Why doesn't Pakistan build an aircraft carrier?

[General Of The Oasis]

aircraft carriers can do the things, that no other war machines can think of doing. if u have a carrier, then you can control thousands of miles in offensive action or in defensive manner.

 

[theboss]

Chinese may be ingeniune but not utterly less qualified than French.
After reading the paragraph below, one may realise that building ship especially nuke powered one are not as easy as keyboards war!

The new French nuclear carrier "Charles de Gaulle" has suffered from a seemingly endless string of problems since it was first conceived in 1986. The 40,000 ton ship has cost over four billion dollars so far and is slower than the diesel powered carrier it replaced. Flaws in the "de Gaulle" have led it to using the propellers from it predecessor, the "Foch," because the ones built for "de Gaulle" never worked right and the propeller manufacturer went out of business in 1999. Worse, the nuclear reactor installation was done poorly, exposing the engine crew to five times the allowable annual dose of radiation. There were also problems with the design of the deck, making it impossible to operate the E-2 radar aircraft that are essential to defending the ship and controlling offensive operations. Many other key components of the ship did not work correctly, including several key electronic systems. The carrier has been under constant repair and modification. The "de Gaulle" took eleven years to build (1988-99) and was not ready for service until late 2000. It's been downhill ever since. The de Gaulle is undergoing still more repairs and modifications. The government is being sued for exposing crew members to dangerous levels of radiation.

 

[theboss]

aircraft carriers can do the things, that no other war machines can think of doing. if u have a carrier, then you can control thousands of miles in offensive action or in defensive manner.

Sits well with India's expantionist ambitions.

 

[Penguin]

It could be worthwhile for PN to acquire Invincible class carrier(s) when they are retired from RN service, but use it(them) with helicopters only, for Assault, ASW as well as AEW roles (i.e. EH-101 Merlin variants). In place of Phalanx or Goalkeeper could be used the same CIWS as on F22P, and the same AShM and ASW torpedo tubes.

This carrier typically carries 22 aircraft;
a) Multi Mission - Strike, ASuW and ASW
12 x Harrier GR.7/9
10 x Sea King ASaC (AEW), and Merlin HM Mk.1 helicopters
b) Multi Mission - Strike and ASuW
18 x Harrier GR.7/9
4 x Sea King ASaC (AEW), and Merlin HM Mk.1 helicopters

Make that 4 EH-101 AEW/Elint + 6 EH-101 UH and 12 EH-101 ASW/ASuW and you're in business.

 

[somebozo]

It can be accquired as scrap to learn inner workings of a carrier but Pakistan has small coast line and no ambitions of project power overseas. So carrier does not fit in its "defensive" doctrine.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

I think we are better off with 20-frigates
3-5 destroyer

1 Carrier would be ok but with , huge fleet of JF17 thunder perhaps we don't need a carrier right away

More transport planes and other its would be ideal investment


The carrier would be eating away our navy's budget

So ideally if we can have 20-30 frigates with anti ship missiles and then suppliment it with 2-4 destroyers its a good defensive setup

Also lets not forgt out Mirages are geared for anti Ship warfare with excocet missiles ....

We have a good thing going just need to aquire 20 frigates first

 

[Penguin]

It can be accquired as scrap to learn inner workings of a carrier but Pakistan has small coast line and no ambitions of project power overseas. So carrier does not fit in its "defensive" doctrine.

A carrier without fixed wing aircraft will have little power to project, while the ASW threat to Pakistan is significant. An ASW carrier along the lines I suggested is defensive.

 

[Penguin]

I think we are better off with 20-frigates
3-5 destroyer

1 Carrier would be ok but with , huge fleet of JF17 thunder perhaps we don't need a carrier right away

More transport planes and other its would be ideal investment


The carrier would be eating away our navy's budget

So ideally if we can have 20-30 frigates with anti ship missiles and then suppliment it with 2-4 destroyers its a good defensive setup

Also lets not forgt out Mirages are geared for anti Ship warfare with excocet missiles ....

We have a good thing going just need to aquire 20 frigates first

12 EH101 makes for a HUGE boost in ASW potential for PN.

There will not be an acquisition of 20 frigates. PN will be lucky to get it's fleet back into double digits (10+) if at all

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

The only time Pakistan should go for a Aircraft carrier is if , we have nuclear propulsion system vs Petrol/Oil based propulsion

Pakistan Navy reallly has to move in calculated manner

1- Develop ample Frigates to first have a numerical force
2- Train that numerical force on how to coodinate operations
3- Getting 2-3 destroyers later on will help us get trained on
Managing ship of considerable larger scale
4- We still need to properly adapt to strategy of working under the
defensive shield of Destroyers from aerial threats
5- Not to mention we also have to device strategies to use the Orion
effectively from Suk Hoi threats from Carriers

So there is a ample learning curve, if there is a carrier available to us we could get it but we won't have any planes for it for 1-2 years. Unless our Mirages can operate on carrier ? not sure

But if we can get it would be good investment

But a carrier is something we could live with out for 10-15 years

The amount of fuel the carrier will burn in 1-2 billion $/year could be used to aquaire
Frigates, Destroyers , and also modernize our radars for time being

10/11 billion saved in fuel money alone in 3-5 years perioud could equip the navy with Submarines and Frigates

But if I had the chance to get hand on carrier I would and worry about planes later

 

[Ras]

It could be worthwhile for PN to acquire Invincible class carrier(s) when they are retired from RN service, but use it(them) with helicopters only, for Assault, ASW as well as AEW roles (i.e. EH-101 Merlin variants). In place of Phalanx or Goalkeeper could be used the same CIWS as on F22P, and the same AShM and ASW torpedo tubes.

This carrier typically carries 22 aircraft;
a) Multi Mission - Strike, ASuW and ASW
12 x Harrier GR.7/9
10 x Sea King ASaC (AEW), and Merlin HM Mk.1 helicopters
b) Multi Mission - Strike and ASuW
18 x Harrier GR.7/9
4 x Sea King ASaC (AEW), and Merlin HM Mk.1 helicopters

Make that 4 EH-101 AEW/Elint + 6 EH-101 UH and 12 EH-101 ASW/ASuW and you're in business.

Retirement of the Invincible class depends on construction of the new carriers right?...there have been rumors of the govt scrapping one or both of the new carriers for budget reasons.

 

[Penguin]

Retirement of the Invincible class depends on construction of the new carriers right?...there have been rumors of the govt scrapping one or both of the new carriers for budget reasons.

There are always rumors :o)

Retirement of Invincible class depends on their age, the fact that there are only a limited number of aging SeaHarrier FA2s and Harrier GR9s left, and the fact that while the F-35B can operate from the deck of this carrier, it cannot be accommodated by the lifts and hangar. No matter what will happen with the new carriers, the 2 still operational will go at some point (number 3 is already serving as parts hulk for the other 2)

It can't fly regular planes, only V(S)TOL planes. So, with those out of the equation, you could get your hands on an excellent helicopter carrier for very little money (even if it will be expensive to run and a helicopter group isn't cheap either)

ps: you might get ex-USMC AV8Bs but these are equally worn out as UK Gr9s if not worse.

 

[MZUBAIR]

No need for PN to have Aircraft Carrier...

Reasons :-

1) Doesnt suite us geographically

2) Aircraft Carrier is an expensive Platform, we may build multiple airports (Hidden) from DASHT to NARA within the same cost but with more benefits.

3) Aircraft Carrier have high maintenance cost.
4) We dont have any Aircraft Carrier JETS.
5) F22P platform is enough for Harbin anti-submarine warfare (ASW) helicopter like Z-9EC.

 

[khurasaan1]

No need for PN to have Aircraft Carrier...

Reasons :-

1) Doesnt suite us geographically

2) Aircraft Carrier is an expensive Platform, we may build multiple airports (Hidden) from DASHT to NARA within the same cost but with more benefits.

3) Aircraft Carrier have high maintenance cost.
4) We dont have any Aircraft Carrier JETS.
5) F22P platform is enough for Harbin anti-submarine warfare (ASW) helicopter like Z-9EC.

within the next 5 yearz we will be needing nuclear powered aircraft carrierz cuz we have to expand in near future..inshallah...

 

[INS Shivalik]

Well, Pakistan will have to Spend 70% of its defense budget on an Aircraft carrier alone, That wouldnt be a Wise Idea to go for one, and More over, Pakistan can go for Submarines, Frigate and Destroyers Instead of wasting Money and Resources On a Aircraft carrier....

And some Anti Ship missiles to Counter any threat.... More than Enough for Defense... But If There is any motive for Aggression then yes, Aircraft carriers are a Dire need and I would Advise you to go for a good one

 

[d14gtc]

Well, Pakistan will have to Spend 70% of its defense budget on an Aircraft carrier alone, That wouldnt be a Wise Idea to go for one, and More over, Pakistan can go for Submarines, Frigate and Destroyers Instead of wasting Money and Resources On a Aircraft carrier....

And some Anti Ship missiles to Counter any threat.... More than Enough for Defense... But If There is any motive for Aggression then yes, Aircraft carriers are a Dire need and I would Advise you to go for a good one

u r kiddin rite