What's new

Does PN need any separate air-striking force and base?

Believe it Not Your Solution is right under you nose..

The Flanker is a great Maritime Multi role fighter.

Twin Engined gives average combat radius 1000 miles

Big payload can do both Air Superiority and Strike Ships carrying cruise missles.

The Chinease J11B the latest and best chinease flanker. ( don,t know if Russia will agree to export though)

Even one Sqd of say 20 planes will Give Indian MIG29K and Harriers a big problem.
 
PN cannot afford aircraft carrier and it would be a burden for it to take care of it from enemies.i think PN doesnt need any carrier at all in near future.
but wat PN need is an air base with few sqads of aircrafts like Mirage(rose),jf-17,jh-7 or j-11 and fully controlled by PN.while PN is already using maritine aircrafts n helis like p3,atlana,fokker,sea king etc.
it would giv our navy full strength to protect our seas.
 
Believe it Not Your Solution is right under you nose..

The Flanker is a great Maritime Multi role fighter.

Twin Engined gives average combat radius 1000 miles

Big payload can do both Air Superiority and Strike Ships carrying cruise missles.

The Chinease J11B the latest and best chinease flanker. ( don,t know if Russia will agree to export though)

Even one Sqd of say 20 planes will Give Indian MIG29K and Harriers a big problem.

yeah ur rite mate :enjoy:
 
We have talked about this before several times! PAF is using Mirage 's to play the anti ship role and in the near future jf-17's will handle the rest ! more or less as i stated before i would like to see PN build up her surface fleet follwed by subs! naval arm could use fighter jets but i don't see it happening it will be handled by PAF !

but PAF is alredy handeling air and in some cases land too.PN should take the over all responsibility for protecting seas and let the PAF protect the air and land comfortabily.all the good NAVYs of world hav there own air attacking forces,dont they?
now days wars are done in air 1stly,then they come to land.
so my point is to let the PAF be so strong to protect our air not oceans.
 
a maritime strike aircraft has to be twin engined ...obviously for the altitude which its flown at its really important to get all the thrust you can lay your hands on
:cheers:
 
but PAF is alredy handeling air and in some cases land too.PN should take the over all responsibility for protecting seas and let the PAF protect the air and land comfortabily.all the good NAVYs of world hav there own air attacking forces,dont they?
now days wars are done in air 1stly,then they come to land.
so my point is to let the PAF be so strong to protect our air not oceans.

Acutally from ex armed forces men here and in real life & also having family in the armed forces of PAK i have come to understand that PN wants leave this responsibility to PAF . To train ,handle ,maintain and all other asscpects of having fighter jets isnt a walk in the park! this task shall be left up to PAF! :agree:
 
actually making an naval fighter squadron will involve in such huge spendings that it will be almost impossible to execute the plane for me the solution is, as i have stated in an earlier post:
now comming toward the point of whether PN need as aircraft squadron! for me the idea is not a bad one but it involves lot of money and training, infact a new system will have to be set up and doing so for just a squadron or two wont be a wise choice. we have also haered from sir Murada Khan that there are some problems when PAF operates for PN and he said that PN never seem to show there real intentions and this craets lot of trouble for both parties. for me the nest solution to this problemis to set up a squadron under the supervision of PAF, it msut be using PAF bases, radars and maintainacne and all other necessary stuff, then the pilots and the human staff involved must be sent to navy on deputation and they will be commanded by the navy. i gues this will sort out lot of stuuf as it wont require any extra funds and will put the force under naval control to avoid any misunderstandings!
i will bw really gratefull for you response to this comment, looking forward to know what Sir. MuradK and others thinnk of this!

i would love to have your views on this and also some other options if there are any!!

regards!
 
actually making an naval fighter squadron will involve in such huge spendings that it will be almost impossible to execute the plane for me the solution is, as i have stated in an earlier post:


i would love to have your views on this and also some other options if there are any!!

regards!

that sounds good.
is it batter if PN take some pilots of PAF for their use,and make a seprate squad,while using PAF bases.
it would nort be a problem for paf to promote some pilots to PN,b/c 100s of pilots enter the paf every year.:cheers:
 
that sounds good.
is it batter if PN take some pilots of PAF for their use,and make a seprate squad,while using PAF bases.
it would nort be a problem for paf to promote some pilots to PN,b/c 100s of pilots enter the paf every year.:cheers:

yeap that it! just get a squadron or two of JF17 and get the satff o deputation from PAF! that will be much more useful then setting up a whole air base, mainatinance and training facility for themselves!

regards!
 
a maritime strike aircraft has to be twin engined ...obviously for the altitude which its flown at its really important to get all the thrust you can lay your hands on
:cheers:

AFAIK, PAF only wants to induct single engine aircraft.

Not sure what the reasoning is.
 
a maritime strike aircraft has to be twin engined ...obviously for the altitude which its flown at its really important to get all the thrust you can lay your hands on

Of course, maritime strike aircraft always need to be twin-engined. Just look at this one:
http://www.faqs.org/docs/air/avf164.html
[4.2] MITSUBISHI F-2

* In contrast to the Ching Kuo, the Japanese Mitsubishi "F-2" fighter is clearly a true member of the F-16 family. It began in 1982 as an intent by the Japan Defense Agency (JDA) to obtain a replacement for the existing Mitsubishi F-1 fighter, which had been judged an interim type and was only built in limited numbers. The replacement was to be a much more capable aircraft, with a primary focus on antiship and strike roles and a secondary focus on air combat. The effort crystallized under the designation of "Fighter Support X (FS-X)".

Oh wait...

 
Last edited:
a maritime strike aircraft has to be twin engined ...obviously for the altitude which its flown at its really important to get all the thrust you can lay your hands on
:cheers:

it does not seems to be a hard n fast rule!
though most of the examples support this view!

regards!
 
wat is the reason behind using twin engine jets?
PAF is already using a5 n used f6. even smaller countries r using twin engine aircraft.why pakistan cannot?
 
AFAIK, PAF only wants to induct single engine aircraft.

Not sure what the reasoning is.
the reason
a maritime strike aircraft has to be twin engined ...obviously for the altitude which its flown at its really important to get all the thrust you can lay your hands on

not sure whats paks reason to stick to single engine fighters
:cheers:
 
The only point of our Naval Arm should be to stop the blockade of our ports in Karachi and Gwadar and keep the sea lanes open.

India has a strong Navy but we need strong defensive capabilities to punish it should it try to blockade Pakistan.

I would say 48 Fighters armed with Exocet, Harpoon and Sunburn Missiles out to be enough to keep the sea lanes open and avoid the blockade.

Those 48 could be the US F-18 or the British Harriers or Tornadoes.

Since the Saudis are getting 72 Eurofighters, we should ask them to sell those Tornadoes to us.

Mercenary;sir

Since the Saudis are getting 72 Eurofighters, we should ask them to sell those Tornadoes to us.

plz, clean your head, from these kind of, unrealistic kind of thoughts, its not going to happen, those Tornadoes " were not arabian hourses, which can be gifted to pakistan":lol::enjoy:
 

Back
Top Bottom