise of the article is not wrong per-say but suggestions are simply crap. You don't defeat a bigger power using 'innovative technologies' as innovation does not come cheap, especially if you are not innovating yourself but buying from Chinese --HA! Chinese innovation must be an oxymoron! What you really need are innovative tactics. Something most of us civilians are totally oblivious of.

I remember people dismissing Mig-21 as a flying coffin. Well, they missed the point that it can fire BVRs. In 2006 joint exercise in Gwalior, IAF demonstrated how they can take out a formation of F-16s using a combination of Su-30 and Mig-21 in tandem in which Mig-21 hides owing to its small size successfully takes out unexpecting F-16s using BVRs. Thats how you defeat a much bigger power using limited resources.
 
Last edited:
The main question here is from where will these beggars be getting money to build such a vast ecosystem of sensors and missiles. They don't have academic and institutional foundation and all these things are going to cost them billions of dollars. Not to mention our carriers will never get close enough to be targetted by Ashms.

Hi,
There is no need for using expletives like beggars for Pakistan. We should be the last ones to throw jibes at someone for having lesser money than us. We shouldn't turn into a forum like the others out there, one of the reasons to start this forum was to have a place for decent debate given every other place is filled with vitriol.

Now to the point o discussion Pakistanis do have an ace of spade, i.e being a proxy for China, and thus can leverage a lot to gain Off the shelf systems from China or even lease systems in lieu of gawadar port etc. And then there is finally the ballistic kill vehicle for carriers that the chinese have supposedly tested, it wouldn't be difficult for China to proliferate that to Pakistan to keep IN in check.
 
Hi,
There is no need for using expletives like beggars for Pakistan. We should be the last ones to throw jibes at someone for having lesser money than us. We shouldn't turn into a forum like the others out there, one of the reasons to start this forum was to have a place for decent debate given every other place is filled with vitriol.

Now to the point o discussion Pakistanis do have an ace of spade, i.e being a proxy for China, and thus can leverage a lot to gain Off the shelf systems from China or even lease systems in lieu of gawadar port etc. And then there is finally the ballistic kill vehicle for carriers that the chinese have supposedly tested, it wouldn't be difficult for China to proliferate that to Pakistan to keep IN in check.

That's one thing nobody seems to be factoring in. Pakistan probably doesn't have the knowledge or money to build these things but there's pretty much nothing stopping China from giving things away to them for free just to tie India down. After all, it's not like Pakistan independently developed its nuclear technology or ballistic missiles either.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: R!cK
Most of the things mentioned in the article are already there.
Pakistan's own GIDS makes Towed array sonars for surface ships and submarines. :: GIDS - SLTA ::
The towed array can detect enemy ships and submarines from very long distances.
Pakistan has one of the longest range Anti ship cruise missiles in the world, the Babur-II with 700 Km range.
Pakistan doesnt have anti ship ballistic missiles right now, but a Quasiballistic missile carried by JF-17 thunder, the Mach 5 CM-400AKG. PAF specially bought 55 of these for the one Indian Aircraft carrier. Each JF-17 can carry and fire two of these. Fire from 200-250 Km.
Then PN flies a fairly big fleet of relatively inexpensive drones for sea area and coastal surveillance. Then long range P-3c Orions and ZDK-03 AWACS in maritime role. All networked together.
So we are alright at the moment.

Help your author that its not carrier which save the battle group but its otherwise. He sounds like once carrier is gone, the battle group becomes useless.

Moreover, it implies once carrier groups are down, PN can dominate IN.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amal
Hi,
There is no need for using expletives like beggars for Pakistan. We should be the last ones to throw jibes at someone for having lesser money than us. We shouldn't turn into a forum like the others out there, one of the reasons to start this forum was to have a place for decent debate given every other place is filled with vitriol.

Now to the point o discussion Pakistanis do have an ace of spade, i.e being a proxy for China, and thus can leverage a lot to gain Off the shelf systems from China or even lease systems in lieu of gawadar port etc. And then there is finally the ballistic kill vehicle for carriers that the chinese have supposedly tested, it wouldn't be difficult for China to proliferate that to Pakistan to keep IN in check.


Do the Chinese have the systems in place to accurately target Carriers in the Arabian sea ? Because Pakistanis don't have the assets for something of that sort and will most likely be leasing equipment from China. Newbie question, Can these sensors which is used for accurately targeting carriers be disrupted in anyway ?


Japanese Navy Destroyer, JS Atago Intercepts Ballistic Missile Target with SM-3 Missile During Aegis BMD Flight Test

You guys might find this thread interesting....
 
Help your author that its not carrier which save the battle group but its otherwise. He sounds like once carrier is gone, the battle group becomes useless.

Moreover, it implies once carrier groups are down, PN can dominate IN.
I hereby take my chance to brag a bit. :D
Unlike many of you i myself has seen one of the world's biggest nuclear powered aircraft carrier the USS Independence cv-62 on her last voyage.
Their port entry was impressive.. Four helicopters on four corners of the ship, flying armed and watching everyone. Then two destroyers before her and two after. Then on-board Jets and other weapons i could not see.
I was young at the time , so didnt pay much attention to weaponery but concentrated on the American chicks onboard, ;)
Did manage to take one out for dinner.

On topic .
Loss of any ship is loss of naval power, and aircraft carriers are like floating airbase and cruise msissile base. Sinking an aircraft carrier gets you naval and air supremacy at the same time.
 
On topic .
Loss of any ship is loss of naval power, and aircraft carriers are like floating airbase and cruise msissile base. Sinking an aircraft carrier gets you naval and air supremacy at the same time.

so IN - Carrier = PN supremacy?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amal