Pakistan-India Conflict 2025: News Updates and Discussion

[Signalian]

I was thinking about TEL based ground launch and not air launched kind. The DF-21D is linked to the Chinese satellites so we don't need our own radars for target locating.

Not sure if Chinese will give us dedicated access to their satellites.

 

[Signalian]

The last batch of Rafale fighters were inducted into the Indian Air Force in December 2022. All the J-10s were inducted into the Pakistan Air Force in March 2022.
Therefore the newest aircraft "brand new" would be only the Rafale fighter jets, which is what President Trump was referring to as "7 brand new jet fighters shot down".
Agree, vintage Mig 29 and Su 30s wouldn't be classified as brand new. Pakistan however has only claimed 4 Rafale jets shot down.
@PK781 @Aggregate @Signalian

I wouldn't take Trump's words as precise details.

 

[hnn]

Not sure if Chinese will give us dedicated access to their satellites.

True but then again China also has never tested operational efficacy of it's tech touted to counter USS Strike Groups in South China Sea - so maybe - it's a big "maybe" though haha

 

[Signalian]

Yes it takes a lot to sink an aircraft carrier but then that is never the priority. With aircrafts carriers the goal is "Mission Kill" which involves rendering the STOBAR inoperable. The MaRV on DF-21D is designed to achieve that. Besides, it is also a better strategy to launch an ASBM from ground so as to minimize the chances of detection by the Naval Fleet. The aeriel bombing on a Naval Fleet usually serves to overwhelm the radars and defenses so as to allow more chances for the ASBM to achieve the desired mission kill.

An aircraft carrier has dedicated escorts of Destroyers, frigates, subs etc. Its never alone. So how many ships will IN dedicate towards its carrier group ? How many ships and subs will be used for other offensive/defensive ops against PN ? and how many ships/subs will be in reserve for China or as backup ?

 

[Signalian]

True but then again China also has never tested operational efficacy of it's tech touted to counter USS Strike Groups in South China Sea - so maybe - it's a big "maybe" though haha

India tested ASAT missile in 2019 but range seems around 300km. India using ASAT weapons in a conflict is debatable.

 

[hnn]

An aircraft carrier has dedicated escorts of Destroyers, frigates, subs etc. Its never alone. So how many ships will IN dedicate towards its carrier group ? How many ships and subs will be used for other offensive/defensive ops against PN ? and how many ships/subs will be in reserve for China or as backup ?

Wait let me ask them first
Anyhow, the limited numbers is the point here. IN can't tactically afford to divert a lot of it's naval assets alongside INS Vikrant - so wouldn't it make sense on our part to have a tech that can counter the limited assets they move (considering if they do)?

 

[hnn]

India tested ASAT missile in 2019 but range seems around 300km. India using ASAT weapons in a conflict is debatable.

Well wouldn't that be the final nail in the coffin? India taking out a Chinese satellite opening a 2 front war for itself where they have already dug up their grave in advance?

 

[Signalian]

Wait let me ask them first
Anyhow, the limited numbers is the point here. IN can't tactically afford to divert a lot of it's naval assets alongside INS Vikrant - so wouldn't it make sense on our part to have a tech that can counter the limited assets they move (considering if they do)?

Look at the navies of countries with which IN brings its aircraft carrier for excercises. IN CBG will be loosely modelled around that navy's CBG.

Pakistan's options to harass IN CBG are PN subs and PAF's aicrafts armed with AShMs. Then PN's land based missiles as IN CBG closes towards Pakistan's coastline.

 

[Signalian]

Well wouldn't that be the final nail in the coffin? India taking out a Chinese satellite opening a 2 front war for itself where they have already dug up their grave in advance?

Lots of variables in fog of war and diplomacy.

 

[Baibers_1260]

I don't know the quality of Vikranth in comparison to the US Carriers. But Missiles would disable it at best, or take out its capabilities. But Pakistan will need to bomb it relentlessly by air, to actually sink it.

Though aircraft carriers have never been sunk by direct bombing, alone, aircraft carriers have been sunk by a combination of torpedo and bomb attacks. Aircraft carriers like battleships are large targets and relatively easy to strike with torpedoes, bombs and more recently anti-ship missiles. There have been no peer adversary use of aircraft carriers since the Falklands war for a good reason. A dive into history is interesting.
Examples:

• On 13 November 1941 the HMS Ark Royal was torpedoed by the German submarine U-81 and sank the following day
• On 3 -4 May 1942 at the Battle of the Coral sea the US aircraft carrier Lexington so critically damaged by the Japanese navy that it was later scuttled. The U.S. sank the Japanese light carrier Shōhō. The US Navy aircraft carriers Yorktown suffered heavy damage as did the Japanese aircraft carrier .
• 4th-7th June 1942-Battle of Midway, All four Japanese fleet carriers—Akagi, Kaga, Sōryū, and Hiryū—present at the battle were sunk, as was the heavy cruiser Mikuma . The U.S. lost the carrier Yorktown and the destroyer Hammann, while the carriers Enterprise and Hornet survived the fighting with light damage.
• 26-28th October 1944 Battle of Leyte Gulf. The light US Navy carrier USS Princeton was lost to a combination of bombs and kamikaze "suicide ":bombing attacks.
• April-May 1982 , Falklands War. The British Navy deployed the two aircraft carriers Invincible and Hermes . The Argentina Navy aircraft carrier ARA Veinticinco de Mayo was not deployed after the Royal Navy submarine Conqueror sunk the Argentinian navy battleship General Belgano The risk to the British aircraft carriers from Exocet was substantial and the British lost the following protecting ships to Argentinian air bombing and anti-ship missile Exocet attacks.
• 2 Type 42 destroyers
• 2 Type 21 frigates
• 1 landing ship
• 1 landing craft
• 1 container ship
• 1 light tank
• 24 helicopter

British pressure on France limited the supply of Exocet missiles to Argentina to just 7 missiles. If Argentina had more missiles more British ships would have been lost including at least one aircraft carrier. The British lost the container ship Atlantic Conveyor which was screening the British carrier HMS Invincible from an Exocet missile attack. Britain lost 24 Westland Wessex helicopters aboard the ship .
In the 1971 conflict with Pakistan, the Indian navy chose to deploy its aircraft carrier only in the Eastern Theater out of range of Pakistan Air Force Martin B-57 bombers, and PN submarines.
Modern coastal and submarine launched anti-ship missiles like the Russian K-800 Bastion pose a potent threat to aircraft carriers. The heavy Russian guided missile cruiser the Moskva was sunk by Ukrainian Neptune missiles in 2022.
Pakistan has likely deployed C802 heavy anti-ship cruise missiles for coastal defense and unless these are taken out by saturation Brahmos attacks these will remain a potent weapon against any attempt by India to blockade Karachi.
Aircraft carriers are most effective against non-peer adversaries. It is doubtful if even in a hypothetical South China sea conflict a showdown between Chinese and US Navy carrier task forces World War II style is likely.
@Aggregate @Signalian @PK781 @Panzerkiel

 

[hnn]

Look at the navies of countries with which IN brings its aircraft carrier for excercises. IN CBG will be loosely modelled around that navy's CBG.

Pakistan's options to harass IN CBG are PN subs and PAF's aicrafts armed with AShMs. Then PN's land based missiles as IN CBG closes towards Pakistan's coastline.

Ok now we are in the grinding territory of strategic planning. Anyhow, I still don't see why having a TEL launched ASBM in the arsenal is not required. The aeriel and naval engagement you mentioned is but one method of engaging IN CBG - a method nonetheless that can incur own loss - so wouldn't it be better to go for the bait and ambush? Didn't we employ the same tactic in May for the aeriel combat?

 

[Aggregate]

Yes it takes a lot to sink an aircraft carrier but then that is never the priority. With aircrafts carriers the goal is "Mission Kill" which involves rendering the STOBAR inoperable. The MaRV on DF-21D is designed to achieve that. Besides, it is also a better strategy to launch an ASBM from ground so as to minimize the chances of detection by the Naval Fleet. The aeriel bombing on a Naval Fleet usually serves to overwhelm the radars and defenses so as to allow more chances for the ASBM to achieve the desired mission kill.

That is pretty good info, I have mostly ever read about it from Defensive POV of the US and the US never mentioning this possibility, is probably the US's way of downplaying the DF-21's potential.

But yeah, taking out the STROBAR, especially the Ramp, would turn it a completely useless, as well as potential graveyard of the planes that are standing on it.

 

[hnn]

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music that you love, upload original content and share it all with friends, family and the world on YouTube.

share.google

Trump being Trump again

 

[hnn]

That is pretty good info, I have mostly ever read about it from Defensive POV of the US and the US never mentioning this possibility, is probably the US's way of downplaying the DF-21's potential.

But yeah, taking out the STROBAR, especially the Ramp, would turn it a completely useless, as well as potential graveyard of the planes that are standing on it.

Yup, US always downplay things. However, modern warfare - since cold war era - isn't about destruction as much as it is about attrition. For example, the 5.56mm NATO round was developed specifically to exploit this - if a soldier dies the rest continue to fight but if a soldier gets critically injured another soldier coming to the rescue of the injured is now engaged. In the present day it's more about attrition and inoperability rather than total annihilation.

 

[Majestic]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Before India i think time of Afghanistan is approaching fast