Pakistan Gets F16 -Blk70/72

[Fafnir]

That's exactly I wanted to know. How important is RCS at 150m - 200m height.

Ekranoplan's have to be shaped a certain way so as to generate the necessary ground effect and that low on the deck means they'll be subjected to heavy air, sea spray and corrosive salts more readily then a high-flying aircraft, so RAM coatings would require far too much maintenance. Stealth for a large ekranoplan just isn't feasible.

A Class A ekranoplan, one that is designed solely for ground-effect travel, is basically a winged boat. Class B can travel up to an altitude of roughly 10,000 meters, but are still shaped according to ground-effect principles.

As for how necessary RCS reductions are, keep in mind that small, low flying cruise missiles are now easily detectable for modern militaries. Recall the firings by Yemeni militants against the united states. These Iranian C-802 missiles, fire across multiple days during three separate events, fly at around 15 meters. They gutted HSV-2 Swift, a civilian transport with no support infrastructure or defences. But against the US Navy's Burke class destroyers all were detected and destroyed before they could reach american vessels. How where these detected despite their low flight path and small RCS?

Modern maritime sensors are optimized to pick up small contacts at distance. Their sensitivity means anti-ship and cruise missiles coming low over the horizon aren't the threat they used to be. Backing up the radars are MPAs with powerful SAR and ISAR radars which aren't fooled by ground clutter or refraction from sea spray or ocean reflectivity and can even see through solid objects like camo netting. Both the P-8I and P-3C of the IN and PN respectively have radars like this which provide support for battegroups.

MPAs also have electro-optical pods and IIR tracking systems. The P-3 for instance has a retractable electro-optical pod under its radar in the aircraft's nose.

Many ships also have electro-optical sensors for CWIS guidance, but also for target identification and tracking. On this Burke class destroyer it's atop the tower forward of the illumination radar.

Electronic warfare systems can pick up signals from active or semi-active homing radars.

Small VTOL UAVs are being trialed to augment the radar coverage of individual ships or battlegroups.

Modern naval ships have very robust support systems to allow them to see beyond the range of their radar's horizon limitations.

Low-flying, all-aspect stealth missiles like NSM that are intelligent and can pick where, when and how to attack a target are a better bet then a large ground-effect craft that'd easily be ID by ocean surveillance satellites and MPAs.

The Soviet KM ekranoplan, first of its kind, was detected by American satellites. It took them years to figure out what the KM was, but just days to find and track it as it traversed the Caspian Sea.

RCS doesn't matter. Modern sensors are too powerful and too ubiquitous for something like an Ekranoplan to go unnoticed.

 

[Caprxl]

Sir, Hypothetically speaking, why in the world, would any one in his right mind, buy nearly 2 decades old tech? Dont you think it will be upgraded prior to delivery?

Just thinking loud here

Whatever might be cooking , but you are a gonna get a CARDIAC arrest to the ladies in the east with your little bread crumbs

Why dont you ask the Italians whats going on with the AW101 and EFT ?

Hahhahaa , nah, Khafee is enough for me, will keep my fingers crossed & hope for the best ?

 

[HRK]

From what I can surmise to what you are stating ... much needs to be done from the current ... to do what @Mastankhan Sahib & @Khafee Sahib have been discussing.

From that aspect, the recently upgraded JH-7A with advanced avionics seems a relatively readier option and much less costly.

But I guess the best platform would be the under consideration J-15 hands down. It can carry the punch, has the range (also can re-fueled in air) and has the capability to fight it's way out of a tight situation.

Nope
- JH-7 does not offer such range plus can't take this Babur missiles
- it does not provide flexibility of completely avoiding the danger zone
- As JH-7 could not take such long range weapons therefore it will be forced to enter or to go near to danger zons

- J-15 is desirable for near sea region as compare to JH-7 and would possibly use medium range SOW in anti ship role and Air defence duties

- J-11/J-15/J-16 would not offer better range than than IAF Su-30MKI and in naval role their offensives role will be limited in terms of geographical reach

While H-6 will purely act as HUNTER from air against IN vessels in open sea without coming close to them and as Pure Bomber against the coastal facilities of IN and would attack them from the distance of 500-600 Km this will force IAF to patrol the coastal areas in deep enough sea zone, this will take toll on IAF assets, and will force her to divert jets from western front to coastal front to defend.

In other words H-6 employment in Naval role will weaken IAF strenght at western front indirectly where they can perform offensive role and would forced IAF to support IN at coastal front where their role would be limited to defence so the benefits of H-6 employment would be

• Decrease the strength of IAF at our Eastern front
• Which mean availability of less number of aerial assets in offensive role against Pakistan
• Will force IAF to place aerial assets in southern zone as far as Kochi
• Force IN either to disperse Naval vessels in open sea outside the reach of H-6 strike rang which would be at least 3,500km with long range weapons
• Or would force IN to concentrate near Southern Coast with increased number of air defence assets like SAM and supported by increased number of Fighter jets from both services namely IAF and IN
• So both IAF and IN will come under pressure specially IN as two of her commands would face direct attacks from H-6
• IAF will feel the pressure as it will be forced to disburse her assets from Kashmir to Kerala and spear some for Chinese Border as well
• So two services would be forced to perform with less number of assets at our easter and southren front

 

[TomCat]

@!eon @Fafnir What do you guys think? Chinese AG-600

 

[TomCat]

Nope
- JH-7 does not offer such range plus can't take this Babur missiles
- it does not provide flexibility of completely avoiding the danger zone
- As JH-7 could not take such long range weapons therefore it will be forced to enter or to nrear to danger sons

- J-15 is desirable for near sea region as compare to JH-7 and would possibly use medium range SOW in anti ship role and Air defence duties

- J-11/J-15/J-16 would not offer better range than than IAF Su-30MKI and in naval role their offensives role will be limited in terms of geographical reach

While H-6 will purely act as HUNTER from air against IN vessels in open sea without coming close to them and as Pure Bomber against the coastal facilities of IN and would attack them from the distance of 500-600 Km this will force IAF to patrol the coastal areas in deep enough sea zone, this will take toll on IAF assets, and will force her to divert jets from western front to coastal front to defend.

In other words H-6 employment in Naval role will weaken IAF strenght at western front indirectly where they can perform offensive role and would forced IAF to support IN at coastal front where their role would be limited to defence so the benefits of H-6 employment would be

• Decrease the strength of IAF at our Eastern front
• Which mean availability of less number of aerial assets in offensive role against Pakistan
• Will force IAF to place aerial assets in southern zone as far as Kochi
• Force IN either to disperse Naval vessels in open sea outside the reach of H-6 strike rang which would be at least 3,500km with long range weapons
• Or would force IN to concentrate near Southern Coast with increased number of air defence assets like SAM and supported by increased number of Fighter jets from both services namely IAF and IN
• So both IAF and IN will come under pressure specially IN as two of her commands would face direct attacks from H-6
• IAF will feel the pressure as it will be forced to disburse her assets from Kashmir to Kerala and spear some for Chinese Border as well
• So two services would be forced to perform with less number of assets at our easter and southren front

Given that India will get S-400, how will the H-6 tables change?

 

[Khafee]

Nope
- JH-7 does not offer such range plus can't take this Babur missiles
- it does not provide flexibility of completely avoiding the danger zone
- As JH-7 could not take such long range weapons therefore it will be forced to enter or to nrear to danger sons

- J-15 is desirable for near sea region as compare to JH-7 and would possibly use medium range SOW in anti ship role and Air defence duties

- J-11/J-15/J-16 would not offer better range than than IAF Su-30MKI and in naval role their offensives role will be limited in terms of geographical reach

While H-6 will purely act as HUNTER from air against IN vessels in open sea without coming close to them and as Pure Bomber against the coastal facilities of IN and would attack them from the distance of 500-600 Km this will force IAF to patrol the coastal areas in deep enough sea zone, this will take toll on IAF assets, and will force her to divert jets from western front to coastal front to defend.

In other words H-6 employment in Naval role will weaken IAF strenght at western front indirectly where they can perform offensive role and would forced IAF to support IN at coastal front where their role would be limited to defence so the benefits of H-6 employment would be

• Decrease the strength of IAF at our Eastern front
• Which mean availability of less number of aerial assets in offensive role against Pakistan
• Will force IAF to place aerial assets in southern zone as far as Kochi
• Force IN either to disperse Naval vessels in open sea outside the reach of H-6 strike rang which would be at least 3,500km with long range weapons
• Or would force IN to concentrate near Southern Coast with increased number of air defence assets like SAM and supported by increased number of Fighter jets from both services namely IAF and IN
• So both IAF and IN will come under pressure specially IN as two of her commands would face direct attacks from H-6
• IAF will feel the pressure as it will be forced to disburse her assets from Kashmir to Kerala and spear some for Chinese Border as well
• So two services would be forced to perform with less number of assets at our easter and southren front

You know what the H6 could do, is marginally cross the border near Rajisthan at altitude, off load LRCM's, and then dash back.

 

[HRK]

Given that India will get S-400, how will the H-6 tables change?

Would they have enough number of S-400 hundred to cover the entire coast of India starts from Gujarat to Kerala .....??

Secondly with 700+ km missile to attack why H-6 would come close to the striking range of S-400 ...... ??

Try to recall second benefit I mentioned Earlie striking with long range SOW remain outside of danger zone

 

[TomCat]

Would they have enough number of S-400 hundred to cover the entire coast of India starts from Gujarat to Kerala .....??

Secondly with 700+ km missile to attack why H-6 would come close to the striking range of S-400 ...... ??

Try to recall second benefit I mentioned Earlie striking with long range SOW remain outside of danger zone

That H-6, apparently a HUGE force multiplier according to your thesis. Enough to keep India in check. Reminds me of PAK-DA, what happened to that project ? Still alive?

 

[HRK]

You know what the H6 could do, is marginally cross the border near Rajisthan at altitude, off load LRCM's, and then dash back.

Why waste this asset for Rajastan, Gujarat, Maharashtra .... ??

For Rajastan and Gujarat we don't even need to cross the border we can launch RA'AD, H-2, H-4, REK from inside of our border


What I am purposing is to use H-6 to target Naval facilities onwards of Mumbai till Kerala and to support the hunt of Indian Naval vessels in deep in open sea from air where they would not have air cover other then ship based SAM

 

[HRK]

Reminds me of PAK-DA, what happened to that project ? Still alive?

Current status in not known I was actually not following that program closely

 

[Mastankhan]

Bhai why JH-7 now China is offering H-6 for export, literally 10-12 jet integrated it with 700km Babur missile and if possible we should try to modify our Abdali missile for air launch version with active radar seeker, this will give us a local alternative to imported CM-400 AKG but with much greater range and each H-6 would be capable to carry six such missiles.

This combination of platform and weapon package would play such a horrific role against Indian Navy fleet in open sea and against coastal defence installation of India that it would almost eliminate the need for any ship in destroyers category for PN for considerable time, it will increase our lethal reach of air power in sea warfare at least till horn of Africa in the south and till Kochi in the east which is HQ of Indian Navy southern command

Hi

i mentioned it before, jh7 is the least expensive of all options..

over the ocean you need a low flying aircraft and jh7 is the only one available.

if paf wants to buy h6, i dont have a problem.

my only problem with paf is not facing the problem head on

 

[Khafee]

AW101 possible acquisition by Pakistan Navy - WDF Exclusive

AW101 possible acquisition by Pakistan Navy 21 Oct 2019 AW-101 Durintg the recent visit to Pakistan of Secretary General of Defence & National Armaments Director, Republic of Italy, Lt General Nicolo Falsaperna and Chairman of the Italian Industries Association for Air Space, Defence &...

world-defense.com

 

[AliYusuf]

- JH-7 does not offer such range plus can't take this Babur missiles

Couldn't JH-7AII carry Babur with little bit of integration and modification on the pylons ... just as much would be needed on the H-6?

As JH-7 could not take such long range weapons therefore it will be forced to enter or to go near to danger zons

Possibly that is not quite so. There are three versions of the JH-7 i.e. JH-7, JH-7A and JH-7AII. The one which have been recently upgraded and introduced in air exercises in Russia this year, has new AESA radar and other modifications. The specs we usually find are that of the first generation simple JH-7s.

J-11/J-15/J-16 would not offer better range than than IAF Su-30MKI and in naval role their offensives role will be limited in terms of geographical reach

Don't need to. Just need to do the job within the range that it is needed to be done.
J-15 with composites and AESA and PL-15 can certainly care of an Su30MKI and maybe even a Rafale (who knows) in the BVR regime.

While H-6 will purely act as HUNTER from air against IN vessels in open sea without coming close to them and as Pure Bomber against the coastal facilities of IN and would attack them from the distance of 500-600 Km this will force IAF to patrol the coastal areas in deep enough sea zone, this will take toll on IAF assets, and will force her to divert jets from western front to coastal front to defend.

In other words H-6 employment in Naval role will weaken IAF strenght at western front indirectly where they can perform offensive role and would forced IAF to support IN at coastal front where their role would be limited to defence so the benefits of H-6 employment would be

• Decrease the strength of IAF at our Eastern front
• Which mean availability of less number of aerial assets in offensive role against Pakistan
• Will force IAF to place aerial assets in southern zone as far as Kochi
• Force IN either to disperse Naval vessels in open sea outside the reach of H-6 strike rang which would be at least 3,500km with long range weapons
• Or would force IN to concentrate near Southern Coast with increased number of air defence assets like SAM and supported by increased number of Fighter jets from both services namely IAF and IN
• So both IAF and IN will come under pressure specially IN as two of her commands would face direct attacks from H-6
• IAF will feel the pressure as it will be forced to disburse her assets from Kashmir to Kerala and spear some for Chinese Border as well
• So two services would be forced to perform with less number of assets at our easter and southren front

This will prove very costly, in my humble opinion. At the moment it will also require a plethora of supporting assets to provide cover for the relatively slow moving and relatively lumbering H-6 (with huge radar cross section).

But if we can create a growler unit of sorts + fighter cover for any eventuality + proper integration of suitable munition for the job ... and above all bear all the acquisition costs and the more challenging operating costs ... then it is a very very powerful addition to our force.

You do realize that apart from the USA, Russia and China ... no other country has been very successful in operating birds of this class.

 

[Gripen9]

Couldn't JH-7AII carry Babur with little bit of integration and modification on the pylons ... just as much would be needed on the H-6?


Possibly that is not quite so. There are three versions of the JH-7 i.e. JH-7, JH-7A and JH-7AII. The one which have been recently upgraded and introduced in air exercises in Russia this year, has new AESA radar and other modifications. The specs we usually find are that of the first generation simple JH-7s.


Don't need to. Just need to do the job within the range that it is needed to be done.
J-15 with composites and AESA and PL-15 can certainly care of an Su30MKI and maybe even a Rafale (who knows) in the BVR regime.


This will prove very costly, in my humble opinion. At the moment it will also require a plethora of supporting assets to provide cover for the relatively slow moving and relatively lumbering H-6 (with huge radar cross section).

But if we can create a growler unit of sorts + fighter cover for any eventuality + proper integration of suitable munition for the job ... and above all bear all the acquisition costs and the more challenging operating costs ... then it is a very very powerful addition to our force.

You do realize that apart from the USA, Russia and China ... no other country has been very successful in operating birds of this class.

I can see a potential of PAF IL-76/C-130 crews training on the H-6 in China and H-6 be part of Pak-China exercises in Pak coastal areas. If push comes to shove during actual hostilities, they can be seconded to PAF with existing missile arsenal from PLAAF. This will eliminate the required ancillary support structure you may need to set up in order to formerly absorb the platform in your inventory.

 

[!eon]

This and H-6 can't beat Speys of JH-7, optimised for dense air.
If the point is to reach from a to c secretly via refueling at b, that's only JH-7.

@!eon @Fafnir What do you guys think? Chinese AG-600
View attachment 11289
View attachment 11290
View attachment 11291
View attachment 11292