What's new

More than 300 PAF Mirages & F-7s will be retired in future. A huge market indeed.

The thread started as what PAF would do about retiring Mirages and F-7s but now has turned into "How can Pakistan sink the Indian Aircraft Carrier and what could IN do about it?".
 
.
Both Su-30MKI and the F-16 have a range nearing 3000 km with Fuel tanks.

The F-16 actually can carry 8x AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles at a time.

th


The hardpoints 7, 7A, 3, 3A, 8, 2, 9 and 1 can carry 8x AIM-120C AMRAAM and the hardpoints 6 and 4 carry the AGM HARPOON. The hardpoint 5 carries a 300lb fuel tank. The stations 5R and 5L carry the Targeting and Jammer pods.

A 2011 article in the United States Naval War College Review credited the "YJ-91/YJ-12" with a range of 400 km and a 205 kg high explosive warhead, compared to the 130 km range of a Harpoon anti-ship missile. Furthermore, an aircraft could launch the "YJ-91/YJ-12" while still 230 km beyond the range of the SM-2 andSparrow anti-air missiles, which have ranges of less than 170 km. Following up in 2014, Robert Haddick postulated that a saturation attack by YJ-12's fired at long range would be viable against United States carrier strike groups; once the wave of sea-skimming missiles appeared over the horizon and was detected by ships' sensors, they would only have some 45 seconds to engage before impact. The U.S. Navy's solution is to use the Cooperative Engagement Capability to detect and destroy the YJ-12's launch aircraft with SM-6 missiles and fighters at long range before they can be fired
 
.
AoA
Could you please elaborate?
Regards

The threat to Indian carriers is from Pakistani submarine Arm, whose intensive purpose would be to deny the Sea Lines of Communication and deep water deployment to the Indian CVGN.
 
.
F16 fully loaded with weapons will not have a combat raduis of 3000km

more like 500km

the flankers have a fully loaded combat radius of 1000km

you are missing up combat radius with ferry range..

ferry range is no weapons just fuel tanks travelling in one direction
 
.
A war fought in 1982 does little to reflect a conflict occurring in 2015 and into the future. The difference in technology and capabilities is VAST.


I had taken this into account in my above analysis.

Anyway, I'll dissect a little further, to launch the Ra'ad (or any other standoff ordinance) the first step is knowing the (rough) location of the target (carrier). How does Pakistan do this with know dedicated military satellites? Anyway, let's assume this has been taken care of- let's say the Indian CNS accidentally tweets the exact GPS coordinates of the IN CBG and take it from there. So the PAF fighters launch with their CMs to the IN CBG

1) When within 500km of the carrier (still 150km outside of maximum launch range of said weapons) such fighters will be detected by the CBG's integrated (overlapping) sensors or the BARCAP (Barrier Combat Air Patrol- flight of MiG-29K/KuB) or the CBG's AEW assets (perhaps even IAF AWACS depending on their deployment/utilisation).

2) The CBG's BARCAP will move to intercept the PAF fighters (still outside of the range of the launch range of their weapons). The MiG-29Ks are amongst some of the world's most potent A2A fighters and nothing the PAF has in service is significantly more capable than them- the Blk.52s are about on par, if not inferior in a many ways), an opposing flight (PAF) will encounter a fearsome welcome.



Anyway, let's say a few fighters somehow (miraculously) manage to make it through and launch their CMs- at 350km-the CBG's integrated automated AD will kick in, tracking the subsonic (Ra'ad is) CMs and when within the launch envelop of the BARAK-8 (90km) the relevant escort vessel's weapons will automatically be launched to intercept. The BARAK-8 being guided by the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR, and in the final stages of flight by its own seeker, that has been specifically designed to counter supersonic, highly manoeuvrable, low flying cruise missiles will, I'm afraid to say, (for you) make mincemeat of the Ra'ad.


Progressing on, BARAK-8 SAMs have somehow failed to prevent a few missiles from getting within 500m of the carrier (the minimal targeting distance of the BARAK-8 and thus outside of its ability to intercept)- the last hopes are on the automated radar-guided bullet-firing CIWS of the carrier firing many 1000s of rounds a minute.


Between the multiple levels of (very capable) cover that would exist with a CBG it is hard to imagine a scenario where the PAF is able to get anywhere near an IN CBG- let alone "touch" it.


It is said that saturation attacks (dozens of AShM targeting a CBG) are one of the greatest threats to a CBG but the PAF would not be able to deliver that kind of ordinance against an IN CBG at once nor would their stated standoff weaponry be much of an issue for some of the world's most sophisticated sensors and weaponry to handle.


Also note, for the above I have not included the IAF's Pune/Mumbai Su-30MKI SQNs who could easily supplement the IN's assets if so required thanks to massive internal fuel and buddy-buddy refuelling.

In 2017 the above scenario will need to be revised to factor in 2 IN CBGs (with the induction of IAC-1). This will complicate the job of the PAF significantly (more targets to locate/track, more opposing fighters to face, more fights to fight on etc).


The above scenario will be relevant until around 2025, when the IN's 65,000 ton (likely) EMALS equipped IAC-2 comes into service with its air wing consisting of advanced fighters (Rafale-M/F-35C) and the world's most formidable carrier-based AWACS (E-2D) the picture changes significantly- and not in Pakistan's favour.


@Dillinger @Capt.Popeye @Penguin @MilSpec @PARIKRAMA please correct me as you see fit.




Was that the case in the last full-scale/conventional war India and Pakistan fought (1971)? Nope- the INS Vikrant targeted your military in East Pakistan. Even during 1999 (Kargil) INS Viraat was out of harbour "exercising" ( ;) ;) )with the rest of the Western fleet. Not so sure what nonsense reading of history you have done.


+ as for the sub-surface threat it is no doubt considerable but with some of the world's most sophisticated ASW systems (S-70B, P-8I, Karmorta class ASW, ACTAS, HUMSA-NG etc) the threat will be minimised.




Care to explain what duties the Indians have assigned to their carriers and why their carriers are no more than show pieces? India has employed its carriers in combat with Pakistan in the past.

You can use abusive and aggressive language, but I shall not reciprocate.

The threat to Indian CVGN is from Pakistani Sub arm. Anyone who would know operations would not argue this.
 
.
The threat to Indian carriers is from Pakistani submarine Arm, whose intensive purpose would be to deny the Sea Lines of Communication and deep water deployment to the Indian CVGN.

AoA
But Pakistan has no SSNs how could our subs sneak in and destroy the carrier.
Regards
 
. . . . .
F16 fully loaded with weapons will not have a combat raduis of 3000km

more like 500km

the flankers have a fully loaded combat radius of 1000km

you are missing up combat radius with ferry range..

ferry range is no weapons just fuel tanks travelling in one direction
AoA
Wanted to hear about the thermocline issue in the Arabian Sea from an expert.
Regards
I have limited knowlege of this subject, a submarimer may able to shed light. Otherwise you can google it. It is changeable due seasonal temperatures, so detection imroves, decreases with the rise and fall of temperature and sub surface currents affect it too. Seems like you are more aware of it than me.
 
.
HI,

First of all air craft carriers cannot be sunk---they can be seriously damaged---large frigates maye sunk.

Tactically and technically---it is not possible for an aircraft carrier and its assets to completely block out the incoming air strikes----.

The carrier will only be able to launch a certain number of aircraft---and if they fly farther to protect it---they will leave huge holes for strike aircraft to slip in---if they stay too close----the strike aircraft can launch from distance----.

It is just 'that' one slip at one place that an element of the strike force can get thru.

It is a guarantee that as long as the Pakistan's aircraft are flying---the indian naval battle group won't get close to the maximum range of the AShM----because of the loss of even one ship will be very heavy.
 
.
Its up to PAF how they use them .. maybe some African countries will buy them ..
 
.
Mastan Khan re your post
The carrier will only be able to launch a certain number of aircraft---and if they fly farther to protect it---they will leave huge holes for strike aircraft to slip in---if they stay too close----the strike aircraft can launch from distance----.

Too many assumptions.

First no Carrier Group commander ( one carrier between 4 & 9 escorting frigates destroyers) is going to risk losing even a single ship..

The great advantage of the vast seas you can move and keep on moving to the point a strike plane will just run out of fuel.

500km out to sea on your attacking planes will be short on fuel.

you have to find the carrier first !!!!!

Then worry about how to get thru

500km X 360 degree radar coverage without getting picked up

get to within 100km and barak 8 become the issue

that's after you have dealthg with MIG29K with bvr missles twin engines means longer range than PAF fighters
 
.
You can use abusive and aggressive language, but I shall not reciprocate.

The threat to Indian CVGN is from Pakistani Sub arm. Anyone who would know operations would not argue this.
Definitely CBG has a big threat from wolfpack of SSN, but SSK? No chance.

Remind you, SSKs are best to work in shallow water near shores.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom