Featured How Pakistan Is Preparing to Kill India’s New Aircraft Carriers

[Basel]

On paper Mirage jet with RA'Ad-II could strike at 1,600+ Km range. Mirage jet have approximately 1,200 Km range with two 1,000 lbs bombs while RA'AD-II have 600 km range

But think in practical sense what will the onstation time

Who will provide Top cover to the strike package .... ???

At What distance strike package will negotiate with IN interceptors .... ???

How many Jets would be required for this purpose .... ??

What will the strategy of IN .... ???

Would they not try to intercept package as soon as possible even if it require to launch counter strike from easter bases in mainland Pakistan .... ???

Our current arrangements could pose constant threat to any target at the distance of 1,200-1,600 Km in Indian Ocean .... ???

India already have logistic and data exchange agreement with USA and If I am not wrong with France as well would these indian allies not provide logistic or Data transfer (read Early Warning) against our strike package .... ???

there are many many questions which we have to answer first.

What you are hinting about is related to our capability to pose limited threat both in terms of time and number of strike attempts at 1200-1600+ Km distance

What I was posting about is related to maximum presence If not the constant presence at 1200-1600 Km distance.

Now the question is Why I am proposing such idea .... ???

Then the answer is we must understand Indian Naval Ambitions in Indian Ocean even if we leave eastern part of Indian Ocean where IN hase its presence at Andaman & Nicobar Island, Maldives Island, we must take note that India have right of berth for its Naval ships at Duqam Port, and was building base at Seychelles islands and most recently at Agaléga Island

I would ask you to first plot Indian bases at Kochi, Mumbai, Duqam Port of Oman, Djibouti due to (presence US and France as India have logistic support agreement) and Agaléga Island on Globe and connect them you will have your answer.

All I am saying is we should not go for sea control but for Sea Denial at longer distance from our shore and for this we could invest in 2 systems Submarines (in which we are already investing) and Long Range Naval Bombers, for this my suggestion is H-6 or any other suitable Long Range Naval Bomber system.

These two systems would pose 2 dimensional counter threats (Aerial and Subsurface) to IN, in fact Naval Bombers such as H-6 would give us Longer Reach and Flexibility than Submarines in time bound operations



Answer to your suggestions
View attachment 769577

When PAF will send Mirages with RAAD-2 it means all hell is going to be unleashed as most probably they will be armed with TNWs also BMs will soon to follow with small nukes enough to take out IN fleet.

For top cover it will be F-16s most probably or JFT with IFR or both, while MPAs, UAVs and Subs (with Baber-3) will also be in position to strike PN and PAF will avoid single platform strike untill it's the only option left, Pakistan will also receive data from friendly Stats and UAVs.

India know that Pakistan have lowered the Nuclear threshold and also for Naval war, all Indian bases out side India are in Pakistan's nuclear strike capability.

Any future war with India will be bloody but it doesn't mean we can not give them hell.

H-6 will not survive in war and China may not sell it, but Su-34 can as it has fighter DNA, with PAF and PN needs it buddy refueling, it will add range and will be less expensive to operate.

We need 1500km submarine and ship launched CM with Sea target hitting capability, a Su-34 class bird with 800km ALCM will be very deadly force, also Su-34 can be configured to used in ASW or Submarine hunter role.

 

[DJ_Viper]

When PAF will send Mirages with RAAD-2 it means all hell is going to be unleashed as most probably they will be armed with TNWs also BMs will soon to follow with small nukes enough to take out IN fleet.

For top cover it will be F-16s most probably or JFT with IFR or both, while MPAs, UAVs and Subs (with Baber-3) will also be in position to strike PN and PAF will avoid single platform strike untill it's the only option left, Pakistan will also receive data from friendly Stats and UAVs.

India know that Pakistan have lowered the Nuclear threshold and also for Naval war, all Indian bases out side India are in Pakistan's nuclear strike capability.

Any future war with India will be bloody but it doesn't mean we can not give them hell.

H-6 will not survive in war and China may not sell it, but Su-34 can as it has fighter DNA, with PAF and PN needs it buddy refueling, it will add range and will be less expensive to operate.

We need 1500km submarine and ship launched CM with Sea target hitting capability, a Su-34 class bird with 800km ALCM will be very deadly force, also Su-34 can be configured to used in ASW or Submarine hunter role.

I got confused reading this post. It seems to me, your strategy is to destroy an AC and start a nuke war with it too? It doesn't work like that. Plus, all assets won't just be made available to support one operation nor would India or any other nation would use nukes when you attack conventional. There are always back door channels and other nations playing safety to avoid starting a nuke war (kind of like what happened two years ago after which, the US worked with both sides and ended the Kashmir dispute forever).

So IMO sinking an AC would be one operation requiring one strategy and coordinated with certain assets, with Pakistan's limited resources to ensure the rest of the war can be fought with other IN assets. Pakistan needs a larger number of advanced subs, just like Israel. Create as much as second and third strike capability that no one would want to even start a war.

 

[Basel]

I got confused reading this post. It seems to me, your strategy is to destroy an AC and start a nuke war with it too? It doesn't work like that. Plus, all assets won't just be made available to support one operation nor would India or any other nation would use nukes when you attack conventional. There are always back door channels and other nations playing safety to avoid starting a nuke war (kind of like what happened two years ago after which, the US worked with both sides and ended the Kashmir dispute forever).

So IMO sinking an AC would be one operation requiring one strategy and coordinated with certain assets, with Pakistan's limited resources to ensure the rest of the war can be fought with other IN assets. Pakistan needs a larger number of advanced subs, just like Israel. Create as much as second and third strike capability that no one would want to even start a war.

USSR have used threat of TNWs strikes against US CBGs in past very effectively.

What people have to understand that Pakistan not just lowered Nuclear threshold on ground by deploying Nasr BMs that policy is also implemented in air and sea warfare too.

 

[DJ_Viper]

USSR have used threat of TNWs strikes against US CBGs in past very effectively.

What people have to understand that Pakistan not just lowered Nuclear threshold on ground by deploying Nasr BMs that policy is also implemented in air and sea warfare too.

Let's do a comparison, the USSR had about 15000+ nukes on various delivery profiles and the largest landmass in the world and the ability to sustain a first strike! Now in comparison, if Pakistan lowered her threshold to drown an aircraft carrier, it risks of totally getting destroyed in response and neither side would go nuke until one sides is at the brink of collapse or losing the war.

I hope this makes sense. An aircraft carrier isn't above a country to risk an entire nation for and while a country has to fight a conventional war first. There are other strategies that will work for this.

 

[INS_Vikrant]

soon to follow with small nukes enough to take out IN fleet.

 

[Basel]

Whatever you think this will be done if necessary.

Let's do a comparison, the USSR had about 15000+ nukes on various delivery profiles and the largest landmass in the world and the ability to sustain a first strike! Now in comparison, if Pakistan lowered her threshold to drown an aircraft carrier, it risks of totally getting destroyed in response and neither side would go nuke until one sides is at the brink of collapse or losing the war.

I hope this makes sense. An aircraft carrier isn't above a country to risk an entire nation for and while a country has to fight a conventional war first. There are other strategies that will work for this.

Kindly answer my question, why people jump up and down when Pakistan talk about using TNWs against advancing IA IBGs?? Will it not start nuclear war?? Even if used inside Pakistan territory??

If Pakistan can plan and prepare to do that knowing that India may use strategic nuclear weapons against cities, then why not Pakistan do the same against Indian navy which will be trying to suffocate Pakistani economy and it's security??

Nuclear threshold is lowered keeping every aspect in mind, it's a deterrent, letting your enemy know that we will not tolerate any misadventure and there is no space under nuclear threshold of any conflict or limited war.

 

[drunken-monke]

nobody can understand cow language

from what i see you seem to ask 7 pages and no answer or something like that and no i gave the answer that the indian aircraft carrier is an expensive toy for fools and i believe that description of me how useless this is should be enough for you so go and drink some chai and feel nice about you being not smarter than your colonial master but in fact desperately after being just as stupid as them

also seriously use some real language

My question was, that whether the plan for Sinking of Indian Aircraft carrier worked or not after 7 pages of discussion??
The use of Aircraft carrier is by no means a job of chair-warriors.. There are so many measures taken to safeguard the Aircraft carrier. Had it been so easy sitting duck, apart of USA and china and many more blue water navy wouldn't have invested in them.. India do have a long experience of operating these toys..

 

[LeGenD]

this is just a game i know but at the end you see a mass of missiles launched at the carrier fleet and i have to point out again iran uses 1000 of missiles if it needs to but on top there are drones submarines etc pp so a carrier fleet can only defend from so many things at once and this is exactly why they are so easily taken out even in a simple video game simulation its obvious that you can overpower it simply with numbers of small systems even these oldschool silkworms do the job in enough numbers let alone drones and more modern missiles

Your argument is flawed. Thousands of missiles, really? Mass of missiles launched at the carrier fleet? If things were this simple...

WE are not talking about attacking 'defenseless structures' in this thread.

1. An aircraft carrier is a 'moving' ship with speeds approaching 30 knots (assuming a good propulsion system).

You will need long-range (maneuverable + guided) cruise missiles or ASBM to engage this kind of target. This is assuming that your surveillance network is not being jammed/disrupted/degraded by airborne assets of the aircraft carrier and can keep tabs on the moving ship. You will be throwing missiles in the water otherwise.

2. An aircraft carrier is provided an escort for its missions to establish a Carrier Battle Group (CBG).

The escort might include well-armed cruisers, well-armed destroyers, well-armed frigates and even submarines.

The escort might be well-equipped to intercept hostile cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, jet fighters, UAVs and submarines.

Expect the CBG to be in a formation to complicate saturation attack possibilities against each vessel (physically widely spaced), and electronically networked to detect and track movements of potential threats in real time across the entire battlespace. Situational awareness is one of the most important aspects of modern warfare.

So how will you subject a well-armed-and-aware CBG to a mass of missiles if it is not operating near your lands? The CBG might as well go on the offensive to soften your defenses early on?

3. I am sure you do not understand these simulations.

Do not just think on the lines of what you can do; you need to think on the lines of what others can do as well. Only then you will understand the risks and challenges of a conflict and CBG of any navy. One-dimensional thoughts lead to misleading conclusions.

 

[Titanium100]

My question was, that whether the plan for Sinking of Indian Aircraft carrier worked or not after 7 pages of discussion??
The use of Aircraft carrier is by no means a job of chair-warriors.. There are so many measures taken to safeguard the Aircraft carrier. Had it been so easy sitting duck, apart of USA and china and many more blue water navy wouldn't have invested in them.. India do have a long experience of operating these toys..

You can ask any military expert the carriers are pretty much a bygone era and you can eliminate them almost at will with So many different methods and options without breaking a sweat..

 

[drunken-monke]

You can ask any military expert the carriers are pretty much a bygone era and you can eliminate them almost at will with So many different methods and options without breaking a sweat..

and still US and China investing in them. ehh??

 

[MIRauf]

and still US and China investing in them. ehh??

To be used against lesser foes.

 

[drunken-monke]

To be used against lesser foes.

Aren't Tomahawks more economical and suitable for lesser foes when compare with huge giant flotilla??

 

[Kaleem.61]

The lion doesn't care what a jack thinks.

Actually Indians are in terrible situaiton:
27 Feb: Failure of existing toys
Galwan: Failure of Manpower
Anatolian Eagle: Failure of future planning
So they can't sit with a burning @$$.

Last time it was PAF now it's PAF and PN need not to mention CPEC(China)

 

[Amin Bactria]

My question was, that whether the plan for Sinking of Indian Aircraft carrier worked or not after 7 pages of discussion??
The use of Aircraft carrier is by no means a job of chair-warriors.. There are so many measures taken to safeguard the Aircraft carrier. Had it been so easy sitting duck, apart of USA and china and many more blue water navy wouldn't have invested in them.. India do have a long experience of operating these toys..

look at how we wrecked the uss bonhomme which unlike american suggestion was hit with a certain plasma weapon and ask yourself if you want to have the same images at home because if you challenge muslims continuesly you will be happy if you dont burn the same way your nuclear facilities your military facilities it can all together burn and who do you point at when that happens because you cant point at anyone since you will not have a chance to know where it comes from

 

[Amin Bactria]

india will have no reach at all if it continues to mess with musllims india will even at home suffer a huge humiliation so forget power projection