Jinnah Class Frigate | Updates & Discussion

[Oscar]

The demand is according to keeping in mind the adversary its not a wish list. Indian Ship building is good they are making destroyers and frigates every year and what are we doing got some type 54 and sleeping only good news was hangoor 8 subs. PN should make after JCF type 52 destoyers at good pace at karachi ship yard so its cost effective. No point inducting 4 5 type 52 d destroyers. Also we should get 4 milden subs too from turkey then we should move forward to SLBM capable subs

Admirable confidence

 

[Bentley777]

Admirable confidence

If PN wants to maintain power balance in the region in sea routes of pak only ship building is the way forward nothing else.

 

[Toxic]

If PN wants to maintain power balance in the region in sea routes of pak only ship building is the way forward nothing else.

Unless you have economic parity going ship to ship is a hopeless endeavor, so the focus should be on parity through assymatric assets like subs, if we are going to acquire any capital assets in the future they should be nuclear submarines.

 

[Waz]

Unless you have economic parity going ship to ship is a hopeless endeavor, so the focus should be on parity through assymatric assets like subs, if we are going to acquire any capital assets in the future they should be nuclear submarines.

Pakistan can't afford parity, but can afford a decent sized fleet which is a must.

 

[Bentley777]

Unless you have economic parity going ship to ship is a hopeless endeavor, so the focus should be on parity through assymatric assets like subs, if we are going to acquire any capital assets in the future they should be nuclear submarines.

No ship to ship but make sure if they attack karachi port there ports comes also comes in PN offensive attack.

 

[Quwa]

IN has made multiple attempts from 2016 onwards to find routes around Pakistan SLOC and EEZ to create blockade and potentially be able to station CM and even BM equipped systems at the flank of Pakistan's posture.
So far they have not been able to do so without either falling afoul of PN or ending up afoul of other countries not interested in playing host to an Indian Kalvari or Akula in their waters.

This is what is driving the sub and UUV push along with the now active net which reportedly extends in detection coverage well beyond expected IN approaches. Impressive considering the nature of the environment.

Yep. I think the one thing worth seeing is whether the PAF re-deploys the Block-52+ to the maritime theatre, especially as J-10CE (or possibly J-35AE) taking up the 'spear-tip' duty.

In its current config, the Block-52+ are very good for countering the IN MiG-29K threat, augmenting the ASCM-equipped JF-17s.

Granted, we (acc. to Scramble) have No.8 JF-17Cs there too, hence the Block-52+'s BVR isn't a must-have per se. However, the Block-52+ do outrange the JF-17s (via CFTs) and are credible assets in themselves.

If we could upgrade those to the V or OZGUR, then the match with PN support would be perfect, IMO, as a counter to the Rafale Ms.

 

[Yasser76]

Yep. I think the one thing worth seeing is whether the PAF re-deploys the Block-52+ to the maritime theatre, especially as J-10CE (or possibly J-35AE) taking up the 'spear-tip' duty.

In its current config, the Block-52+ are very good for countering the IN MiG-29K threat, augmenting the ASCM-equipped JF-17s.

Granted, we (acc. to Scramble) have No.8 JF-17Cs there too, hence the Block-52+'s BVR isn't a must-have per se. However, the Block-52+ do outrange the JF-17s (via CFTs) and are credible assets in themselves.

If we could upgrade those to the V or OZGUR, then the match with PN support would be perfect, IMO, as a counter to the Rafale Ms.

Not sure, even with CFTs a lot of fuel is burned on take off and we do not have boom tankers, also the Vipers have no decent antiship missiles. Much better off with a J-10C that can top off from a tanker and take any Chinese anti-ship missile

Dont get me wrong, still think we should keep the vipers but there is a reason many countries have opted not to use them in the anti-ship role.

I think get 18 more Vs, upgrade the current 18 Block 52s and have two Sqds of Vs dedicated to SEAD/DEAD

 

[Ak01]

Not sure, even with CFTs a lot of fuel is burned on take off and we do not have boom tankers, also the Vipers have no decent antiship missiles. Much better off with a J-10C that can top off from a tanker and take any Chinese anti-ship missile

potentially fitting F-16s with azb rek's could actually do a pretty nice job against ships, particularly in terms of overwhemling AD.

PAF already uses ARM equipped Azb for SEAD. Could be used in this theatre too, imagine 20 AZB's inbound, not an easy target to intercept

 

[Toxic]

potentially fitting F-16s with azb rek's could actually do a pretty nice job against ships, particularly in terms of overwhemling AD.

PAF already uses ARM equipped Azb for SEAD. Could be used in this theatre too, imagine 20 AZB's inbound, not an easy target to intercept

Ok they maybe they could but why? Especially if we have proper air launched anti ship missiles from JF-17s,J-10C's and in the future J-35, it's like using a bow and arrow when you have a gun.

 

[rafale]

Not sure, even with CFTs a lot of fuel is burned on take off and we do not have boom tankers, also the Vipers have no decent antiship missiles. Much better off with a J-10C that can top off from a tanker and take any Chinese anti-ship missile

Dont get me wrong, still think we should keep the vipers but there is a reason many countries have opted not to use them in the anti-ship role.

I think get 18 more Vs, upgrade the current 18 Block 52s and have two Sqds of Vs dedicated to SEAD/DEAD

With what stand off weapons are you gonna do SEAD/DEAD with F-16s??

India is boosting S-400 right on the border to pretty much cover all your important airspace, next time they will target your flying sorties with their ADs..........so how will F-16s survive in the 300km range of S-400 while flying within Pakistan?

 

[Yasser76]

With what stand off weapons are you gonna do SEAD/DEAD with F-16s??

India is boosting S-400 right on the border to pretty much cover all your important airspace, next time they will target your flying sorties with their ADs..........so how will F-16s survive in the 300km range of S-400 while flying within Pakistan?

A combination of HARM and EW for DEAD and SEAD would be effective. Turks have two Sqds dedicated to this and of course have exercised against their own S-400s.

I would be more worried if i was an S-400 operator

 

[Ak01]

Ok they maybe they could but why? Especially if we have proper air launched anti ship missiles from JF-17s,J-10C's and in the future J-35, it's like using a bow and arrow when you have a gun.

azb+rek= $20,000 maybe $30,000?

cm400akg=$1.67m.

 

[Quwa]

With what stand off weapons are you gonna do SEAD/DEAD with F-16s??

India is boosting S-400 right on the border to pretty much cover all your important airspace, next time they will target your flying sorties with their ADs..........so how will F-16s survive in the 300km range of S-400 while flying within Pakistan?

1. India stationing the S-400 that close to the border will put those S-400s at risk of Army guided missile fire and OWE/LMs. In that deployment scenario, Pakistan's first priority will be to neutralize that nearby S-400 as quickly as possible, likely via ground-based SSM and OWE/LM fire.

2. A SAM's range is tied to altitude; so the farther you go out in range, the more gaps you leave at low level/altitude coverages (due to the curvature of the Earth). This is why low-flying tactics are key in SEAD/DEAD ops. You'd negate low-flying threats by filling out the long-range SAM's coverage gaps with low-level SAMs. However, India can't exactly place low-level SAMs within Pakistani territory (or they can, but at that point, we're talking about some next level intelligence problems).

 

[Toxic]

azb+rek= $20,000 maybe $30,000?

cm400akg=$1.67m.

Yeah but you are putting the launch aircraft at far higher risk trying to lob reks at ships

 

[Ak01]

Yeah but you putting the launch aircraft at far higher risk trying to lob reks at ships

not when they're standoff range munitions

AFRL’S QUICKSINK WEAPON DEMO – Air Force Research Laboratory

afresearchlab.com