# PN mini-submarine fleet



## Myth_buster_1

SMX-23 was offered to PN in IDEADS 2006









Frances DCN (Stand 1300, French Pavilion) is showing a new low-cost coastal submarine concept aimed at navies looking to modernise their existing submarine force or acquire a submarine capability for the first time.

The design, known as SMX-23, has been conceived to address a perceived market requirement for a robust, affordable and supportable submarine, capable of performing a range of littoral defence missions, said the company, adding: It is clear that while many navies are attracted to the advantages offered by conventional submarines in the 1,400 to 1,800-ton displacement range, not all have the financial or technical resources to operate boats of such cost and complexity.

DCNs approach has been to engineer a significantly smaller submarine design that could be built for about half the cost of a typical diesel-electric boat. Building on its experience from the Scorpene submarine programme, the company has performed a value analysis to understand the individual worth of each equipment on board.

This has allowed it to make informed judgements on the balance of performance versus cost.

At 48.8m in length and displacing 855 tonnes surfaced, the double-hulled SMX-23 would be capable of remaining submerged for up to 60 hours at 4 knots. Operated by a crew of 19 (with space for an additional two trainees), it would have a mission endurance of up to 15 days.

According to DCN, SMX-23 is designed for precise navigation in shallow waters, with the ability to conduct surveillance while bottomed on the sea floor. It would also be ideally suited for special forces missions [a lockin/ lock-out trunk for special forces is housed in the fin], intelligence gathering and minelaying.

Heavyweight torpedoes and/or anti-ship missiles could be carried in six torpedo tubes forward. There is no provision for reloads as an additional weapon stowage compartment would have required a significant increase in hull volume.

The baseline combat system produced by DCN as part of its SMX-23 study comprises a fourconsole sensor, weapon and command system, a multi-array integrated sonar system, and an above-water sensor suite comprising a primary optronic mast, electronic support measures (ESM) and a navigation radar. A secondary optronic sensor would be fitted on the ESMmast.

_________________________



a quick list 

9 U-214
10+ SMX-23
4 Nuclear power sub

a nice looking PN force.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Skywalker

And whose gonna pay for this.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Skywalker said:


> And whose gonna pay for this.



You? 



> It is clear that while many navies are attracted to the advantages offered by conventional submarines in the 1,400 to 1,800-ton displacement range, not all have the financial or technical resources to operate boats of such cost and complexity.


----------



## jamal18

For a long time I have been thinking of the idea of a small, short range localy produced submarine. Put all that technology we have been absorbing into practice.

It will be as a force multiplier, and for export.

The idea of 6 torpedoes in tubes, with no reloads. This is not the second world war with submarines required to sink many ships. Just one enemy ship can change the entire situation.

Good training, and a confidence boost to our engineers.

Around 600 tons.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TOPGUN

Wat will be total count for PN in the near future of the sub fleet????


----------



## Quwa

There's a higher chance of Pakistan buying U-210mod:

Information Dissemination: HDW Introduces Type 210mod Submarine

It would definitely be a good coastal defence submarine to help out our MRTP-33.


----------



## jamal18

Mark Sien said:


> There's a higher chance of Pakistan buying U-210mod:
> 
> Information Dissemination: HDW Introduces Type 210mod Submarine
> 
> It would definitely be a good coastal defence submarine to help out our MRTP-33.



Yes, but I am more interested in pakistan producing its own submarines.

A small coastal submarine is the ideal first step for pakistani designers and engineers. What is the point of endless tot if pakistan is still buying from abroad?

And you can't export it.

I like the idea of 8 tubes, with no reloads. Gives the submarine two shots of 4 torpedoes each.

Slugger, I meant a small submarine for an anti-ship role.Pakistan made its own midget submarine years ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Super Falcon

some nuke subs from china should be high on agenda for our naval aquasitions because our navy is very small to indian and we need nuke subs to give IN something to think about and im damn sure as their land forces are very scared to face our armed land forces IN will be scaring to by PN

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## must7

Super Falcon said:


> some nuke subs from china should be high on agenda for our naval aquasitions because our navy is very small to indian and we need nuke subs to give IN something to think about and im damn sure as their land forces are very scared to face our armed land forces IN will be scaring to by PN



Improved Song class called 039G1 which actually look a lot like our Agosta-90B (surprise .. surprise) ... have already given a heart attack to USN Kitty Hawk and with the ability to carry ASCM .. I think we should be talking about these subs a lot. It is also believed that the latest Song class has an integrated AIP system .. of course operation experience of integration of an AIP system will take time.

Ofcourse the PN still wants to carry on with Western sub and be get interested in a next generation Chinese sub. I would say .. the Chinese sub is surely a system to be bought in the future, as it would not be with conditions attached.

However, to have a nuke sub from China might be difficult as we donot know the copyright conditions of the nuclear power plant which might be provided by Russia (I suppose) !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Skywalker

PC said:


> You?



Thankyou for lettering me know that you are a real nut.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Skywalker said:


> Thankyou for lettering me know that you are a real nut.



oh so you decided to drop by again?


----------



## ahussains

IF 3 214 are comming and we allowed to make 2 Agosta 90B with some upgrades like capable of launching Babur Cruise Missile that can done the Job very well .


----------



## Super Falcon

agosta 90 b should only be used for attack sub chinese sub i think should be buyed specially song class atleast 4 of them and 2 to 3 nuke sus and i dont think so russia have conditions for nuke sub with china if even they had china will make a way to counter it as they did it in JF 17 case


----------



## TOPGUN

Ok once again can anyone tell me wat will be the total count of PN sub fleet in the future ?? thx.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

View attachment 5e2fa5712661428ca3c9c7285400fe0a.jpg


View attachment 5b6deccb745c7a391e2b5cff799db4c2.jpg


View attachment 6c117481ceac0f44037aca6d7ff983d8.jpg


----------



## zeeshuisb

Pakistan is already using the midgets

*MG110 COSMOS Midget Submarine*

The SX 404 type sold to Pakistan in the early 1970s have been replaced by three Italian-built SX-756-class midget submarines, delivered in 1988. This State of the Art MIDGET submarine is now building in Karachi Shipyard & Engineering Works for Pakistan Navy in collaboration with M/s COSMOS of Italy. The boat is capable of firing torpedoes and carrying mines. It is available both in Offensive as well as Defensive roles. These displace 40 tons and are capable of diving to a depth of 100m. They can carry six swimmers and two SDVs, as well as 2 tons of explosives.

*Other features include:*
&#8226; Stealth capability
&#8226; Quiet Transiting
&#8226; Shallow Water Operations
&#8226; Sneak Operations
&#8226; Commando Operations
&#8226; Surveillance and Intelligence Missions

*SPECIFICATIONS:*
Length overall: 27.28 meters
Height overall: 5.59 meters
Pressure Hull Diameter: 2.30 meters
Pressure Hull Length: 19.10 meters
Displacement surfaced: 102 tons
Displacement surfaced: 110 tons
Operation Depth: 100 m
Max. speed (surfaced): 9 KTS (on diesel engine)
Max. speed (submerged): 6 KTS (on batteries)
Endurance: Over 1000 NM on diesel engine, Over 40 NM on batteries
Complement: 14 (6 operators + 8 commandos)
Armament: 
&#8226; Torpedo Firing Tubes
&#8226; Mines Laying Hooks

Pakistan is building *MG110 COSMOS Midget Submarine* at Karachi Shipyard and engineering works. pictures of MG110 COSMOS Midget Submarine are available at 

MIDGET Submarines

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## lindsyebanks

I have already posted the below on another thread on this forum, but as it is dealing with the same subjected, here it is again.

The SX-756 submarines were the first of a new design by Cosmos of Livorno. The first 3 craft were sold to Pakistan in kit form and arrived in Karachi in 1988. When the deal for the submarines was signed, it was no coincidence that Adm Tariq Kamal Khan was CNS. As a former SSGN and first CO of PNS Iqbal following its commission on 29 March 1967, he understood full well the potential of SOF and unconventional warfare. Cosmos marketed the submarine as the MG-110 along with another variant known as the MG-120ER. The latter is known to be in service with Italy, South Korea and Columbia. The SDV's delivered to PN in the 1970's are no longer in use and were withdrawn from service in the late 90's. Some of thse SDV's now serve as reminders of a past era for SSGN as part of a display at the Maritime museum in Karachi.

SX-756 are equipped to carry torpedoes, mines and/or combat divers. They have been modernised during the late 90's to help keep them in service. One of the X-craft was lost at sea in 1995. However there were no fatalities and the Midget was recovered, repaired and subsequently returned to service

PN deployed its 6 SX-404 midgets against India in 1971. One of them even fired upon an Indain naval FFG, but the torpedoe firing system malfunctioned and remained lodged in its external launcher, thereby denying PN what might have been a double hit in concert with PNS/M Hangor's sinking of INS Kukri.

In 1978, an unfortunate accident resulted in the loss of an SX-404 at sea with all hands. Despite SAR ops, niether the midget nor any bodies were eveer recovered. The sole PN SX-404 hull known to have survived the breakers yard/target practise is on display at the PN Maritime Museum and an earlier version of the SX-404 is still reported to be in service with the Columbian Navy. However it is doubtful that this would have been done without significant modification or as is likely a fabriaction of a new hull based on the old design.

Cosmos was bought out by Cardoen Industries in the mid 90's. However owing to the latters connections with the then Iraqi government, the Italian government shut Cosmos down, putting it out of business.


----------



## Super Falcon

i feel we need atlest 18 subs with nuke subs of 2 so we can give some probleum to indian naval AC fleet and sub fleet those 18 should be state of the art subs so we servive P8 posedian attack of indian naval anti submarine aircraft

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Skywalker

Growler said:


> You?



Thankyou for confirming me that you are nuts?


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Skywalker said:


> Thankyou for confirming me that you are nuts?



and it was not very "nuts" of you to reply a 9 months old post?


----------



## Arsalan

TOPGUN said:


> Ok once again can anyone tell me wat will be the total count of PN sub fleet in the future ?? thx.



sir, perhaps the older Agosta 70 ready to be decommisioned as soon as the induction of newer platforms be it be french or german i do not see the number rising above six in the near future! that is as realistic as one can get.
just to me optimist, i guess we can build two or so mre Agosta 90B to complement!

regards!

*i know i am a bit too late, but, as it is said, better late then never!!*


----------



## Arsalan

Super Falcon said:


> i feel we need atlest 18 subs with nuke subs of 2 so we can give some probleum to indian naval AC fleet and sub fleet those 18 should be state of the art subs so we servive P8 posedian attack of indian naval anti submarine aircraft



sir, with all the respect, dont you think it is a bit toooo unrealistic approach. you are talking about 18 were as one cannot see more then six in another six years or so. i really wish i was wrong with this thinking but i am afraid i am not!!!
what do you say??

regards!


----------



## shravan

Super Falcon said:


> i feel we need atlest 18 subs with nuke subs of 2 so we can give some probleum to indian naval AC fleet and sub fleet those 18 should be state of the art subs so we servive P8 posedian attack of indian naval anti submarine aircraft



Ya need to start working on the 2 nuke subs ASAP. And i am sure India will like the news..


----------



## Myth_buster_1

arsalanaslam123 said:


> sir, perhaps the older Agosta 70 ready to be decommisioned as soon as the induction of newer platforms be it be french or german i do not see the number rising above six in the near future! that is as realistic as one can get.
> just to me optimist, i guess we can build two or so mre Agosta 90B to complement!
> 
> regards!
> 
> *i know i am a bit too late, but, as it is said, better late then never!!*



Nope... super falcon is quite right here... and btw we are talking about future most probably 2020 time frame.. Agosta is just a very old frame with good technology.. the last thing PN wanna do is waist money on somthing that was already forced down their throat! yes i am talking about agostas... it would have been a wiser decision to have opted for Type-209 AIP with sub harpoon capability.. but thats just my opinion and availability is another issue or could they have sorted it out if zardari had not interfered?

however i am not with the idea of producing nuclear power submarine.. IMO PN should rather spend that couple of billion dollars on more capable sub in indo-pak context the "Type-214"... spend 2 billion dollars on nuclear sub or get 5 type-214?


----------



## Myth_buster_1

shravan said:


> Ya need to start working on the 2 nuke subs ASAP. And i am sure India will like the news..



no thanks... we dont want it unless we think india is on the other side of the globe..


----------



## Skywalker

Growler said:


> and it was not very "nuts" of you to reply a 9 months old post?



After 9 months you converted in a live form.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arsalan

*SSG(N) personnel on a X-Craft (SX-756 Class) midget submarine during a training exercise. The X-Craft course that is taught to SSG(N) personnel has a 32 week duration out of which 12 weeks are spent on theory and 20 weeks on practical exercises. *

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Jungibaaz

These 'mini-subs', what weapons can they carry?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arsalan

Jungibaaz said:


> These 'mini-subs', what weapons can they carry?



Pakistan have build at karachi ship yard midget subs in colaboration with M/s COSMOS of Italy. these were the SX-756 subs.
the last example was built back in 1988~94 and no new arrivials since then.



> A State of the Art MIDGET submarine built for Pakistan Navy in collaboration with M/s COSMOS of Italy. The boat is capable of firing torpedoes and carrying mines. It is available both in Offensive as well as Defensive roles.
> *Other features include:*
> &#8226; Stealth capability
> &#8226; Quiet Transiting
> &#8226; Shallow Water Operations
> &#8226; Sneak Operations
> &#8226; Commando Operations
> &#8226; Surveillance and Intelligence Missions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Length (Overall) 27.28 M
> Height (Overall) 5.59 M
> Pressure Hull Diameter 2.30 M
> Pressure Hull Length 19.10 M
> Displacement (Surfaced) 102 Tons
> Displacement (Submerged) 110 Tons
> Operation Depth 100 M
> Max. speed (Surfaced) 9 Knots (on diesel engine)
> Max. speed (Submerged) 6 Knots (on batteries)
> Endurance Over 1000 Nautical Miles
> on Diesel Engine
> Complement 14 (6+8)
> Armament
> &#8226; Torpedo Firing Tubes
> &#8226; Mines Laying Hooks



MIDGET Submarines

regards!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Last Hope

zeeshuisb said:


> Pakistan is already using the midgets
> 
> *MG110 COSMOS Midget Submarine*
> 
> The SX 404 type sold to Pakistan in the early 1970s have been replaced by three Italian-built SX-756-class midget submarines, delivered in 1988. This State of the Art MIDGET submarine is now building in Karachi Shipyard & Engineering Works for Pakistan Navy in collaboration with M/s COSMOS of Italy. The boat is capable of firing torpedoes and carrying mines. It is available both in Offensive as well as Defensive roles. These displace 40 tons and are capable of diving to a depth of 100m. They can carry six swimmers and two SDVs, as well as 2 tons of explosives.
> 
> *Other features include:*
>  Stealth capability
>  Quiet Transiting
>  Shallow Water Operations
>  Sneak Operations
>  Commando Operations
>  Surveillance and Intelligence Missions
> 
> *SPECIFICATIONS:*
> Length overall: 27.28 meters
> Height overall: 5.59 meters
> Pressure Hull Diameter: 2.30 meters.
> Pressure Hull Length: 19.10 meters
> Displacement surfaced: 102 tons
> Displacement surfaced: 110 tons
> Operation Depth: 100 m
> Max. speed (surfaced): 9 KTS (on diesel engine)
> Max. speed (submerged): 6 KTS (on batteries)
> Endurance: Over 1000 NM on diesel engine, Over 40 NM on batteries
> Complement: 14 (6 operators + 8 commandos)
> Armament:
>  Torpedo Firing Tubes
>  Mines Laying Hooks
> 
> Pakistan is building *MG110 COSMOS Midget Submarine* at Karachi Shipyard and engineering works. pictures of MG110 COSMOS Midget Submarine are available at
> 
> MIDGET Submarines



What torpedos will be used and what are the ranges???
SLBM included??


----------



## Lefa

Thank you for this assist! 
These submarines were designed to carry E14 and E15 533 torpedoes, produced by Sintra Alcatel (now in DCNS).
To be noted, that this weapon its not dual purpose, the E version got anti ship capabilities, so for many years these plattforms were not ssk capable.
This could be due to two reasons (in my opinion): or PN focused on ship interdiction or they didnt had a dual purpose torpedo to fit in (likely the second).
Later, I think in 1995 these submarine recived an upgrade, and report says that the new weapons installed on board were AEG's SUT torpedo, this time a dual purpose weapon with both capabilities.

In 1995 you've lost (and brightly recovered) one of your three "x-craft" due to a chicken bone..

Any updated pictures?
If you want detailed infos, of cuorse the ones not classified, I'll be pleasured to answere.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arsalan

proudpakistanistudent said:


> What torpedos will be used and what are the ranges???
> SLBM included??



these are not nuclear subs friend,,
no SLBM


----------



## Arsalan

The Naval Special Services Group (SSGN), numbering 1,000 marines, is responsible for conducting unconventional operations at sea and along the shoreline. Delivery or insertion of maritime special forces includes fixed- wing/helicopter low-level parachuting, light craft beaching and underwater conveyance, for which the navy operates at least three Cosmos Class MG110 miniature submarines (SSI) and some swimmer- delivery vehicles. 

On the basis of design developed by PN Dockyard, this type of mini submarine has been constructed at PN Dockyard. These mini-submarines can be used for various purposes like attacking enemy units in harbour with Frogmen/Charriots, at sea with torpedoes, at shore installations by commandos etc. other uses include mine laying, defensive barrier in shallow waters, advance pickets duties, intelligence gathering etc. 

Although the Italian Navy pioneered the use of human torpedoes (known today as swimmer delivery vehicles or SDVs), in today's Italian Navy there are no midgets. However Cosmos of Livorno has sold a number of midgets abroad. The SX 404 type sold to Pakistan in the early 1970s have been replaced by three [or possibly four] Italian-built SX-756-class midget submarines, delivered in 1988. These displace 40 tons and are capable of diving to a depth of 100m. They can carry six swimmers and two SDVs, as well as 2 tons of explosives. 



Length overall 27.28 meters 
Height overall 5.59" 
Pressure Hull Diameter 2.30" 
Pressure Hull Length 19.10" 
Displacement 102 tons (surfaced), 
110 tons (sub-merged)

Operation Depth In excess of 100 m 
Test Depth In excess of 100 m 
Max. speed (surfaced) 9 KTS (on diesel engine) 
Max. speed (submerged) 6 KTS (on batteries) 
Endurance Over 1000 NM on diesel engine, Over 40 NM on batteries 
Complement 14 (6 operators + 8 commandos) 
Armament Torpedo Firing Tubes, Mine Laying Hooks


----------



## Arsalan

Lefa said:


> Thank you for this assist!
> These submarines were designed to carry E14 and E15 533 torpedoes, produced by Sintra Alcatel (now in DCNS).
> To be noted, that this weapon its not dual purpose, the E version got anti ship capabilities, so for many years these plattforms were not ssk capable.
> This could be due to two reasons (in my opinion): or PN focused on ship interdiction or they didnt had a dual purpose torpedo to fit in (likely the second).
> Later, I think in 1995 these submarine recived an upgrade, and report says that the new weapons installed on board were AEG's SUT torpedo, this time a dual purpose weapon with both capabilities.
> 
> In 1995 you've lost (and brightly recovered) one of your three "x-craft" due to a chicken bone..
> 
> Any updated pictures?
> If you want detailed infos, of cuorse the ones not classified, I'll be pleasured to answere.




i read in another forum that these were perhaps fitted with some sort of external torpedo tubes, not sure about it but will search for this upgrade and update it here in this thread.


----------



## TOPGUN

How many do we have in the fleet?


----------



## Lefa

arsalanaslam123 said:


> i read in another forum that these were perhaps fitted with some sort of external torpedo tubes, not sure about it but will search for this upgrade and update it here in this thread.



Thats a factory option, indeed.
These submarines used to have (I'm talkin with past because Cos.Mo.S. (Costruzioni Motoscafi Sottomarini - Underwater Motorboard Construction) went in default in 2003 after some problems with export) several lodaout options, like external torpedo tubes (2), mine layng systems (up to 12 if I'm not wrong, I should check) or swimmer delivery vehicles (2).

About this point (torpedo capability) its not clear to me, if the original boats ('88) were already cabable to fire torpedos.
As I wrote before, on paper they were E14/E15 ready, but images doest not help with that.
For sure, the upgraded boat (the one refeared as MG-110) got two new tubes.
Due to this, I think that the original SX-756 delivered in the 80s were not torpedo capable, because on a midget of that size there is no space for four tubes...
I would like to know more about this midlife upgrade!

@TOPGUN:

They should be 3 (N°1 boat was the one of the accident), in the past you used to have a older model, much smaller (project SX-404B, SX-404 were the ones for Korea).


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

arsalanaslam123 said:


> *The Naval Special Services Group (SSGN), numbering 1,000 marines*, is responsible for conducting unconventional operations at sea and along the shoreline. Delivery or insertion of maritime special forces includes fixed- wing/helicopter low-level parachuting, light craft beaching and underwater conveyance, for which the navy operates at least three Cosmos Class MG110 miniature submarines (SSI) and some swimmer- delivery vehicles.
> 
> On the basis of design developed by PN Dockyard, this type of mini submarine has been constructed at PN Dockyard. These mini-submarines can be used for various purposes like attacking enemy units in harbour with Frogmen/Charriots, at sea with torpedoes, at shore installations by commandos etc. other uses include mine laying, defensive barrier in shallow waters, advance pickets duties, intelligence gathering etc.
> 
> Although the Italian Navy pioneered the use of human torpedoes (known today as swimmer delivery vehicles or SDVs), in today's Italian Navy there are no midgets. However Cosmos of Livorno has sold a number of midgets abroad. The SX 404 type sold to Pakistan in the early 1970s have been replaced by three [or possibly four] Italian-built SX-756-class midget submarines, delivered in 1988. These displace 40 tons and are capable of diving to a depth of 100m. They can carry six swimmers and two SDVs, as well as 2 tons of explosives.
> 
> 
> 
> Length overall 27.28 meters
> Height overall 5.59"
> Pressure Hull Diameter 2.30"
> Pressure Hull Length 19.10"
> Displacement 102 tons (surfaced),
> 110 tons (sub-merged)
> 
> Operation Depth In excess of 100 m
> Test Depth In excess of 100 m
> Max. speed (surfaced) 9 KTS (on diesel engine)
> Max. speed (submerged) 6 KTS (on batteries)
> Endurance Over 1000 NM on diesel engine, Over 40 NM on batteries
> Complement 14 (6 operators + 8 commandos)
> Armament Torpedo Firing Tubes, Mine Laying Hooks





SSG(N) are commandoes and there number is above 3000 but real strenght is classified....Marines are naval infantry!They are under command of PMC.

Researchers are there to research abt stuff.


----------



## Lefa

I think arsalanaslam was in good faith, after all, it was a quote from globasecurity.org, not thesun.uk 

Here we go with two juicy pictures, a launch in Karachi and a midget in navigation during a celebration (I forget which one):












Both boats are from the early design, built under cosmos licence and supervision in Karachi.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Arsalan

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> SSG(N) are commandoes and there number is above 3000 but real strenght is classified....Marines are naval infantry!They are under command of PMC.
> 
> Researchers are there to research abt stuff.



thanks for pointing but we all know that, 
the article was not a reserach by any means, just posted from another forum, answering Lefa, just the basic info.

*@ TOPGUN:*
looking for the numbers in operation, (reported at some sources to be 3 licinesed built at karachi ship yard).

*Regarding Upgrades*
also they have undergone upgrades and no official statement is available regarding these.
i have talked to a source of mine and what little i have got from him, there appears no significant structural change so perhaps all the upgrades were regarding electronics or perhaps at most a better Sonar. according to him, the upgrades are most likely to be in communication and control pannel electronics. he is checking and all info that is not harmfull for national security will be updated soon.

thank you!
regards!


----------



## TOPGUN

arsalanaslam123 said:


> thanks for pointing but we all know that,
> the article was not a reserach by any means, just posted from another forum, answering Lefa, just the basic info.
> 
> *@ TOPGUN:*
> looking for the numbers in operation, (reported at some sources to be 3 licinesed built at karachi ship yard).
> 
> *Regarding Upgrades*
> also they have undergone upgrades and no official statement is available regarding these.
> i have talked to a source of mine and what little i have got from him, there appears no significant structural change so perhaps all the upgrades were regarding electronics or perhaps at most a better Sonar. according to him, the upgrades are most likely to be in communication and control pannel electronics. he is checking and all info that is not harmfull for national security will be updated soon.
> 
> thank you!
> regards!



Thx brother that's what i had thought as well just wanted to make sure cheers.


----------



## Lefa

arsalanaslam123 said:


> *Regarding Upgrades*
> also they have undergone upgrades and no official statement is available regarding these.
> i have talked to a source of mine and what little i have got from him, there appears no significant structural change so perhaps all the upgrades were regarding electronics or perhaps at most a better Sonar. according to him, the upgrades are most likely to be in communication and control pannel electronics. he is checking and all info that is not harmfull for national security will be updated soon.
> 
> thank you!
> regards!



Thank you so much, looking forward for this juicy informations, I cant wait!

Lets go deeper with pictures comparison.
In this pic we see N&#176;3 boat (original SX-756 design), the same project as the N&#176;2 boat that I've posted above.
As you can see, the upper part of the light hull its flat.






In this "recent" picture (post '95), we see an upgraded boat.
If you look at the upper part of the light hull we can see two main differnces: there are two bulges, one that cover almost the whole fore (from the sail to the end) and one smaller but higher in the final fore part.
These bulges are light superstructures needed to cover the new boat's components, respectively two torpedo tubes and a new sonar array.






Thats why I think that the original project was not capable to shoot torpedos, its not possible to fit four tubes in such submarine, also because in this project most of the fore part its occupied from the special forces exit trunk..

Lets go even deeper!


----------



## Arsalan

Lefa said:


> Thank you so much, looking forward for this juicy informations, I cant wait!
> 
> Lets go deeper with pictures comparison.
> In this pic we see N°3 boat (original SX-756 design), the same project as the N°2 boat that I've posted above.
> As you can see, the upper part of the light hull its flat.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In this "recent" picture (post '95), we see an upgraded boat.
> If you look at the upper part of the light hull we can see two main differnces: there are two bulges, one that cover almost the whole fore (from the sail to the end) and one smaller but higher in the final fore part.
> These bulges are light superstructures needed to cover the new boat's components, respectively two torpedo tubes and a new sonar array.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thats why I think that the original project was not capable to shoot torpedos, its not possible to fit four tubes in such submarine, also because in this project most of the fore part its occupied from the special forces exit trunk..
> 
> Lets go even deeper!




HI,
sorry can you repost the pics, these are not visible.

and yes, yesterday i went to fortress.
unfortunately it was at night time and my mobile cam is not good enough toget clear pics at night time. i need to take out time this weekend.
there is another issue aswell, due to security concerns, it might be difficult to get pics, it is a military area! so if i stop posting after this sunday, do look out for me in some jail!!


----------



## Last Hope

arsalanaslam123 said:


> these are not nuclear subs friend,,
> no SLBM



Can we modify them?
Like we did modify helicopters sent from US (maybe Cobras) and they could fight at night.

Our great engineers could do that!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Lefa

arsalanaslam123 said:


> HI,
> sorry can you repost the pics, these are not visible.
> 
> and yes, yesterday i went to fortress.
> unfortunately it was at night time and my mobile cam is not good enough toget clear pics at night time. i need to take out time this weekend.
> there is another issue aswell, due to security concerns, it might be difficult to get pics, it is a military area! so if i stop posting after this sunday, do look out for me in some jail!!



Ups...my bad..
I'm pretty sure that your info about outer torpedo tubes its correct, maybe thats why I've read somewhere that since '95 the tubes are doubled (2 up on the pressure hull inside the light hull and 2 under and external the hull as shown in the red circles od this picture).






Thank you for your the Fortress raid.....but I wont see you in jail! 
If you'll go again this week end, make some detailed pics!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arsalan

Lefa said:


> Ups...my bad..
> I'm pretty sure that your info about outer torpedo tubes its correct, maybe thats why I've read somewhere that since '95 the tubes are doubled (2 up on the pressure hull inside the light hull and 2 under and external the hull as shown in the red circles od this picture).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for your the Fortress raid.....but I wont see you in jail!
> If you'll go again this week end, make some detailed pics!!




yeap its fine now,
thanks for the pics and info regarding external tubes.

if i am here in Lahore this weekend i will be going to fortress!
will check if i can get some pics.

regards!


----------



## Arsalan

> Jungibaaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> These 'mini-subs', what weapons can they carry?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan have build at karachi ship yard midget subs in colaboration with M/s COSMOS of Italy. these were the SX-756 subs.
> the last example was built back in 1988~94 and no new arrivials since then.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A State of the Art MIDGET submarine built for Pakistan Navy in collaboration with M/s COSMOS of Italy. The boat is capable of firing torpedoes and carrying mines. It is available both in Offensive as well as Defensive roles.
> *Other features include:*
>  Stealth capability
>  Quiet Transiting
>  Shallow Water Operations
>  Sneak Operations
>  Commando Operations
>  Surveillance and Intelligence Missions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Length (Overall) 27.28 M
> Height (Overall) 5.59 M
> Pressure Hull Diameter 2.30 M
> Pressure Hull Length 19.10 M
> Displacement (Surfaced) 102 Tons
> Displacement (Submerged) 110 Tons
> Operation Depth 100 M
> Max. speed (Surfaced) 9 Knots (on diesel engine)
> Max. speed (Submerged) 6 Knots (on batteries)
> Endurance Over 1000 Nautical Miles
> on Diesel Engine
> Complement 14 (6+8)
> Armament
>  Torpedo Firing Tubes
>  Mines Laying Hooks
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> MIDGET Submarines
Click to expand...


adding to this, it was te third of the Midget subs, the PNSM Larkana that was build at karachi dock yard under licience from M/s COSMOS

regards!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Lefa

Great man, thank you! Keep on the good job!

So, if I got it straight, only the 3th boat have the aspect of the picture above? or maybe all 3 boats been upgraded at this level?

Thank you!

[edit]

Are you sre mate about this name?
PNS LARKANA looks like its a missile boat ..

I'm sayng this beacause its strange that a Navy give the same name at two of her boats (at the same time)..


----------



## lindsyebanks

The MG110LR X-craft currently in service with Pakistan were supplied from the outset with two external torpedoe tubes. Following modification, the X-craft have been given the provision to carry torpedoes within the hull of the submarine. Structurally the main difference in the hull is found on the upper section forward of the sail. There are no other structural differences and the dive entry/exit chamber remains unaffected. additional modifications allowed for enhanced Sonar, Comms and fire control system as well as outer structural enhancments for carriage of the newer mines - i.e. Stonefish. A redesigned new outer hull was also incorporated which offered better acoustic absorption capabilities.

The X-craft do not have any names as they do not have any penant assigned. They are simply referred to as X-craft 01, 02 & 03. There is no PNSM Larkhana or any other name ever assigned to either these X-craft or their predecessors. 

Note: None of the above is harmful to any national interest. Its common knowledge to practioners in the sub industry.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Lefa

Cosmos always marketed his products with several different names, the actual designation for PN was SX-908/PA, producer's designation was SX-756S while I've not understood if MG-110 is the upgraded boat designation or its just another market name of the same product.

Who performed the mid life upgrades? Local SysCo company?

How many of the three boats been upgraded in order to fit tubes up on the pressure hull?


----------



## lindsyebanks

The updates were done locally by Pakistan Navy in concert with Cosmos. The X-craft which underwent the modernization plan first was the one which had just been recovered from the sea bed following its accident. The other two subs also subsequently underwent the same upadates of the modernization programme albeight the final was never intended to be updated with the extra bow torpedoe tubes. However retrofitting this would not be a difficult task for the navy. The 2nd X-craft has reverted back to its non-bow torpedoe tube original spec but this can be retrofitted within a matter of days. 

As these are X-craft for use primarily by SSGN, the carraige of torpedoes becomes an irrelevant factor. Subsequent mission fit including carraige of torpedoes would be dictated by the the mission profile designated to the X-craft during war time. 

MG 110 LR was a new name given to the updated SX-756 X-craft when they were being marketed to other nations in particular Egypt which had shown a strong interest. You can be assured that the equipment fit may well be different and one thing which was indicated at the time was the increased range of the subs hence the designation LR (Long Range). Whilst the Pakistani X-craft also have the same increase in range, their designation was not changed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Lefa

Excellent, thank you.
Egypt been a Cosmos customer during the '60, but I do belive they were just SDVs and they never get our submarines..

Do you know if the designation LR, include the AIP mod?
The factory also use another designation to intend the improved range, ER (extended range), but I think that it was applied from the 120t boats on.
The ER module was an AIP engine nemed UAPE (Underwater Auxiliary Propulsion Engine), created by Italtech, the company that later was envolved in the OFF scandal.

On another hand, any news from Lahore?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lindsyebanks

There is no AIP on the MG-110LR rather the extended range was afforded through conventional means (That is all I can say at this point ;-> ). Rightly or wrongly, COSMOS interspersed the designations of theX-craft sold by them throuhout their history. But a few facts can be ascertained. When Pakistan initially looked at buying X-craft to replace their SX-404, the replacement available at the time was the SX-756. The MG-110 LR is a larger version of the SX-756 and hence its new designation. To date Pakistan is the only known operator of the MG-110LR. 

The ER you refer to was applied only to the MG-120ER which did in fact incorporate AIP and to my knowledge this model remain unsold. The MG-120 was in fact based onthe MG-110LR,with AIP being one key and perhaps only significant difference in addition to the usual increase in payload. Three had in fact been ordered by Iraq, but were not delivered owing to circumstances we are all aware of at the time. The sole completed 120-ER remained undelivered and its fate is unkown, i.e. whether scrapped or absorbed by a naval force either at home or abroad. 

Given the confidential nature of the business of selling X-craft, it is very unlikely that the true picture of Cosmos's sale history will ever be known except to the handful very close to the company. Discretion is something both Cosmos and its customers valued strongly. 

As for Lahore, I believe someone else promised you an answer on that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Lefa

You are well informed and from you words I can evince that you know what are you talking about (your knowledge on this matter looks focused on the problematic PN experience with cosmos, correct me if Im wrong), this positively surprise me since there is very few people interested in such a small segment, I like you!

What you state is mostly correct, I may add that that original SX-756W was a 70t boat, the factory designation for the 110t boat (marketed as MG-110, later LR after the improvements) was SX-756S.
Iraq was about to buy in the late 80s, other then many companys shares, two W and one S of the 756 model.

MG-120 is a totally different boat, of course the 110t boats upgrade, but it shares few with the old model and it arrived many years later (is a early 90 product), and I believe they were sold.

The evolution doesnt stop with the 120t boat, there are other models, mind that Cos.Mo.S. defaulted in 2003.

As for Lahore, yes, I was waiting for pictures about the 404B boat on display over there..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Manticore

These submarines were built in Pakistan under the supervision of the Italian company Cosmos. They are built to an enlarged SX 756 design and have replaced the older SX 404 design submarines, which have now been retired.

These submarines can transport up to eight swimmers on raiding or reconnaissance missions, or perform other tasks in shallow waters such as mining. Armament consists of two torpedo tubes that can be loaded with SUT type torpedoes, up to eight limpet type mines can be carried in place of the torpedoes, or a pair of two-man underwater swimmer chariots.

Sensors only include a pair of Pilkingtom CK 39 periscopes.

These subs are believed to have an endurance of 20 days.

Three of these submarines were purchased in 1988. One was lost in 1995, but has been replaced. All are active.

Builder 
COSMOS Shipbuilders, Livorno

http://babriet.tripod.com/navy/stat/statmg110.htm

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UmarJustice

How many MINI subs do we have in active service?


----------



## A.Rafay

UmarJustice said:


> How many MINI subs do we have in active service?



Three maybe!!


----------



## UmarJustice

A.Rafay said:


> Three maybe!!



That figure is old.


----------



## Saleem

Skywalker said:


> And whose gonna pay for this.



hang NS&co, AZ&co etc upside down for a week in city square and 100 lashes a day...and they will cough up the dough....


----------



## turbo charged

...edit...


----------



## Lebanks

That figure of 3 x-craft is unlikely to change in the near to medium term. Control of these x-craft was taken from SSGN & placed under COMSUBS. Whilst a not so clear decision, it was a long time coming & had always met heavy resistance from SSGN.


----------



## Super Falcon

Piston_1 said:


> Actualy we don need Nuclear power subs.these are bands of sound.Which is easily got noticed n got killed.We only need very quite subs which can stay under water for longer times & wait enemy to come close n get killed.
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan should make small size stealth Drone subs to kill Enemy ships n subs.


Dear nuke subs are very silent these days and they dont need to surface as normal submarine and they can carry tactical nukes our enemy has nuke subs .

They can dive upto 600 feet or more some subs 800 feet latest russian sub can go 1000 feet

Normal submarine only dive upto 500 feet

If sub dive 600 fett or more no sonar can detect it even P 8 

And nuke subs can give pakistan third stike capabilty which will bring more fear in enemy heart 

Pakistan is only nuke country dont have nuke subs

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Piston_1 said:


> Actualy we don need Nuclear power subs.these are bands of sound.Which is easily got noticed n got killed.We only need very quite subs which can stay under water for longer times & wait enemy to come close n get killed.
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan should make small size stealth Drone subs to kill Enemy ships n subs.



Have you realized you are replying to almost 8 year old post? 
anyways, Nuclear sub will eat up entire budget of PN and PN is already in possess of acquiring Chinese AIP subs.


----------



## princefaisal

Manticore said:


> These submarines were built in Pakistan under the supervision of the Italian company Cosmos. They are built to an enlarged SX 756 design and have replaced the older SX 404 design submarines, which have now been retired.
> 
> These submarines can transport up to eight swimmers on raiding or reconnaissance missions, or perform other tasks in shallow waters such as mining. Armament consists of two torpedo tubes that can be loaded with SUT type torpedoes, up to eight limpet type mines can be carried in place of the torpedoes, or a pair of two-man underwater swimmer chariots.
> 
> Sensors only include a pair of Pilkingtom CK 39 periscopes.
> 
> These subs are believed to have an endurance of 20 days.
> 
> Three of these submarines were purchased in 1988. One was lost in 1995, but has been replaced. All are active.
> 
> Builder
> COSMOS Shipbuilders, Livorno
> 
> MG 110 Midget Submarine


Can these submarines be modified to carry exocet type missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## black-hawk_101

I think PN has no plans of acquiring any submarines other than the 8 S-20Ps and some FACs for MSA. Even no deal for another F-22P Block-II.


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

PN commando midgets are a heap of italian scrap from COSMOS, not bankrupt, and now PN will not make this covert diver insertion stupidity again.


----------



## Zarvan

black-hawk_101 said:


> I think PN has no plans of acquiring any submarines other than the 8 S-20Ps and some FACs for MSA. Even no deal for another F-22P Block-II.


4 more F-22 P are coming for sure as for new midget submarines well they can come from Italy. Italy is busy developing some really good midget submarines these days. Let's hope they manage to do it


----------



## black-hawk_101

Zarvan said:


> 4 more F-22 P are coming for sure as for new midget submarines well they can come from Italy. Italy is busy developing some really good midget submarines these days. Let's hope they manage to do it


can you share some details of midget submarines? like pics and specs. Also, info about F-22P Block-II


----------



## fatman17

SSGN in action

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 313baberali

Skywalker said:


> And whose gonna pay for this.


U are worried like Pakistan atomic energy Program was run on money growing on trees, be muture,same gonna pay who is paying everthing

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## black-hawk_101

List of active Pakistan Navy ships - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Cosmos-class submarine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
How many Midget Submarines PN has and can PN acquire more of these class which are operational in other navies with upgrades?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CHI RULES

PN should increase it's midgets in numbers along with FACs of catramen class so they may make a coastal defense line near our harbors considering so far our Navy regular ships are not in enough numbers to effectively stop any enemy aggression in deep see. Similarly these midgets if armed within torpedoes and FACs with Missiles can be used for demolition missions on enemy naval bases near to our territory.

North Korea and Iran are using these tactics quite significantly against bigger and modern navies.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## black-hawk_101

CHI RULES said:


> PN should increase it's midgets in numbers along with FACs of catramen class so they may make a coastal defense line near our harbors considering so far our Navy regular ships are not in enough numbers to effectively stop any enemy aggression in deep see. Similarly these midgets if armed within torpedoes and FACs with Missiles can be used for demolition missions on enemy naval bases near to our territory.
> 
> North Korea and Iran are using these tactics quite significantly against bigger and modern navies.


Mini submarines should be given to Marines as its their roles.


----------



## Cool_Soldier

Pakistan is going to enhance reasonably its Marines size,definitely, it will require more and modern equipments to arm them.

Mini subs and FACs can be one of those apparatus.


----------



## black-hawk_101

Why not PN sign up some deal for 12 Andrasta SSKs may be with ME help?


----------



## kenyannoobie

Imo,3rd world countries shouldn't use mini subs as ASDVs;but rather littoral combat vessels. I've been looking at the Chilean Crocodile:






and wonder can its torp loadout be expanded to at least 8 ideally 10 ,with the option of 4 submerged launched capable Stingers/Strelas or even Iglas, without compromising hull integrity or sea keeping characteristics? Also are these SAMs silent swim out capable like torps? That way you'd get a real offensive littoral sub. I do know the Kilo Type 877 EKM has a launcher for 8 Iglas.
H I Sutton - Covert Shores


----------



## Tay Mur

But i think there must be huge fleet of Diesel-submarines instead of mini bcuz Pak is not fighting in war.



Super Falcon said:


> some nuke subs from china should be high on agenda for our naval aquasitions because our navy is very small to indian and we need nuke subs to give IN something to think about and im damn sure as their land forces are very scared to face our armed land forces IN will be scaring to by PN


But i think 'Nuke subs" is not a good idea, bcuz there there maintence is too expensive, Pak should consider Deisel -submarines. Correct Me if i am wrong


----------



## milen

This post is a helpful overview of the particular topic and very actionable. I can set up my new idea from this post. It gives in depth information.


----------



## stalintom

Hope SMX-23, will become a successful. All the best


----------



## Sara Malik

Nice


----------



## Pindi Boy

I have a question why do PN buy type 39A we should have bought we should have bought type39C ot type093 submarine bcoz its SSn ?????
Thanks


----------



## SSGcommandoPAK

TOPGUN said:


> Wat will be total count for PN in the near future of the sub fleet????



12 TO 14


----------



## Cameleer1512

Pakistan is by far the strongest Muslim nation currently, Atleast in my books

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nomi007

any fresh images


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Thanks to our Turkish members (@cabatli_53) for posting info from MSI Journal; the Pakistan Navy is to procure new mini-SSKs from STM.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Cornered Tiger

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Thanks to our Turkish members (@cabatli_53) for posting info from MSI Journal; the Pakistan Navy is to procure new mini-SSKs from STM.



Can u give me the link to His POST Sir. I am desperate to see. Thanks in advance.


----------



## graphican

Excellent NEWS!

The submarine has 6 torpedo launching tubes. This should be able to delivery 6 Babur-IIIs and 4 surface to air missiles. That does the job for Pakistan.


----------



## khavar

Great idea. Awesome


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Cornered Tiger said:


> Can u give me the link to His POST Sir. I am desperate to see. Thanks in advance.


https://defence.pk/threads/turkish-defence-industry-exports-updates.313408/page-77#post-9129127

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

graphican said:


> Excellent NEWS!
> 
> The submarine has 6 torpedo launching tubes. This should be able to delivery 6 Babur-IIIs and 4 surface to air missiles. That does the job for Pakistan.




Alot of fire power for a midget Submarine


----------



## Penguin

graphican said:


> Excellent NEWS!
> 
> The submarine has 6 torpedo launching tubes. This should be able to delivery 6 Babur-IIIs and 4 surface to air missiles. That does the job for Pakistan.



Surface to air missiles? That would be unusual, to say the least. And why place Babur on such small, limited range, coastal boats? How smart would that be?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue Marlin

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Thanks to our Turkish members (@cabatli_53) for posting info from MSI Journal; the Pakistan Navy is to procure new mini-SSKs from STM.


any link and i would like to see some pics


----------



## razgriz19

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Thanks to our Turkish members (@cabatli_53) for posting info from MSI Journal; the Pakistan Navy is to procure new mini-SSKs from STM.





Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> https://defence.pk/threads/turkish-defence-industry-exports-updates.313408/page-77#post-9129127



But STM doesn't offer any midget subs. Why would the Navy want to buy it from a company which has never made a submarine before?


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Here's the scan from MSI. Thanks to @cabatli_53 for translating, but basically, the Pak Navy and STM studied the idea of upgrading or refurbishing the Cosmo MG110s, but it was unfeasible. So now they're in talks to design a next-gen mini-SSK from the ground-up. It'll be a major program between STM and the Pak Navy if finalized. 

@Horus Lol how in the Earth, Heaven and Hell did our journos miss this?!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue Marlin

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Here's the scan from MSI. Thanks to @cabatli_53 for translating, but basically, the Pak Navy and STM studied the idea of upgrading or refurbishing the Cosmo MG110s, but it was unfeasible. So now they're in talks to design a next-gen mini-SSK from the ground-up. It'll be a major program between STM and the Pak Navy if finalized.
> 
> @Horus Lol how in the Earth, Heaven and Hell did our journos miss this?!


probably because they dont speak turkish, like me. i honestly doubt pakistan is more bothered about getting frigates than mini sub tbh since they need them more than mini subs.

besides go for an option that already exists, you should know
http://quwa.org/2016/11/04/indonesias-pt-palindo-marine-showcases-mini-submarine-design/


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Blue Marlin said:


> probably because they dont speak turkish, like me. i honestly doubt pakistan is more bothered about getting frigates than mini sub tbh since they need them more than mini subs.
> 
> besides go for an option that already exists, you should know
> http://quwa.org/2016/11/04/indonesias-pt-palindo-marine-showcases-mini-submarine-design/


Well, the journalists just needed to go to the STM booth and ask a few questions. Anyways, the PT submarine is interesting and I think STM (and MTC) will come up with a very similar solution. However, if the Pak Navy intends to arm its mini-SSKs with torpedo tubes, then it'll need a different design (than PT Palindo's).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JustHappened

STM is working together with YTÜ .edu. YTÜ got already a COSMOS CE4F and all blueprints from Turkish Navy.

Some sources claim that it could be a design like German type 200

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Penguin

JustHappened said:


> STM is working together with YTÜ .edu. YTÜ got already a COSMOS CE4F and all blueprints from Turkish Navy.
> 
> Some sources claim that it could be a design like German type 200



It was reported in _Jane's Underwater Warfare Systems 2009-2010 ISBN 978-0710629029 _that Turkey evaluated two midget submarine designs (Type 200 and Type 300 ) from the German firm ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS). However, since it is now 2017 and nothing has been forthcoming while Turkey has built and operates full size TKMS designs, IMHO this indicates that Turkey may have considered these, but has not acted on these beyond the design evaluations. Of course, this does not rule out the development of a similar design (but does that have to take 7-8 years?)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TOPGUN

Penguin said:


> It was reported in _Jane's Underwater Warfare Systems 2009-2010 ISBN 978-0710629029 _that Turkey evaluated two midget submarine designs (Type 200 and Type 300 ) from the German firm ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS). However, since it is now 2017 and nothing has been forthcoming while Turkey has built and operates full size TKMS designs, IMHO this indicates that Turkey may have considered these, but has not acted on these beyond the design evaluations. Of course, this does not rule out the development of a similar design (but does that have to take 7-8 years?)




Thanks brother any conformation that PN will get these ?


----------



## JustHappened

The COSMO's had balance and so called dolphing diving problems, they couldn't be upgraded to the level Turkish SAT wanted. YTÜ .edu promised to work on this. That's the reason why TN granted one COSMO and all blueprints to YTÜ. They are working together with STM and it could be the first indigenious Turkish sub.


----------



## Fabricio Tavares

That is very impressive.


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

It's much heavier (700 tons), but the BMT Vidar-7 or Wyvern would be a good reference point for a great mini-SSK.

https://www.bmtdsl.co.uk/media/6740041/SBPD005-0517_WYVERN.pdf


----------



## Fabricio Tavares

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> It's much heavier (700 tons), but the BMT Vidar-7 or Wyvern would be a good reference point for a great mini-SSK.
> 
> https://www.bmtdsl.co.uk/media/6740041/SBPD005-0517_WYVERN.pdf



Yes, but the idea itself requires a lot knowledge.


----------



## Vijyes Yechury

Mini submarine is under 200 ton weight. If it is 800ton, it is a small submarine, but still q submarine. It can work well but with smaller payload and range. AIP may be difficult to accommodate in the small space. Small oxygen tank for using while underground for 1-2 days is possible.


----------



## CHI RULES

Few capable mini subs are inevitable for Pak which my have capability to fire torpedo as well as can be effectively used to insert PN marines/frogmen in enemy territory for sabotage of naval assets.
It's better to go for further research work jv with China or Turkey for developing such mini subs ingenuously.


----------



## PAR 5

Very informative and interesting thread. PN continues its search for a Small Sub


----------



## Armchair

The full sized subs of PN are designed to fight the IN fleet in the high seas. They cost hundreds of millions of dollars each but are well worth the money. 

What PN needs are 2 more classes of submarines. 

Firstly, a small submarine, say 200-500 tons, designed for simplicity and low costs, with the purpose of attacking nearby Indian ports and naval bases (say uptil Mumbai). Following features could perhaps be helpful for such a role:

1. A simple diesel-electric, using lithium ion batteries (these have become very cheap because of smartphones and electric cars, and easily source-able from China)

2. 2 non-reloadable torpedo tubes, simple, doesn't need a torpedo room or personnel to man such rooms.

3. 4 floating mines that can be used to mine Indian ports. 

4. One piggy-back UUV, that acts as a suicide submarine - launched from a distance, it goes into the vicinity of a port, launches two torpedoes at anything that gives a sonar return, or sits and waits until something shows up. drops two mines at choice places, and potentially returns to Pakistani waters (or self-destructs). 

5. minimal personnel - 4-6 persons to operate such a small submarine. 

This is a simple submarine that won't be able to compete in the high seas or stalk and stake out Indian fleets. Its a simple offensive weapon that will force India to spend considerable time, money and energy on defensive measures, thus tying them down and diverting their resources from offensive purchases.

The second type of submarine should be a simple submersible for marines to use to penetrate Indian terrain.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Armchair said:


> The full sized subs of PN are designed to fight the IN fleet in the high seas. They cost hundreds of millions of dollars each but are well worth the money.
> 
> What PN needs are 2 more classes of submarines.
> 
> Firstly, a small submarine, say 200-500 tons, designed for simplicity and low costs, with the purpose of attacking nearby Indian ports and naval bases (say uptil Mumbai). Following features could perhaps be helpful for such a role:
> 
> 1. A simple diesel-electric, using lithium ion batteries (these have become very cheap because of smartphones and electric cars, and easily source-able from China)
> 
> 2. 2 non-reloadable torpedo tubes, simple, doesn't need a torpedo room or personnel to man such rooms.
> 
> 3. 4 floating mines that can be used to mine Indian ports.
> 
> 4. One piggy-back UUV, that acts as a suicide submarine - launched from a distance, it goes into the vicinity of a port, launches two torpedoes at anything that gives a sonar return, or sits and waits until something shows up. drops two mines at choice places, and potentially returns to Pakistani waters (or self-destructs).
> 
> 5. minimal personnel - 4-6 persons to operate such a small submarine.
> 
> This is a simple submarine that won't be able to compete in the high seas or stalk and stake out Indian fleets. Its a simple offensive weapon that will force India to spend considerable time, money and energy on defensive measures, thus tying them down and diverting their resources from offensive purchases.
> 
> The second type of submarine should be a simple submersible for marines to use to penetrate Indian terrain.



This is a highly controversial and highly secretive subject. However, many countries are looking to acquire mini-subs in Asia Pacific and Middle East region.

There are many concepts on the market, such as Korea, Chile, and Turkey, but none have any history of building a small submarine. There are only a few successful boat builders in the world that have the experience, and are still currently building small submarines. As previously mentioned, STM is talking about a concept that is far from being an engineering design and too risky as a development project.

The optimal shallow water attack submarine (SWATS) for Pakistan Navy is estimated to be 400-500 Tons. This is the right compromise between cost and mission. A boat of this capacity is able to do most of the tasks of a larger conventional sub, and still be a carrier for special forces operations, infiltration and exfiltration. 

It should have 3-4 torpedo tubes, preferably pressurized. 
It should have CCD AIP with a capacity of 40-60 hours with full hotel load and without batteries.
It should have a minimum of two 4-6 men SDVs
It should be fully automated, so a crew of 8-12 people can operate it.
It should be able to navigate 2500NM to 3500 NM, to give some utility and undertake swatch and harbor defence.
It should defend against other SWATS, midgets, and SDVs.
It should have complete sensor payload, bow sonar, intercept sonar, ESM, ELINT, periscopes, and datalink
Preferably, it should not have lead acid batteries, but Li Ion.
It should have at least two engines, and skewed propeller design to defeat LOFAR.
It should be configurable, and transportable.
It should be able to navigate 10-30 meter waters, with obstacle avoidance.
It should be able to integrate with surveillance and weaponized UUVs, for launch or recovery.

Such a sub, when employed in asymmetric warfare, would put a fail to many defensive doctrines of much large navies.

Just my two cents.



CHI RULES said:


> Few capable mini subs are inevitable for Pak which my have capability to fire torpedo as well as can be effectively used to insert PN marines/frogmen in enemy territory for sabotage of naval assets.
> It's better to go for further research work jv with China or Turkey for developing such mini subs ingenuously.



Neither China or Turkey have the capability in this area.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Sine Nomine

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> This is a highly controversial and highly secretive subject. However, many countries are looking to acquire mini-subs in Asia Pacific and Middle East region.
> 
> There are many concepts on the market, such as Korea, Chile, and Turkey, but none have any history of building a small submarine. There are only a few successful boat builders in the world that have the experience, and are still currently building small submarines. As previously mentioned, STM is talking about a concept that is far from being an engineering design and too risky as a development project.
> 
> The optimal shallow water attack submarine (SWATS) for Pakistan Navy is estimated to be 400-500 Tons.


*1-Sang-O II / K-300 [North Korea]
2-Fateh Class [Iran]
3- HDS-500 Midget Submarine* 

The HDS-500 design features a distinct streamlines sail and 'X' form tail mounted _behind_ an integrated pumpjet. Less obvious innovations include a mini wet-dry hangar in the tail. 


a) Flexible Payoad Module (FPM) 
b) Integrated sail 
c) Intercept sonar 
d) Hatches for Payload Modules 
e) 533mm (21") torpedo tube (x2) 
f) Conformal sonar array 
g) 324mm (12.75") torpedo tubes (x4) 


*Specification* 
Length: 37 meters 
Beam: 4.5 meter
Displacement: 510 tons surfaced 
Speed: Maximum 20 kt submerged, 7 kt cruising
Operating depth: 250 meters
Endurance : 21 days, 2,000 nautical miles 
Armament: 2 x 533mm (21") heavyweight torpedoes and 4 x 324mm (12.75") lightweight torpedoes. 
Crew: 10 plus 4 combat swimmers 
http://www.hisutton.com/News - Korea building new HDS-400 midget submarine.html


Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Such a sub, when employed in asymmetric warfare, would put a fail to many defensive doctrines of much large navies.





Bilal Khan 777 said:


> It should have at least two engines, and skewed propeller design to defeat LOFAR.
> It should be configurable, and transportable.
> It should be able to navigate 10-30 meter waters, with obstacle avoidance.


Why not pump-jet propulsors,they would allow them to operate in shallow waters.


----------



## Armchair

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> This is a highly controversial and highly secretive subject. However, many countries are looking to acquire mini-subs in Asia Pacific and Middle East region.
> 
> There are many concepts on the market, such as Korea, Chile, and Turkey, but none have any history of building a small submarine. There are only a few successful boat builders in the world that have the experience, and are still currently building small submarines. As previously mentioned, STM is talking about a concept that is far from being an engineering design and too risky as a development project.
> 
> The optimal shallow water attack submarine (SWATS) for Pakistan Navy is estimated to be 400-500 Tons. This is the right compromise between cost and mission. A boat of this capacity is able to do most of the tasks of a larger conventional sub, and still be a carrier for special forces operations, infiltration and exfiltration.
> 
> It should have 3-4 torpedo tubes, preferably pressurized.
> It should have CCD AIP with a capacity of 40-60 hours with full hotel load and without batteries.
> It should have a minimum of two 4-6 men SDVs
> It should be fully automated, so a crew of 8-12 people can operate it.
> It should be able to navigate 2500NM to 3500 NM, to give some utility and undertake swatch and harbor defence.
> It should defend against other SWATS, midgets, and SDVs.
> It should have complete sensor payload, bow sonar, intercept sonar, ESM, ELINT, periscopes, and datalink
> Preferably, it should not have lead acid batteries, but Li Ion.
> It should have at least two engines, and skewed propeller design to defeat LOFAR.
> It should be configurable, and transportable.
> It should be able to navigate 10-30 meter waters, with obstacle avoidance.
> It should be able to integrate with surveillance and weaponized UUVs, for launch or recovery.
> 
> Such a sub, when employed in asymmetric warfare, would put a fail to many defensive doctrines of much large navies.
> 
> Just my two cents.
> 
> 
> 
> Neither China or Turkey have the capability in this area.



You're back! I'm honored to get a correspondence!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PAR 5

Shallow Water Attack (SWAT) Submarines are the best choice for both defense and offense purposes for Pakistan Navy. I have an eye on this thread and in due course of time will share some interesting information on the said matter (if allowed). Stay Tuned

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

MUSTAKSHAF said:


> *1-Sang-O II / K-300 [North Korea]
> 2-Fateh Class [Iran]
> 3- HDS-500 Midget Submarine*
> 
> The HDS-500 design features a distinct streamlines sail and 'X' form tail mounted _behind_ an integrated pumpjet. Less obvious innovations include a mini wet-dry hangar in the tail.
> 
> 
> a) Flexible Payoad Module (FPM)
> b) Integrated sail
> c) Intercept sonar
> d) Hatches for Payload Modules
> e) 533mm (21") torpedo tube (x2)
> f) Conformal sonar array
> g) 324mm (12.75") torpedo tubes (x4)
> 
> 
> *Specification*
> Length: 37 meters
> Beam: 4.5 meter
> Displacement: 510 tons surfaced
> Speed: Maximum 20 kt submerged, 7 kt cruising
> Operating depth: 250 meters
> Endurance : 21 days, 2,000 nautical miles
> Armament: 2 x 533mm (21") heavyweight torpedoes and 4 x 324mm (12.75") lightweight torpedoes.
> Crew: 10 plus 4 combat swimmers
> http://www.hisutton.com/News - Korea building new HDS-400 midget submarine.html
> 
> 
> Why not pump-jet propulsors,they would allow them to operate in shallow waters.



While thy Hyundai submarine is theoretically available to PN, it has an issue. its theoretical. Let me look at the platform specs and I will come back with some technical evaluation, but I highly doubt that Koreans with no prior experience of a compact submarine can build this one. A compact submarine is more difficult than a conventional boat, as it needs all the same equipment as a larger sub thrown in a limited area. 

North Koreans and Iranians both are unlicensed copies/designs of a Italian boat builder.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ARMalik

Many years ago in the late 80's and early 90's when I was still a little kid, I remember going with my father to PNS I***L. There I use to see midget/mini submarines being built. Even then PN use to have these subs, so I hope there are plenty of them in the PN. Those were the good old days with my father which I will never forget.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cool_Soldier

Sorry for being OFF topic.
Today there is news in Jang daily newspaper that Pakistan and China has an agreement for procuring two War ships and one video clip is attached.

News is not clear about type of ships and further details.
Is it Type 54A (As one was agreed last year and two were under considerations)?


----------



## syed_yusuf

Cool_Soldier said:


> Sorry for being OFF topic.
> Today there is news in Jang daily newspaper that Pakistan and China has an agreement for procuring two War ships and one video clip is attached.
> 
> News is not clear about type of ships and further details.
> Is it Type 54A (As one was agreed last year and two were under considerations)?



is this on top of 1 ship ordered earlier?


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

ARMalik said:


> Many years ago in the late 80's and early 90's when I was still a little kid, I remember going with my father to PNS I***L. There I use to see midget/mini submarines being built. Even then PN use to have these subs, so I hope there are plenty of them in the PN. Those were the good old days with my father which I will never forget.



Yes, those subs are still there. Now over 25 years old and needing replacement with something bigger, and more capable.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Armchair

Why not take the design of the same Italian builder or the unlicensed plans from North Korea, and then modernize and customize it. I'm out of my depth here given the participants here but:

1. For a small sub that is designed to attack Mumbai and come back, does it need an AIP? Specially if it is carrying UUVs that will actually be doing the attack? At best one could think of a simple oxygen tank based Stirling system. 

2. A small submarine designed to attack ports near Pakistan has a distinctive set of requirements. How far do those requirements class for a submarine designed for frogmen? They do fundamentally seem to be different requirements. Would it not be better to keep them as separate projects? 
When exactly in history did frogmen play a decisive role? If we imagine the attack plan of action, here is how it goes - a small submarine leaves port from somewhere near Karachi, heads towards Dwarka or Mumbai, launches armed UUV, mines vicinity, launches supporting attack, either retrieves UUV and returns or returns without UUV. 
If you add frogmen to this mix, the submarine has to get a lot closer to the enemy port. They also have to wait for the frogmen to return, a slow and tortuous process. They then have to retrieve the frogmen, opening a hatch and thus creating even more clamour. At a time when every second is of essence. 
Basically adding frogmen to the mix complicates to kingdom come the whole assault, severely increases the risk factor and adds a whole lot of complication to the hull and submarine requirement (including housing frogmen, their equipment and underwater launch). 
Why not just Keep it Simple and build a simple, basic assault small sub. Would be a serious threat for Dwarka and Mumbai and would tie up significant enemy resources in defense. 

I think it sounds great, imagining an Ocean's 11, going right in, stalking an Indian port, planting plastic explosives... but... is it really relevant? Even if that is, you could simply make a small submarine that is designed for that role - i.e. take old design built in the 80s and brush it up, make it a bit larger if you need, and you're done. 

But why mix the two requirements and compromise a mission that has a significant impact on the battle-space?

I remember reading in a RAND report that a strategy that forces the enemy to change its dispositions is the most valuable strategy. A small submarine designed to attack Indian ports would do that. Its a critically important and low-cost solution. Why compromise that for Ocean's 11?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Armchair said:


> Why not take the design of the same Italian builder or the unlicensed plans from North Korea, and then modernize and customize it. I'm out of my depth here given the participants here but:
> 
> 1. For a small sub that is designed to attack Mumbai and come back, does it need an AIP? Specially if it is carrying UUVs that will actually be doing the attack? At best one could think of a simple oxygen tank based Stirling system.
> 
> 2. A small submarine designed to attack ports near Pakistan has a distinctive set of requirements. How far do those requirements class for a submarine designed for frogmen? They do fundamentally seem to be different requirements. Would it not be better to keep them as separate projects?
> When exactly in history did frogmen play a decisive role? If we imagine the attack plan of action, here is how it goes - a small submarine leaves port from somewhere near Karachi, heads towards Dwarka or Mumbai, launches armed UUV, mines vicinity, launches supporting attack, either retrieves UUV and returns or returns without UUV.
> If you add frogmen to this mix, the submarine has to get a lot closer to the enemy port. They also have to wait for the frogmen to return, a slow and tortuous process. They then have to retrieve the frogmen, opening a hatch and thus creating even more clamour. At a time when every second is of essence.
> Basically adding frogmen to the mix complicates to kingdom come the whole assault, severely increases the risk factor and adds a whole lot of complication to the hull and submarine requirement (including housing frogmen, their equipment and underwater launch).
> Why not just Keep it Simple and build a simple, basic assault small sub. Would be a serious threat for Dwarka and Mumbai and would tie up significant enemy resources in defense.
> 
> I think it sounds great, imagining an Ocean's 11, going right in, stalking an Indian port, planting plastic explosives... but... is it really relevant? Even if that is, you could simply make a small submarine that is designed for that role - i.e. take old design built in the 80s and brush it up, make it a bit larger if you need, and you're done.
> 
> But why mix the two requirements and compromise a mission that has a significant impact on the battle-space?
> 
> I remember reading in a RAND report that a strategy that forces the enemy to change its dispositions is the most valuable strategy. A small submarine designed to attack Indian ports would do that. Its a critically important and low-cost solution. Why compromise that for Ocean's 11?



There are many existing and evolving OPS and PLANS for SWATS. By discussing your scenarios further we can jeopardize them. Lets just say that the future employment of SWATS in PN will be quite a surprise for the potential adversaries.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## syed_yusuf

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> There are many existing and evolving OPS and PLANS for SWATS. By discussing your scenarios further we can jeopardize them. Lets just say that the future employment of SWATS in PN will be quite a surprise for the potential adversaries.


What is SWAT?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Armchair

syed_yusuf said:


> What is SWAT?


Shallow Water Attack Submarine. 

I've learned an immense amount from reading through @bilalkhan777 's posts. He doesn't give any secrets away but you end up educated on defence policy and decision making, at a level you cannot get at your average university. I've learned more from reading his and other's like his posts than years of reading and study.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> This is a highly controversial and highly secretive subject. However, many countries are looking to acquire mini-subs in Asia Pacific and Middle East region.
> 
> There are many concepts on the market, such as Korea, Chile, and Turkey, but none have any history of building a small submarine. There are only a few successful boat builders in the world that have the experience, and are still currently building small submarines. As previously mentioned, STM is talking about a concept that is far from being an engineering design and too risky as a development project.
> 
> The optimal shallow water attack submarine (SWATS) for Pakistan Navy is estimated to be 400-500 Tons. This is the right compromise between cost and mission. A boat of this capacity is able to do most of the tasks of a larger conventional sub, and still be a carrier for special forces operations, infiltration and exfiltration.
> 
> It should have 3-4 torpedo tubes, preferably pressurized.
> It should have CCD AIP with a capacity of 40-60 hours with full hotel load and without batteries.
> It should have a minimum of two 4-6 men SDVs
> It should be fully automated, so a crew of 8-12 people can operate it.
> It should be able to navigate 2500NM to 3500 NM, to give some utility and undertake swatch and harbor defence.
> It should defend against other SWATS, midgets, and SDVs.
> It should have complete sensor payload, bow sonar, intercept sonar, ESM, ELINT, periscopes, and datalink
> Preferably, it should not have lead acid batteries, but Li Ion.
> It should have at least two engines, and skewed propeller design to defeat LOFAR.
> It should be configurable, and transportable.
> It should be able to navigate 10-30 meter waters, with obstacle avoidance.
> It should be able to integrate with surveillance and weaponized UUVs, for launch or recovery.
> 
> Such a sub, when employed in asymmetric warfare, would put a fail to many defensive doctrines of much large navies.
> 
> Just my two cents.
> 
> 
> 
> Neither China or Turkey have the capability in this area.


FYI there are a few new options from China's CSIC:

CSIC MS200






displacement: 200 tons | length: 30 m
crew: 6 + 8 SOF
range: 120 nm (submerged) | 1,500 nm (surfaced)
2 torpedo tubes 
endurance 15 days
CSIC 600-ton AIP submarine 





displacement: 600 tons | length: 50 m
crew 15
range: 400 nm (submerged w/AIP) | 2,000 nm (surfaced)
4 torpedo tubes
endurance: 20 days
http://www.navyrecognition.com/inde...s-three-new-submarine-designs-for-export.html

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Armchair

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> FYI there are a few new options from China's CSIC:
> 
> CSIC MS200
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> displacement: 200 tons | length: 30 m
> crew: 6 + 8 SOF
> range: 120 nm (submerged) | 1,500 nm (surfaced)
> 2 torpedo tubes
> endurance 15 days
> CSIC 600-ton AIP submarine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> displacement: 600 tons | length: 50 m
> crew 15
> range: 400 nm (submerged w/AIP) | 2,000 nm (surfaced)
> 4 torpedo tubes
> endurance: 20 days
> http://www.navyrecognition.com/inde...s-three-new-submarine-designs-for-export.html



Hi, interesting. Has China actually built any either for itself or an export customer?


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> FYI there are a few new options from China's CSIC:
> 
> CSIC MS200
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> displacement: 200 tons | length: 30 m
> crew: 6 + 8 SOF
> range: 120 nm (submerged) | 1,500 nm (surfaced)
> 2 torpedo tubes
> endurance 15 days
> CSIC 600-ton AIP submarine
> the
> 
> displacement: 600 tons | length: 50 m
> crew 15
> range: 400 nm (submerged w/AIP) | 2,000 nm (surfaced)
> 4 torpedo tubes
> endurance: 20 days
> http://www.navyrecognition.com/inde...s-three-new-submarine-designs-for-export.html



Both theoretical platforms proposed by CSIC that have not been considered by PLN. China has no history or experience in building compact submarine. They are looking for someone to pay the development cost and take teh risk on the platform. Both submarines miss the sweet spot of 400-500 tons, which is the ideal sub between midgets and conventional sub.



Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> FYI there are a few new options from China's CSIC:
> 
> CSIC MS200
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> displacement: 200 tons | length: 30 m
> crew: 6 + 8 SOF
> range: 120 nm (submerged) | 1,500 nm (surfaced)
> 2 torpedo tubes
> endurance 15 days
> CSIC 600-ton AIP submarine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> displacement: 600 tons | length: 50 m
> crew 15
> range: 400 nm (submerged w/AIP) | 2,000 nm (surfaced)
> 4 torpedo tubes
> endurance: 20 days
> http://www.navyrecognition.com/inde...s-three-new-submarine-designs-for-export.html



I have looked into the Chinese subs further. Major design issues. Unable to bottom due to tail steering planes. no dedicated escape trunks, no bow thrusts, lead acid batteries. Miniaturized versions of Russian designs that were never built. While the chinese have progressed in the conventional sub arena, they are zero when it comes to midgets and compact submarines.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Armchair

The Russian Navy’s special operations forces (SOF) will receive the newest P-650 special-purpose midget submarines. These ships display just 720 tons and will be able to covertly deliver special-purpose and SOF groups to the shore and retrieve them. The submarine was designed by the Malakhit Special Marine Engineering Design Bureau. According to experts, it will be a response to the introduction of submarines converted by the U.S. Navy into SOF platforms, the newspaper Izvestia reported.

http://www.navyrecognition.com/inde...orces-to-receive-p-650-midget-submarines.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Both theoretical platforms proposed by CSIC that have not been considered by PLN. China has no history or experience in building compact submarine. They are looking for someone to pay the development cost and take teh risk on the platform. Both submarines miss the sweet spot of 400-500 tons, which is the ideal sub between midgets and conventional sub.
> 
> 
> 
> I have looked into the Chinese subs further. Major design issues. Unable to bottom due to tail steering planes. no dedicated escape trunks, no bow thrusts, lead acid batteries. Miniaturized versions of Russian designs that were never built. While the chinese have progressed in the conventional sub arena, they are zero when it comes to midgets and compact submarines.


So I guess it is really just the Russians who are active in this space. If not the Chinese, Turks or Koreans, there's hardly anyone left besides them or the French, Germans and Swedes (who probably could do it, but at a high cost).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Armchair

I think with the submarine building infrastructure being built, Pakistan my only need a blueprint and certain subsystems, which (subsystems) can largely be sourced from China and Turkey. 

Question is, do the Russians have a blueprint based on their tested design in the 400-500 ton class? How about the Italians? If nothing else, good shipbuilders would have mature design teams that could provide the least risky options... approach Damen?

On the other hand, investing in trial and error at home would help develop a submarine design team indigenously.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Armchair said:


> I think with the submarine building infrastructure being built, Pakistan my only need a blueprint and certain subsystems, which (subsystems) can largely be sourced from China and Turkey.
> 
> Question is, do the Russians have a blueprint based on their tested design in the 400-500 ton class? How about the Italians? If nothing else, good shipbuilders would have mature design teams that could provide the least risky options... approach Damen?
> 
> On the other hand, investing in trial and error at home would help develop a submarine design team indigenously.


Yep but R&D carries the risk of sunk costs, esp. w/errors and rectifying them. Inherently, this isn't a bad thing, but with our fiscal condition we can't do a lot of these efforts without serious risk of delays and maybe even outright cancellations. 

A foreign partner would help spread the costs and maybe even scale, but the key is that they're actually experienced in mini subs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Yep but R&D carries the risk of sunk costs, esp. w/errors and rectifying them. Inherently, this isn't a bad thing, but with our fiscal condition we can't do a lot of these efforts without serious risk of delays and maybe even outright cancellations.
> 
> A foreign partner would help spread the costs and maybe even scale, but the key is that they're actually experienced in mini subs.



Russian subs will be very hard to acquire, with a long Rosoborexport involvement and likely no Transfer of Technology.

My research shows that only Italians have the experience and pedigree to undertake the proper platform. There are two companies in Italy. GSE Trieste, and DRASS Galezzi. GSE Trieste is almost bankrupt having been sucked dry by Lockheed Martin on the US program, and does not have suitable craft that would be of interest to PN. They are also limited to Dry SDV concept, which a SWATS already is by design. DRASS designs seem to be lot more comprehensive and complete than its competitors. Industry experts claim that since DRASS have a mature design team, their craft are much along the development curve and will present a much lower risk to the purchaser.

DRASS Galezzi is shrouded with secrecy, and there is nothing on their website. Leaks on third party website show them as the only Italian manufacturer with practical designs of 350 Tons and 450 Tons that could suit PN requirement. They seem to have SDVs as well that integrate with the platform. However I believe this will be a secondary capability to PN's doctrine of full conventional submarine attack and defense.

If the Italian government gives permission for Transfer of Technology, this could be a suitable platform for the Pakistani replacement. However, I am not sure if DRASS would be interested in South Asian market. According to Janes, Romania is proceeding with compact submarine program so its likely DRASS. With the compact SWAT submarine as latest additional to brown water naval doctrines, it is likely that companies like DRASS will be very busy in the next 10 years.

In my opinion, with the heavy investment in Chinese Submarines, it would be prudent for Pakistan Navy to keep a European option in the mix, if the platform becomes available and the payload / range / personnel mix allow the Drass 450 for offense, and Drass 160 ton platform as a defensive platform.



Armchair said:


> I think with the submarine building infrastructure being built, Pakistan my only need a blueprint and certain subsystems, which (subsystems) can largely be sourced from China and Turkey.
> 
> Question is, do the Russians have a blueprint based on their tested design in the 400-500 ton class? How about the Italians? If nothing else, good shipbuilders would have mature design teams that could provide the least risky options... approach Damen?
> 
> On the other hand, investing in trial and error at home would help develop a submarine design team indigenously.



Building a submarine is not so simple. Indeed the shipbuilding infrastructure is back, and current with the Ghazi / Hangor class being built in Pakistan with Chinese assistance. But compact submarines are difficult. They have roughly the same systems as a large submarine stuffed in a smaller package. If someone hasn't done it before, they are likely to not be able to do it in a short or finite time. 

What would be a safer approach is to select a company that already has a complete engineering design, and request mission modifications for it. Build the first one in their yard with your technical team OJT, be involved in the modifications, and assign your design engineers as interns and externs in the company for 2-3 years working as employees. Manufacture your craft with the OEM assistance. This is a practical way to go.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
4


----------



## MastanKhan

Armchair said:


> I think with the submarine building infrastructure being built, Pakistan my only need a blueprint and certain subsystems, which (subsystems) can largely be sourced from China and Turkey.
> 
> Question is, do the Russians have a blueprint based on their tested design in the 400-500 ton class? How about the Italians? If nothing else, good shipbuilders would have mature design teams that could provide the least risky options... approach Damen?
> 
> On the other hand, investing in trial and error at home would help develop a submarine design team indigenously.



Hi,

First of all---when you want to build a submarine---you need to understand and accept the level of difficulty involved---.

Secondly---you need to have fear of the difficulty that you will face in building a quality end product---.

That fear will make you understand the importance of the project at hand---and when you have the understanding---you will find out that you do not have the ability to build a submarine from blue print---.

Acceptance is the first step to success---.

There are certain technologies where trial and error don't go hand in hand---and such is the case with building submarines---.

Russian subs is not the way forward for pakistan---.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Russian subs will be very hard to acquire, with a long Rosoborexport involvement and likely no Transfer of Technology.
> 
> My research shows that only Italians have the experience and pedigree to undertake the proper platform. There are two companies in Italy. GSE Trieste, and DRASS Galezzi. GSE Trieste is almost bankrupt having been sucked dry by Lockheed Martin on the US program, and does not have suitable craft that would be of interest to PN. They are also limited to Dry SDV concept, which a SWATS already is by design. DRASS designs seem to be lot more comprehensive and complete than its competitors. Industry experts claim that since DRASS have a mature design team, their craft are much along the development curve and will present a much lower risk to the purchaser.
> 
> DRASS Galezzi is shrouded with secrecy, and there is nothing on their website. Leaks on third party website show them as the only Italian manufacturer with practical designs of 350 Tons and 450 Tons that could suit PN requirement. They seem to have SDVs as well that integrate with the platform. However I believe this will be a secondary capability to PN's doctrine of full conventional submarine attack and defense.
> 
> If the Italian government gives permission for Transfer of Technology, this could be a suitable platform for the Pakistani replacement. However, I am not sure if DRASS would be interested in South Asian market. According to Janes, Romania is proceeding with compact submarine program so its likely DRASS. With the compact SWAT submarine as latest additional to brown water naval doctrines, it is likely that companies like DRASS will be very busy in the next 10 years.
> 
> In my opinion, with the heavy investment in Chinese Submarines, it would be prudent for Pakistan Navy to keep a European option in the mix, if the platform becomes available and the payload / range / personnel mix allow the Drass 450 for offense, and Drass 160 ton platform as a defensive platform.
> 
> 
> 
> Building a submarine is not so simple. Indeed the shipbuilding infrastructure is back, and current with the Ghazi / Hangor class being built in Pakistan with Chinese assistance. But compact submarines are difficult. They have roughly the same systems as a large submarine stuffed in a smaller package. If someone hasn't done it before, they are likely to not be able to do it in a short or finite time.
> 
> What would be a safer approach is to select a company that already has a complete engineering design, and request mission modifications for it. Build the first one in their yard with your technical team OJT, be involved in the modifications, and assign your design engineers as interns and externs in the company for 2-3 years working as employees. Manufacture your craft with the OEM assistance. This is a practical way to go.


I just saw the 3rd-party leaks of the DG-450. Indeed, it's a formidable design relative to the size.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Armchair

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> First of all---when you want to build a submarine---you need to understand and accept the level of difficulty involved---.
> 
> Secondly---you need to have fear of the difficulty that you will face in building a quality end product---.
> 
> That fear will make you understand the importance of the project at hand---and when you have the understanding---you will find out that you do not have the ability to build a submarine from blue print---.
> 
> Acceptance is the first step to success---.
> 
> There are certain technologies where trial and error don't go hand in hand---and such is the case with building submarines---.
> 
> Russian subs is not the way forward for pakistan---.



Thanks MK for sharing your thoughts. Didn't PN actually build mini-submarines in the 1980s? If they could do it then, there is no reason they cannot incrementally improve and do it now - meaning build a basic small submarine from blueprints. If there are specific parts and subsystems you cannot build, outsource it. 

If NK and Iran can build these, there is no reason PN cannot with a little bit of effort. 

Logical analysis:

1. Mini submarines are only a secondary consideration for PN, as such less important.
2. Sourcing a modern design is difficult with basically only one possible supplier (Italy) or unproven designs, in either case expensive ships.
3. A tried and tested design is available from North Korea / Iran. 
4. Submarines can be modernized and improved upon. lead-acid batteries can be replaced with Lithium-ion batteries. etc. 
5. PN needs a simple, cheap submarine that can threaten Mumbai, Dwarka, Goa, etc. 

Logic dictates that one keeps it simple, gets a tried and tested design, modernizes it, and builds it themselves. In the process, gains a market where there is little competition and a grand potential demand.


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Armchair said:


> Thanks MK for sharing your thoughts. Didn't PN actually build mini-submarines in the 1980s? If they could do it then, there is no reason they cannot incrementally improve and do it now - meaning build a basic small submarine from blueprints. If there are specific parts and subsystems you cannot build, outsource it.
> 
> If NK and Iran can build these, there is no reason PN cannot with a little bit of effort.
> 
> Logical analysis:
> 
> 1. Mini submarines are only a secondary consideration for PN, as such less important.
> 2. Sourcing a modern design is difficult with basically only one possible supplier (Italy) or unproven designs, in either case expensive ships.
> 3. A tried and tested design is available from North Korea / Iran.
> 4. Submarines can be modernized and improved upon. lead-acid batteries can be replaced with Lithium-ion batteries. etc.
> 5. PN needs a simple, cheap submarine that can threaten Mumbai, Dwarka, Goa, etc.
> 
> Logic dictates that one keeps it simple, gets a tried and tested design, modernizes it, and builds it themselves. In the process, gains a market where there is little competition and a grand potential demand.


Generally, KSEW manufactures based on the OEM's documentation, support and material kits. It isn't assembly, but it isn't turnkey manufacturing with end-to-end local sourcing either. I'd bet the Cosmos Midget SSKs were done this way as well (along with basically every other warship built at KSEW).

The second issue is the potential shift in the mini-SSK requirement. As discussed by @Bilal Khan 777 , these new mini-SSKs aren't just frogmen carriers, but smaller AShW and ASW assets in earnest. For the PN, the goal is to make these mini-SSKs as much of a threat to the IN as the Hangor (II) and Agosta 90B SSPs. 

So if it takes X to hunt one large SSP (e.g. Hangor/Khalid), then it should take X to hunt one mini-SSK (and when you multiply it by the number of assets, distribution in littoral seas and EEZ _and _AAW/AShW threats from the PN (054A) and the PAF, then you basically make a naval engagement pointless for the IN. 

However, to truly excel in building such mini-SSKs, you need prior design and development experience. Pakistan doesn't even leverage its own development experience for larger SSKs, much less mini-SSKs. There's the option of working with Turkey, but they're inexperienced and we risk cost-overruns and delays which, while useful from a developmental standpoint, we just can't afford.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Armchair

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Generally, KSEW manufactures based on the OEM's documentation, support and material kits. It isn't assembly, but it isn't turnkey manufacturing with end-to-end local sourcing either. I'd bet the Cosmos Midget SSKs were done this way as well (along with basically every other warship built at KSEW).
> 
> The second issue is the potential shift in the mini-SSK requirement. As discussed by @Bilal Khan 777 , these new mini-SSKs aren't just frogmen carriers, but smaller AShW and ASW assets in earnest. For the PN, the goal is to make these mini-SSKs as much of a threat to the IN as the Hangor (II) and Agosta 90B SSPs.
> 
> So if it takes X to hunt one large SSP (e.g. Hangor/Khalid), then it should take X to hunt one mini-SSK (and when you multiply it by the number of assets, distribution in littoral seas and EEZ _and _AAW/AShW threats from the PN (054A) and the PAF, then you basically make a naval engagement pointless for the IN.
> 
> However, to truly excel in building such mini-SSKs, you need prior design and development experience. Pakistan doesn't even leverage its own development experience for larger SSKs, much less mini-SSKs. There's the option of working with Turkey, but they're inexperienced and we risk cost-overruns and delays which, while useful from a developmental standpoint, we just can't afford.



Hi Bilal, 

Can't argue with what Bilal Khan 777 is saying but does PN really need a high end mini submarine when, in its own words, the mini submarine project is a footnote to the main projects in the PN. 

The easiest way to get rid of a project is to make the requirements overly complex and then claim its too expensive / can't be done. 

Now, if Iran and North Korea can build submarines in this class, by whatever means that may be, Pakistan is perfectly capable of building the very same submarine, in fact a considerably better one given the suppliers and technologies available to the PN. You could get the deal through a middle-man that is not North Korea or Iran, to stay above controversy, upgrade some of the basic systems (get the Turkish weapons and command consoles, Chinese lithium ion batteries). And you have a cheap and effective submarine that threatens India's major ports on the Western shore. 

From where I see it, KIS principle works here just fine. It also builds a submarine that has solid export potential. The expertise are coming - PN is getting ToT and hands-on training to train a new generation of Pakistani naval architects and engineers, after the 8 boats are build, PN will build nuclear SSNs and SSBNs. A mini submarine would be an easy side project. 

In summary:
Blueprints, documentation, specifications from the NK / Iran via third party
Subsystems and technical support from Turkey / China (sub-assembly kits can be built by Chinese suppliers with documentation from NK / Iran)

You could, in theory, do the same with an Italian designer. As far as Italian industry is concerned, they want to sell - they are out to make a profit. The price just has to be right.


----------



## MastanKhan

Armchair said:


> Hi Bilal,
> 
> Can't argue with what Bilal Khan 777 is saying but does PN really need a high end mini submarine when, in its own words, the mini submarine project is a footnote to the main projects in the PN.
> 
> The easiest way to get rid of a project is to make the requirements overly complex and then claim its too expensive / can't be done.
> 
> Now, if Iran and North Korea can build submarines in this class, by whatever means that may be, Pakistan is perfectly capable of building the very same submarine, in fact a considerably better one given the suppliers and technologies available to the PN. You could get the deal through a middle-man that is not North Korea or Iran, to stay above controversy, upgrade some of the basic systems (get the Turkish weapons and command consoles, Chinese lithium ion batteries). And you have a cheap and effective submarine that threatens India's major ports on the Western shore.
> 
> From where I see it, KIS principle works here just fine. It also builds a submarine that has solid export potential. The expertise are coming - PN is getting ToT and hands-on training to train a new generation of Pakistani naval architects and engineers, after the 8 boats are build, PN will build nuclear SSNs and SSBNs. A mini submarine would be an easy side project.
> 
> In summary:
> Blueprints, documentation, specifications from the NK / Iran via third party
> Subsystems and technical support from Turkey / China (sub-assembly kits can be built by Chinese suppliers with documentation from NK / Iran)
> 
> You could, in theory, do the same with an Italian designer. As far as Italian industry is concerned, they want to sell - they are out to make a profit. The price just has to be right.



Hi,

The capability of subs that iran and N korea have---pakistan can build mini subs better than them---but better does not mean that it meets the minimal standards as both the Bilal's mentioned in their post---.

One has to remember---Pak navy sub fleet is one of the oldest in asia---our sub fleet in experience was only second to Japan in the region---( plz correct me on that )---.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Armchair

Fair enough. Surely the decision makers know what they are doing, and those in the industry and with technical know-how know better.


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> The capability of subs that iran and N korea have---pakistan can build mini subs better than them---but better does not mean that it meets the minimal standards as both the Bilal's mentioned in their post---.
> 
> One has to remember---Pak navy sub fleet is one of the oldest in asia---or sub fleet in experience was only second to Japan in the region---( plz correct me on that )---.


For what it's worth ... Pakistan did grease its palms with the Italians (e.g. numerous Leonardo purchases), so at least getting DRASS to listen might not be impossible.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MastanKhan

Armchair said:


> Fair enough. Surely the decision makers know what they are doing, and those in the industry and with technical know-how know better.



Hi,

Sometimes they do---and sometimes they don't---.

There is so much information out there in the public that a critical mind can come out with a very good solution.

The problem here is that the technology is leaping forward at such a vast speed---and because of that it takes a lots of discipline to stick with what you planned on---.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## araz

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> I just saw the 3rd-party leaks of the DG-450. Indeed, it's a formidable design relative to the size.


Could you post it as I cant find the relevant material. 
Regards
A

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

araz said:


> Could you post it as I cant find the relevant material.
> Regards
> A


http://www.hisutton.com/DRASS.html

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## khanasifm

Didn’t last modp annual report had a similar mini sub listed as being developed by kse assuming based on previous experience with Italian mini subs ?

If that’s the case and it’s successful than there is no need for Chinese or it could be based on Chinese input who knows

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

khanasifm said:


> Didn’t last modp annual report had a similar mini sub listed as being developed by kse assuming based on previous experience with Italian mini subs ?
> 
> If that’s the case and it’s successful than there is no need for Chinese or it could be based on Chinese input who knows



There was a DGMP project for Midget development but I dont think it went through.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

It is not realistic to obtain drawings from NK or IR. Both are stolen/out of date Italian designs. Most operational compact sub out there in the world has something to do with Italy. This tells you that the only country with real experience is Italians. Rest are hopefuls.

As someone pointed out, Pakistan Navy is one fo the most experienced submarine force in Asia, and a pioneer, including operation of compact submarines. I am sure that PN has plans in place to stay ahead of the curve in SWATS arena.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Armchair

From the link:

Based in La Spezia, conveniently near to the Italian naval Special Forces (COMSUBIN), Drass were close neighbors of Cos.Mo.S during the time that the latter was a major midget submarine and SDV exporter. So it is not entirely Surprising that Drass have taken over the Cos.Mo.S designs after they went out of business (see notes HERE). *Although the fundamental designs are established classics from Cos.Mo.S,* Drass has incorporated up to date lithium-ion battery technology, a new control and navigation module and the latest generation of sensors. 

the 450 seems to be a new design though, its very boxy. Wonder if that helps with stealth. Design suggests this would be a relatively slow submarine. Which compromises the main mission of a simple design that vectors to an Indian port, lets loose, and hurries back home. 
More than the SDV component, I'm interested in a suicide UUV armed with torpedoes. 
Get to the vicinity of an Indian port, launch UUVs, mine anticipated enemy vectors, get out of there. Given open source information (and admittedly a complete lack of professional expertise in the field), the above just seems to most practical and effective solution. 

Get a separate special forces delivery submarine for a Kutch landing, and to neutralize Dwarka. 





*DS4* 4-man SDV 
The DS4 is a minimal evolution of the Cos.Mo.S CE4F project for the* Turkish Navy's SAT* (Su Altı Taarruz) in the late-1990s to early-2000s.

Mini submarines meant havoc and took down hundreds of thousands of tons of enemy shipping in WW2. The natural inclination has always been to make things bigger and badder, in almost any weapons system other than perhaps small arms. With lithium-ion batteries, there is a really effective solution here that would force IN to spend a good portion of its resources in defense.

Imagine also the moral and psychological victory of Indian ports burning. It would be in the news worldwide and something to remember for decades. 

You could even have an SDV with torpedoes, manned to attack a port. Which has its own pros and cons.


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Armchair said:


> From the link:
> 
> Based in La Spezia, conveniently near to the Italian naval Special Forces (COMSUBIN), Drass were close neighbors of Cos.Mo.S during the time that the latter was a major midget submarine and SDV exporter. So it is not entirely Surprising that Drass have taken over the Cos.Mo.S designs after they went out of business (see notes HERE). *Although the fundamental designs are established classics from Cos.Mo.S,* Drass has incorporated up to date lithium-ion battery technology, a new control and navigation module and the latest generation of sensors.
> 
> the 450 seems to be a new design though, its very boxy. Wonder if that helps with stealth. Design suggests this would be a relatively slow submarine. Which compromises the main mission of a simple design that vectors to an Indian port, lets loose, and hurries back home.
> More than the SDV component, I'm interested in a suicide UUV armed with torpedoes.
> Get to the vicinity of an Indian port, launch UUVs, mine anticipated enemy vectors, get out of there. Given open source information (and admittedly a complete lack of professional expertise in the field), the above just seems to most practical and effective solution.
> 
> Get a separate special forces delivery submarine for a Kutch landing, and to neutralize Dwarka.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *DS4* 4-man SDV
> The DS4 is a minimal evolution of the Cos.Mo.S CE4F project for the* Turkish Navy's SAT* (Su Altı Taarruz) in the late-1990s to early-2000s.
> 
> Mini submarines meant havoc and took down hundreds of thousands of tons of enemy shipping in WW2. The natural inclination has always been to make things bigger and badder, in almost any weapons system other than perhaps small arms. With lithium-ion batteries, there is a really effective solution here that would force IN to spend a good portion of its resources in defense.
> 
> Imagine also the moral and psychological victory of Indian ports burning. It would be in the news worldwide and something to remember for decades.
> 
> You could even have an SDV with torpedoes, manned to attack a port. Which has its own pros and cons.



Easy there tiger with your imagery. There is no such thing as "boxy" in this design and lets not put any Indian ports on fire.

Drass was designing midget submarines way before CosMos. I believe most of the design teams moved to successful companies like Drass Galezzi and GSE after they were closed by the Italian Government due to Cardoen affair. The DG450 shows decades of Italian experience of compact submarine design. That is its true pedigree.

The DG 450 seems to be nothing like anything CosMos has ever produced. CosMos was a low cost midget submarine developer. Most of its platforms were manual bare knuckle sort of boats. From the leaked data, DG450 seems to be a very mature, technical, and fully automated approach, what Submariners prefer in a submarine. From the available data, the hull is low noise stealth low acoustic design. There seems to be a bow mounted sonar but its very hard to tell. The tail form is X instead of the conventional rudder of Cosmos. The prop is 5 blade skewed instead of the two blade conventional prop of cosmos MG110 sold to PK. The design shows 03 HWT and 04 LWTs, and carriage for 02 DS4 or DS6 type SDVs. The same area on the upper fairing can infiltrate or recover larger UUVs, or UUVs can be launched from HWTs. The carriage for mines, that is likely for this platform, seems to be internal, probably stern and aft.

The vertical design of the craft is still hydrodynamic and a Naca profile, but designed so that the submarine can be bottomed. The sub will be not be flying in the air that you have to worry about Radar cross section. From the air, the submarine will have hardly any visibility when compared to conventional sub. This design will also be extremely small echo return (the fairing seems anechoic) when the sub turns towards an approaching submarine or ship. This is not a feature for conventional submarines.

Overall, DG450 seems to be a compact submarine (450 tons), that would be effective for coastal operations and force multiplier for conventional submarine, having the ability to do many similar tasks. However, it has a secondary capability for special forces or UUV package delivery/recovery, which will be a big plus. Any special forces insertion or exfiltration maybe one fo the secondary roles for Pakistan Navy, as they study the right platform for their emerging SWATS doctrine.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Armchair

RETHINK:

Perhaps the solution PN wants is two SDVs armed with mini-torpedoes along with a mini-submarine. All three attack a port - devastating as an SDV can carry 8x mini-torpedoes. This maximizes utilization compared to my solution above, as the submarine engages the enemy alongside the SDVs. UUVs may have a difficult time targeting stationary ships at port. 

Two SDVs each carrying 8x mini-torpedoes (see the SDV plans in the link shared by Bilal Q). The mini submarine carrying 4x heavyweight torpedoes attacking from range, with 8x light torpedoes. Within 15 minutes from start of firing they could devastate the entire port. That's a total of 26 torpedoes, each could potentially be 100% on target, given the enemy is caught unawares. 

15 minutes later, the submarines and SDVs have already existed the area. 30 minutes and an Indian port devastated.



Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Easy there tiger with your imagery. There is no such thing as "boxy" in this design and lets not put any Indian ports on fire.
> 
> Drass was designed midget submarines way before CosMos. I believe most the design team moved to successful companies like Drass Galezzi after they were closed by the Italian Government. The DG450 shows decades of Italian experience of compact submarine design. That is its true pedigree.
> 
> The DG 450 seems to be nothing like anything CosMos has ever produced. CosMos was a low cost midget submarine developer. Most of its platforms were manual bare knuckle sort of boats. From the leaked data, DG450 seems to be a very mature, technical, and fully automated approach, what Submarines prefer in a submarine. From the available data, the hull is low noise stealth low acoustic design. There seems to be a bow mounted sonar but its very hard to tell. The tail form is X instead of the conventional rudder of Cosmos. The prop is 5 blade skewed instead of the two blade conventional prop of cosmos MD110 sold to PK. The design shows 03 HWT and 04 LWTs, and carriage for 02 DS4 or DS6 type SDVs. The same area on the upper fairing can infiltrate or recover larger UUVs, or UUVs can be launched from HWTs. The carriage for mines, that is likely for this platform, seems to be internal, probably stern and aft.
> 
> The vertical design of the craft is still hydrodynamic and a Naca profile, but designed so that the submarine can be bottomed. The sub will be not be flying in the air that you have to worry about Radar cross section. From the air, the submarine will have hardly any visibility when compared to conventional sub. This design will also be extremely small echo return (the fairing seems anechoic) when the sub turns towards an approaching submarine or ship. This is not a feature for conventional submarines.
> 
> Overall, DG450 seems to be a compact submarine (450 tons), that would be effective for coastal operations and force multiplier for conventional submarine, having the ability to do many similar tasks. However, it has a secondary capability for special forces or UUV package delivery/recovery, which will be a big plus. Any special forces insertion or exfiltration maybe one fo the secondary roles for Pakistan Navy, as they study the right platform for their emerging SWATS doctrine.



Thanks again. 

Yes, its definitely making sense on second thought. 

The idea of a stealth submarine existed in the US (faceted design showed that sonar stealth was achievable, USN refused due to the design slowing down the submarine a few knots, which was critical for it to keep up with the battle group). 

Thank you very much for the technical reply, that does give me... even more ideas...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## khanmubashir

Imagine an autonomous mini sub like submersible platform capable of launching a wide type of weapons even a ballistic missile

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BHarwana

Pakistan has modified versions MG 110 Italian mini Submarines. Last one was inducted some time back. They were built at Karachi Shipyard.


----------



## Armchair

@Bilal Khan 777 tagging you just in case you missed my edited reply.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> FYI there are a few new options from China's CSIC:
> 
> CSIC MS200
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> displacement: 200 tons | length: 30 m
> crew: 6 + 8 SOF
> range: 120 nm (submerged) | 1,500 nm (surfaced)
> 2 torpedo tubes
> endurance 15 days
> CSIC 600-ton AIP submarine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> displacement: 600 tons | length: 50 m
> crew 15
> range: 400 nm (submerged w/AIP) | 2,000 nm (surfaced)
> 4 torpedo tubes
> endurance: 20 days
> http://www.navyrecognition.com/inde...s-three-new-submarine-designs-for-export.html


Second one is great option specially as it can remain in water for 20 days. 4 to 6 of these could be given mission to hunt down as many enemy subs as they can


----------



## MastanKhan

Zarvan said:


> Second one is great option specially as it can remain in water for 20 days. 4 to 6 of these could be given mission to hunt down as many enemy subs as they can




Hi,

Mini subs don't hunt enemy subs---. Just small naval craft that has run astray or for special operations.

A regular sized subs has a very strong EW suite and massive amount of fire power---.



Armchair said:


> RETHINK:
> 
> Perhaps the solution PN wants is two SDVs armed with mini-torpedoes along with a mini-submarine. All three attack a port - devastating as an SDV can carry 8x mini-torpedoes. This maximizes utilization compared to my solution above, as the submarine engages the enemy alongside the SDVs. UUVs may have a difficult time targeting stationary ships at port.
> 
> Two SDVs each carrying 8x mini-torpedoes (see the SDV plans in the link shared by Bilal Q). The mini submarine carrying 4x heavyweight torpedoes attacking from range, with 8x light torpedoes. Within 15 minutes from start of firing they could devastate the entire port. That's a total of 26 torpedoes, each could potentially be 100% on target, given the enemy is caught unawares.
> 
> 15 minutes later, the submarines and SDVs have already existed the area. 30 minutes and an Indian port devastated.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks again.
> 
> Yes, its definitely making sense on second thought.
> 
> The idea of a stealth submarine existed in the US (faceted design showed that sonar stealth was achievable, USN refused due to the design slowing down the submarine a few knots, which was critical for it to keep up with the battle group).
> 
> Thank you very much for the technical reply, that does give me... even more ideas...



Hi,

I think you need to read up on Joe Buff---.

All US subs are comparatively stealth as compared to the subs of russia and china---.

The Wolfe class sub at Flank speed is quieter than some russian subs sitting in the submarine pen---.

Just like the tactical nucs---what pak navy needs are sub kiloton nuc tipped torps---. If exploded under the keel of an A/C carrier---it will break its back or lift it up and throw it upside down---.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Armchair

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> Mini subs don't hunt enemy subs---. Just small naval craft that has run astray or for special operations.
> 
> A regular sized subs has a very strong EW suite and massive amount of fire power---.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I think you need to read up on Joe Buff---.
> 
> All US subs are comparatively stealth as compared to the subs of russia and china---.
> 
> The Wolfe class sub at Flank speed is quieter than some russian subs sitting in the submarine pen---.
> 
> Just like the tactical nucs---what pak navy needs are sub kiloton nuc tipped torps---. If exploded under the keel of an A/C carrier---it will break its back or lift it up and throw it upside down---.



Thanks, I will check him out. Another nuke experiment done was, instead of using the nuke directly on a ship, they detonated it underwater, creating a tsunami. It was found to damage a flotilla a lot more than air-burst. 

I will try to dig up the article - the folks that developed stealth for fighter aircraft took the ideas to the navy, designing a faceted submarine, which improved stealth even further. Currently stealth is achieved by tiles / other material and acoustic suppression, what they proposed was shaping (faceted, diamond-like shaping). This was rejected, not because it didn't work, but because it slowed down the submarine a few knots. 

I wonder if the gap between Russian / Chinese and US submarines are smaller than at any point in past history.


----------



## MastanKhan

Armchair said:


> Thanks, I will check him out. Another nuke experiment done was, instead of using the nuke directly on a ship, they detonated it underwater, creating a tsunami. It was found to damage a flotilla a lot more than air-burst.
> 
> I will try to dig up the article - the folks that developed stealth for fighter aircraft took the ideas to the navy, designing a faceted submarine, which improved stealth even further. Currently stealth is achieved by tiles / other material and acoustic suppression, what they proposed was shaping (faceted, diamond-like shaping). This was rejected, not because it didn't work, but because it slowed down the submarine a few knots.
> 
> I wonder if the gap between Russian / Chinese and US submarines are smaller than at any point in past history.



Hi,

Joe Buff wrote about it in his work of fiction that I read over a decade ago---.

" 

Deep Sound Channel, 2000.
Thunder in the Deep, 2001.
Crush Depth, 2002.
Tidal Rip, 2003.
Straits of Power, 2004.
Seas of Crisis, 2005. "

I wrote about it here---I guess no one understood the significance---.

With the pump jet technology---yes---the gap has narrowed---but otoh---the US tech has also advanced into other dimensions---.

Well---when an explosion is underwater---it is the concussion that smashes the metal structure from underneath---or crushes a submerged vessel upto a certain distance away---.

Tsunami can be survived by a large ship---but the shock wave of explosion underwater will crush the structure plates / frame from under a ship and throw the ship up in the air---to fall back and sink.

So---it just becomes a proximity explosion---where you really don't want to hit the target but want the explosion to happen deep under the keel.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rafi

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> http://www.hisutton.com/DRASS.html



Interest has been shown for a custom made boat for the PN, based on the 450 design. The PN is especially impressed with the dual role, ie coastal sub and special forces insertion/extraction.

The Italians are keen, and are offering decent terms, PN wants ToT to build these boats at home. Price will decide if a deal takes place.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Rafi said:


> Interest has been shown for a custom made boat for the PN, based on the 450 design. The PN is especially impressed with the dual role, ie coastal sub and special forces insertion/extraction.
> 
> The Italians are keen, and are offering decent terms, PN wants ToT to build these boats at home. Price will decide if a deal takes place.



How many Subs would PN be looking to buy?

guys, someone mentioned Hyundai's compact submarine earlier. Look what I found during my research:

CRITICAL DESIGN ISSUES / OBSERVATIONS WITH HHI KS500A S/M

S No Design Observation Comment
1. Concept An initial concept and not proceeded to engineering design or industrialization
2. Past Experience Shipbuilder has no past or current experience of building compact submarines.
3. Main Propulsion Batteries Li Ion batteries are without a mechanism to charge them at sea in this S/M. S/M cannot dive after first discharge.
4. Main Propulsion Batteries Battery bank cannot be discharged more than 60%, so effectively can only use 40% capacity of the declared endurance.
5. Main Propulsion Batteries Li Ion batteries, if completely discharged, have to be replaced. Batteries are not in a separate compartment or outside the pressure hull so replacement is time consuming.
6. Main Propulsion Batteries Batteries inside the pressure hull. Any chemical event or fire will directly affect the crew with gas exchange in pressurized chamber / hull.
7. Autonomy loss Declared autonomy is 2000NM but gets adjusted to 1200NM due to above observation.
8. Flank / conformal Array Sonar S/M does not have appropriate length to use the flank /conformal array capabilities specifically in lower frequencies due to limited length, hence very limited range.
9. Non-Compliant rescue solution The vessel is not compatible and compliant with NATO standard S/M rescue requirements and methods.
10. Sail design obstruction The “built in” sail design does not allow crew movement from bow to stern.
11. Emergency Power Generator S/M has no emergency generator in the design, putting life safety at risk.
12. Questionable Propulsion System The propulsion system has design issues, and still not perfected in many S/Ms such as Kilo class.
13. No Torpedo Defence The Bow mounted sonar can detect incoming torpedo but submarine has no countermeasure launchers.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Rafi

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> How many Subs would PN be looking to buy?
> 
> guys, someone mentioned Hyundai's compact submarine earlier. Look what I found during my research:
> 
> CRITICAL DESIGN ISSUES / OBSERVATIONS WITH HHI KS500A S/M
> 
> S No Design Observation Comment
> 1. Concept An initial concept and not proceeded to engineering design or industrialization
> 2. Past Experience Shipbuilder has no past or current experience of building compact submarines.
> 3. Main Propulsion Batteries Li Ion batteries are without a mechanism to charge them at sea in this S/M. S/M cannot dive after first discharge.
> 4. Main Propulsion Batteries Battery bank cannot be discharged more than 60%, so effectively can only use 40% capacity of the declared endurance.
> 5. Main Propulsion Batteries Li Ion batteries, if completely discharged, have to be replaced. Batteries are not in a separate compartment or outside the pressure hull so replacement is time consuming.
> 6. Main Propulsion Batteries Batteries inside the pressure hull. Any chemical event or fire will directly affect the crew with gas exchange in pressurized chamber / hull.
> 7. Autonomy loss Declared autonomy is 2000NM but gets adjusted to 1200NM due to above observation.
> 8. Flank / conformal Array Sonar S/M does not have appropriate length to use the flank /conformal array capabilities specifically in lower frequencies due to limited length, hence very limited range.
> 9. Non-Compliant rescue solution The vessel is not compatible and compliant with NATO standard S/M rescue requirements and methods.
> 10. Sail design obstruction The “built in” sail design does not allow crew movement from bow to stern.
> 11. Emergency Power Generator S/M has no emergency generator in the design, putting life safety at risk.
> 12. Questionable Propulsion System The propulsion system has design issues, and still not perfected in many S/Ms such as Kilo class.
> 13. No Torpedo Defence The Bow mounted sonar can detect incoming torpedo but submarine has no countermeasure launchers.



3 and also licence producing in house.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## syed_yusuf

Rafi said:


> 3 and also licence producing in house.


why just 3, is it to replace existing ones or to add to them ..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Thorough Pro

The real issue in the past experiment was the radiation that came with the tidal wave. There was no way to get rid of that and the ships needed to be abandoned



MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> Joe Buff wrote about it in his work of fiction that I read over a decade ago---.
> 
> "
> 
> Deep Sound Channel, 2000.
> Thunder in the Deep, 2001.
> Crush Depth, 2002.
> Tidal Rip, 2003.
> Straits of Power, 2004.
> Seas of Crisis, 2005. "
> 
> I wrote about it here---I guess no one understood the significance---.
> 
> With the pump jet technology---yes---the gap has narrowed---but otoh---the US tech has also advanced into other dimensions---.
> 
> Well---when an explosion is underwater---it is the concussion that smashes the metal structure from underneath---or crushes a submerged vessel upto a certain distance away---.
> 
> Tsunami can be survived by a large ship---but the shock wave of explosion underwater will crush the structure plates / frame from under a ship and throw the ship up in the air---to fall back and sink.
> 
> So---it just becomes a proximity explosion---where you really don't want to hit the target but want the explosion to happen deep under the keel.


----------



## ghazi52

*AhmAd IbrAhim*‏ @AhmAdTipu7

Pakistan Navy is interested in Italian DG 450 Midget submarine for replacing its Cosmos MG110 Midgets. DG 450 can serve as Shallow Water attack sub as well as for underwater carrier for special ops. Total numbers and price tag is unknown yet and discussions are in initial phase

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Rafi

syed_yusuf said:


> why just 3, is it to replace existing ones or to add to them ..



Negotiations are to purchase 3 outright and then to licence produce design with indigenous systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Rafi said:


> Negotiations are to purchase 3 outright and then to licence produce design with indigenous systems.


Is the idea to build a sizable mini-SSK fleet ... e.g. 9-12 in total for A2/AD AShW and ASW?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rafi

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Is the idea to build a sizable mini-SSK fleet ... e.g. 9-12 in total for A2/AD AShW and ASW?



Yes sizeable number to be able to send multiple spec forces teams insertion/extraction.

And also to use them to patrol coast and EEZ.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Armchair

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> Joe Buff wrote about it in his work of fiction that I read over a decade ago---.
> 
> "
> 
> Deep Sound Channel, 2000.
> Thunder in the Deep, 2001.
> Crush Depth, 2002.
> Tidal Rip, 2003.
> Straits of Power, 2004.
> Seas of Crisis, 2005. "
> 
> I wrote about it here---I guess no one understood the significance---.
> 
> With the pump jet technology---yes---the gap has narrowed---but otoh---the US tech has also advanced into other dimensions---.
> 
> Well---when an explosion is underwater---it is the concussion that smashes the metal structure from underneath---or crushes a submerged vessel upto a certain distance away---.
> 
> Tsunami can be survived by a large ship---but the shock wave of explosion underwater will crush the structure plates / frame from under a ship and throw the ship up in the air---to fall back and sink.
> 
> So---it just becomes a proximity explosion---where you really don't want to hit the target but want the explosion to happen deep under the keel.



There were some actual experiments the US did with nuclear weapons and retired ships. I am trying to rack my brain for it. It was found that exploding them underwater was far more effective than exploding them air burst.

Bilal Khan 777 does it again - he has found the exact thing that PN needs. I just hope they can build them in numbers, and if possible, in the future design one themselves and export it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MastanKhan

Armchair said:


> There were some actual experiments the US did with nuclear weapons and retired ships. I am trying to rack my brain for it. It was found that exploding them underwater was far more effective than exploding them air burst.
> .



Hi,

that is what I stated in my post on this issue and the same thing I wrote about 1/2 a decade ago---.

Mini sub kilotonnuc---detonated underwater under the enemy ship or subs---

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Rafi said:


> 3 and also licence producing in house.



So this seems as a new CONOPS in PN for coastal subs, expansion of special forces domain, and additional tasks.
This seems like a smart move on part of PN. Coastal sub costs less than a conventional platform, but is able to do a lot of the same tasks.



Armchair said:


> There were some actual experiments the US did with nuclear weapons and retired ships. I am trying to rack my brain for it. It was found that exploding them underwater was far more effective than exploding them air burst.
> 
> Bilal Khan 777 does it again - he has found the exact thing that PN needs. I just hope they can build them in numbers, and if possible, in the future design one themselves and export it.



Just good research i think.



MUSTAKSHAF said:


> *1-Sang-O II / K-300 [North Korea]
> 2-Fateh Class [Iran]
> 3- HDS-500 Midget Submarine*
> 
> The HDS-500 design features a distinct streamlines sail and 'X' form tail mounted _behind_ an integrated pumpjet. Less obvious innovations include a mini wet-dry hangar in the tail.
> 
> 
> a) Flexible Payoad Module (FPM)
> b) Integrated sail
> c) Intercept sonar
> d) Hatches for Payload Modules
> e) 533mm (21") torpedo tube (x2)
> f) Conformal sonar array
> g) 324mm (12.75") torpedo tubes (x4)
> 
> 
> *Specification*
> Length: 37 meters
> Beam: 4.5 meter
> Displacement: 510 tons surfaced
> Speed: Maximum 20 kt submerged, 7 kt cruising
> Operating depth: 250 meters
> Endurance : 21 days, 2,000 nautical miles
> Armament: 2 x 533mm (21") heavyweight torpedoes and 4 x 324mm (12.75") lightweight torpedoes.
> Crew: 10 plus 4 combat swimmers
> http://www.hisutton.com/News - Korea building new HDS-400 midget submarine.html
> 
> 
> Why not pump-jet propulsors,they would allow them to operate in shallow waters.



This is the feedback of your Korean submarine from my submariner friends:

CRITICAL DESIGN ISSUES / OBSERVATIONS WITH HHI KS500A S/M

1. Concept:An initial concept and not proceeded to engineering design or industrialization
2. Past Experience: Shipbuilder has no past or current experience of building compact submarines.
3. Main Propulsion Batteries: Li Ion batteries are without a mechanism to charge them at sea in this S/M. S/M cannot dive after first discharge.
4. Main Propulsion Batteries: Battery bank cannot be discharged more than 60%, so effectively can only use 40% capacity of the declared endurance.
5. Main Propulsion Batteries: Li Ion batteries, if completely discharged, have to be replaced. Batteries are not in a separate compartment or outside the pressure hull so replacement is time consuming.
6. Main Propulsion Batteries: Batteries inside the pressure hull. Any chemical event or fire will directly affect the crew with gas exchange in pressurized chamber / hull.
7. Autonomy loss: Declared autonomy is 2000NM but gets adjusted to 1200NM due to above observation.
8. Flank / conformal Array Sonar: S/M does not have appropriate length to use the flank /conformal array capabilities specifically in lower frequencies due to limited length, hence very limited range.
9. Non-Compliant rescue solution: The vessel is not compatible and compliant with NATO standard S/M rescue requirements and methods.
10. Sail design obstruction: The “built in” sail design does not allow crew movement from bow to stern.
11. Emergency Power Generator: S/M has no emergency generator in the design, putting life safety at risk.
12. Questionable Propulsion System: The propulsion system has design issues, and still not perfected in many S/Ms such as Kilo class.
13. No Torpedo Defence: The Bow mounted sonar can detect incoming torpedo but submarine has no countermeasure launchers.
14. No AIP System: The submarine data does not show any AIP system for further U/W endurance during critical operations.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sine Nomine

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> This is the feedback of your Korean submarine from my submariner friends:
> 
> CRITICAL DESIGN ISSUES / OBSERVATIONS WITH HHI KS500A S/M


So,she is out of Question for us.
Sir,we have experience in this field,why don't we try ourselves?


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

MUSTAKSHAF said:


> So,she is out of Question for us.
> Sir,we have experience in this field,why don't we try ourselves?



I strongly believe we should try, but with experienced hands on deck.



MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> that is what I stated in my post on this issue and the same thing I wrote about 1/2 a decade ago---.
> 
> Mini sub kilotonnuc---detonated underwater under the enemy ship or subs---



The mini-subs in PN will always remain conventional.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sine Nomine

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> I strongly believe we should try, but with experienced hands on deck.


Yes,we can because we have lot of experience with Italian midget subs and french agosta class.
That sure would come in handy.


----------



## MastanKhan

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> I strongly believe we should try, but with experienced hands on deck.
> 
> 
> 
> The mini-subs in PN will always remain conventional.



Hi,

Sir---I am not talking about the 'mini sub'---I am talking about a nuctippedtorped with under 1 kiloton yield---would wreak havoc when it explodes under the keel of a ship or in the viccinity of another sub---.

A sub could be crushed at a distance away from the explosion due to concussion effect---.


----------



## dBSPL

With its conventional diesel electric propulsion, low-resistance plate and low self-defense capability, these mini-subwater-vehicles have no chance in the open seas. These tools must be unmanned.


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> I strongly believe we should try, but with experienced hands on deck.
> 
> 
> 
> The mini-subs in PN will always remain conventional.


I agree with the conventional point. However, it'd be very interesting if there's a way to add in a ASCM/LACM, even a small one with 120 km range. If anything, it offers an additional ability to attack India's coastal assets, especially from a platform that might be tough to detect in busy port waters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> I agree with the conventional point. However, it'd be very interesting if there's a way to add in a ASCM/LACM, even a small one with 120 km range. If anything, it offers an additional ability to attack India's coastal assets, especially from a platform that might be tough to detect in busy port waters.



I am sure Pakistan Navy has some very interesting ideas on how to employ combat submarines, when they are fully inducted.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Is there any progress on this progress or has it been shelved?


----------



## Quwa

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Is there any progress on this progress or has it been shelved?


The idea was last officially discussed in IDEAS 2016 (followed by the MoDP report talking about KSEW building a mini-SSK). I suppose we'll find out more (positively or negatively) in IDEAS 2018.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Quwa said:


> The idea was last officially discussed in IDEAS 2016 (followed by the MoDP report talking about KSEW building a mini-SSK). I suppose we'll find out more (positively or negatively) in IDEAS 2018.



I highly doubt anything will be discussed at Ideas 2018.


----------



## ziya

general director of turkish company STM said that we are working on mini sub design

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

ziya said:


> general director of turkish company STM said that we are working on mini sub design



They are pushing a non-built German design, that is only at concept. STM is a builder, and not a designer. They do not have any experience of submarine design, let alone a small submarine which is twice as difficult since you have put all the same machinery in a small space. Lets see what PN decides.


----------



## Hassan Guy

Quwa said:


> The idea was last officially discussed in IDEAS 2016 (followed by the MoDP report talking about KSEW building a mini-SSK). I suppose we'll find out more (positively or negatively) in IDEAS 2018.


Don't tell me Zaravn made it to KSEW's stall before you did.


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Hassan Guy said:


> Don't tell me Zaravn made it to KSEW's stall before you did.


I spoke to the PN and KSEW, but after the 3rd or 4th question, I just felt ashamed to ask any further Lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dBSPL

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> They are pushing a non-built German design, that is only at concept. STM is a builder, and not a designer. They do not have any experience of submarine design, let alone a small submarine which is twice as difficult since you have put all the same machinery in a small space. Lets see what PN decides.




STM is designer and system engineer company. Also worldwide company on project management. It is one of the few companies that can be among the top 100 defense companies in the world without any production infrastructure. In 5 years they will become one of the top 50 defense companies in the world. Currently one of Turkey's most important engineering companies.

The company is currently in charge of the modernization of Agosta class submarines belonging to the Pakistani navy and to Reis Class(Located very serious differences in design, fully customized system by Turkey). In addition, the MG110 Cosmos class, which is no longer capable of responding to any operational need, They working on a solution with AIP propulsion instead of pocket submarines since 2016. The Turkish navy is also working on MILDEN, which is independent of this project, and the responsibility for this project will probably be on the STM. Another example is Milgem project, which Pakistan Navy will be a primary user and learn its production infrastructure, all are STM's responsibility. Or largest ship in the Pakistan Navy, PNS Moawin, all engineering services camed from STM.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hexciter

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> They are pushing a non-built German design, that is only at concept. STM is a builder, and not a designer. They do not have any experience of submarine design, let alone a small submarine which is twice as difficult since you have put all the same machinery in a small space. Lets see what PN decides.



Isn’t she the company who let you build your fleet support ship and modernize the French submarines?


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

dBSPL said:


> STM is designer and system engineer company. Also worldwide company on project management. It is one of the few companies that can be among the top 100 defense companies in the world without any production infrastructure. In 5 years they will become one of the top 50 defense companies in the world. Currently one of Turkey's most important engineering companies.
> 
> The company is currently in charge of the modernization of Agosta class submarines belonging to the Pakistani navy and to Reis Class(Located very serious differences in design, fully customized system by Turkey). In addition, the MG110 Cosmos class, which is no longer capable of responding to any operational need, They working on a solution with AIP propulsion instead of pocket submarines since 2016. The Turkish navy is also working on MILDEN, which is independent of this project, and the responsibility for this project will probably be on the STM. Another example is Milgem project, which Pakistan Navy will be a primary user and learn its production infrastructure, all are STM's responsibility. Or largest ship in the Pakistan Navy, PNS Moawin, all engineering services camed from STM.



STM is a shipyard and project management company. They are not designing any submarines. They have done nothing for MG110. They are only providing TKMS and other german solutions packaged as Turkish systems. Milgem project for Pakistan has already gone to ASFAT and will be done by Istanbul Shipyard. PNS Moawin is a prototype that has not been designed by STM, but a third naval design company in Turkey.



Hexciter said:


> Isn’t she the company who let you build your fleet support ship and modernize the French submarines?



Yes, and indeed, but does that mean they are making mini-submarines now or any submarine for that matter? What is their submarine design history? Which Turkish Navy submarine have they designed? Talk reality, not fiction.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dBSPL

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> STM is a shipyard and project management company. They are not designing any submarines. They have done nothing for MG110. They are only providing TKMS and other german solutions packaged as Turkish systems. Milgem project for Pakistan has already gone to ASFAT and will be done by Istanbul Shipyard. PNS Moawin is a prototype that has not been designed by STM, but a third naval design company in Turkey.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and indeed, but does that mean they are making mini-submarines now or any submarine for that matter? What is their submarine design history? Which Turkish Navy submarine have they designed? Talk reality, not fiction.



STM has been heavily involved in the naval project particularly in last 10 years. With the development of Turkish Navy National Corvette Program (MiLGEM), STM has been authorized to improve Turkey’s indigenous capability of naval shipbuilding and modernization as well as using the deep-routed experience of Turkey in order to provide solutions for Turkish Navy and allied & friendly countries.
The specialization areas of STM in Naval Projects are;


*Design services*
Project management
Naval shipbuilding and modernization
Platform and system integration
Acquisition services for systems and materials
Infrastructural and organizational planning
Repair and maintenance activities
Test and Trials
Integrated Logistics Support (ILS)
Through life cycle management
Research and Development
Feasibility studies and Consultancy
PROJECTS
The major naval shipbuilding and modernization programs of STM including;


MiLGEM-Ada Class Corvettes (Turkish Navy National Corvette Program)
Pakistan Navy Fleet Tanker (PNFT) Project
Modernization of Turkish Navy Type-209 Class Submarines
Turkish Navy New Type Submarine Building Project 
Turkish Navy Replenishment at Sea and Combat Support Ship Project

So here is my question , where is STM shipyard ?
Please show us. (In fact , STM is not a shipyard. )



Bilal Khan 777 said:


> other german solutions packaged as Turkish systems.



Please learn a little about it, before answering with your memorizations.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rafi

The Italians will be the way ToT, other options only if that falls through.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

dBSPL said:


> STM has been heavily involved in the naval project particularly in last 10 years. With the development of Turkish Navy National Corvette Program (MiLGEM), STM has been authorized to improve Turkey’s indigenous capability of naval shipbuilding and modernization as well as using the deep-routed experience of Turkey in order to provide solutions for Turkish Navy and allied & friendly countries.
> The specialization areas of STM in Naval Projects are;
> 
> 
> *Design services*
> Project management
> Naval shipbuilding and modernization
> Platform and system integration
> Acquisition services for systems and materials
> Infrastructural and organizational planning
> Repair and maintenance activities
> Test and Trials
> Integrated Logistics Support (ILS)
> Through life cycle management
> Research and Development
> Feasibility studies and Consultancy
> PROJECTS
> The major naval shipbuilding and modernization programs of STM including;
> 
> 
> MiLGEM-Ada Class Corvettes (Turkish Navy National Corvette Program)
> Pakistan Navy Fleet Tanker (PNFT) Project
> Modernization of Turkish Navy Type-209 Class Submarines
> Turkish Navy New Type Submarine Building Project
> Turkish Navy Replenishment at Sea and Combat Support Ship Project
> 
> So here is my question , where is STM shipyard ?
> Please show us. (In fact , STM is not a shipyard. )
> 
> 
> 
> Please learn a little about it, before answering with your memorizations.



You seemed to be deeply, commercially, or emotionally connected with STM. May the force be with you.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## dBSPL

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> You seemed to be deeply, commercially, or emotionally connected with STM. May the force be with you.


You claimed that STM is a shipyard, and you said that STM has a construction activity. However, there is a company offering engineering services. And when we answer that, you respond absurdly. Sorry but when STM, one of the world's top 100 defense companies, doesn't need me here. It's a pity that you're answering this way when we want to be nice to you.

In the field of STM marine systems, TF4500 frigate, TTHB corvette, MILDEN TS1700 and AIP midget submarine design activities are concentrated. With IDEF 2019, we will see the process of these projects.

STM's most important job now is the Supply and Combat Support Ship Project, whose contract was recently signed. (DIMDEG)

In this context,

-Form Optimization and Model Experiments,
-Dimensioning and structural analysis required for ship design,
-3-D CAD / CAE activities,
-Design of the ship's electrical system,
-Design of Air Suction System and Exhaust System, analyzes and settlements,
-Supply and inspection of the technical information required from the manufacturer regarding the system / devices foreseen to be included in the ship have been completed by stm.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

dBSPL said:


> You claimed that STM is a shipyard, and you said that STM has a construction activity. However, there is a company offering engineering services. And when we answer that, you respond absurdly. Sorry but when STM, one of the world's top 100 defense companies, doesn't need me here. It's a pity that you're answering this way when we want to be nice to you.
> 
> In the field of STM marine systems, TF4500 frigate, TTHB corvette, MILDEN TS1700 and AIP midget submarine design activities are concentrated. With IDEF 2019, we will see the process of these projects.
> 
> STM's most important job now is the Supply and Combat Support Ship Project, whose contract was recently signed. (DIMDEG)
> 
> In this context,
> 
> -Form Optimization and Model Experiments,
> -Dimensioning and structural analysis required for ship design,
> -3-D CAD / CAE activities,
> -Design of the ship's electrical system,
> -Design of Air Suction System and Exhaust System, analyzes and settlements,
> -Supply and inspection of the technical information required from the manufacturer regarding the system / devices foreseen to be included in the ship have been completed by stm.



why did STM, the greatest company on this planet, lose the Milgem project in Pakistan?

Coming back to the topic, what SWAT submarine have they designed and is in production?


----------



## dBSPL

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> why did STM, the greatest company on this planet, lose the Milgem project in Pakistan?
> 
> Coming back to the topic, what SWAT submarine have they designed and is in production?


What is the reason for this cynical attitude? Is it because I criticized the lies you said above? First of all, instead of making fun with me, pretending to be an honorable person is expected to correct your misinformation above. The courtesy language is important to me. Please show your sensitivity.

First, the STM is not the greatest, yet in the 97th place. The 2025 target is the first 50. It's just a 10-year-old company. https://people.defensenews.com/top-100/

Work on the TS1700 submarine concept is underway. In the last press briefing, promising explanations were made and we expect IDEF 2019 for the actual presentation.

More detailed information on the submarine subject is here http://c4news.me/nedvq , you can use translator. STM's general manager explains that the design activities were started with the company's own resources. (In this respect, it is similar to TF4500)

ADA class, which is the base model of the first 3 corvettes purchased by Pakistan; ship design, classification services, model tests, design services for main propulsion systems and all other systems, construction equipment to be used during the construction of the ship, provided partly or completly by STM.

Meanwhile, the MILGEMs to be produced in Pakistan are under the responsibility of Asfat, but who is responsible for the infrastructure improvements of the shipyard? Could it be STM?https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/turkeys-stm-wins-pakistani-naval-infrastructure-contract.509902/

The MILGEM program is a much longer and more comprehensive program and is originally planned for the Turkish Navy. Therefore, the workload of STM is being used in the MILGEM program. But I suppose you still claim STM is a shipyard and kind of blue collar company? Pakistan is the country that wants to acquire this infrastructure. Asfat is a state-owned subsidiary where military factories and naval shipyards are assembled around the country. In other words, it is a component of the same central structure, although it has no organic link with TSKGV companies.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## cabatli_53

dBSPL said:


> What is the reason for this cynical attitude? Is it because I criticized the lies you said above? First of all, instead of making fun with me, pretending to be an honorable person is expected to correct your misinformation above. The courtesy language is important to me. Please show your sensitivity.
> 
> First, the STM is not the greatest, yet in the 97th place. The 2025 target is the first 50. It's just a 10-year-old company. https://people.defensenews.com/top-100/
> 
> Work on the TS1700 submarine concept is underway. In the last press briefing, promising explanations were made and we expect IDEF 2019 for the actual presentation.
> 
> More detailed information on the submarine subject is here http://c4news.me/nedvq , you can use translator. STM's general manager explains that the design activities were started with the company's own resources. (In this respect, it is similar to TF4500)
> 
> ADA class, which is the base model of the first 3 corvettes purchased by Pakistan; ship design, classification services, model tests, design services for main propulsion systems and all other systems, construction equipment to be used during the construction of the ship, provided partly or completly by STM.
> 
> Meanwhile, the MILGEMs to be produced in Pakistan are under the responsibility of Asfat, but who is responsible for the infrastructure improvements of the shipyard? Could it be STM?https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/turkeys-stm-wins-pakistani-naval-infrastructure-contract.509902/
> 
> The MILGEM program is a much longer and more comprehensive program and is originally planned for the Turkish Navy. Therefore, the workload of STM is being used in the MILGEM program. But I suppose you still claim STM is a shipyard and kind of blue collar company? Pakistan is the country that wants to acquire this infrastructure. Asfat is a state-owned subsidiary where military factories and naval shipyards are assembled around the country. In other words, it is a component of the same central structure, although it has no organic link with TSKGV companies.




Bro, Best thing to do is to let him alone. I have tried to discuss with this guy before when he claimed “Aselpod is an Israeli product Turks just producing minor things under licence bla bla” but It never serve the purpose. Generally, He firstly make an absurd claims about any thing without any source/background info as if he know something that others don’t know, then hope to get good attention and respect. No matter How false his claims are. When someone told him to prove what He is talking, He starts telling with a rude attitude How professional background He has and How old is he. If you tell him that What He is talking is certainly not true, then He starts playing as if a serious official reprehending a small boy while implying how delusional and brainwashed you are. I think He has serious problems in his life so That must be the way getting attention and respect in social area. Let him to talk whatever he want. Let him suppose STM is a shipyard or STM lost in Pakistani Milgem deal or whatever He want...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

dBSPL said:


> What is the reason for this cynical attitude? Is it because I criticized the lies you said above? First of all, instead of making fun with me, pretending to be an honorable person is expected to correct your misinformation above. The courtesy language is important to me. Please show your sensitivity.
> 
> First, the STM is not the greatest, yet in the 97th place. The 2025 target is the first 50. It's just a 10-year-old company. https://people.defensenews.com/top-100/
> 
> Work on the TS1700 submarine concept is underway. In the last press briefing, promising explanations were made and we expect IDEF 2019 for the actual presentation.
> 
> More detailed information on the submarine subject is here http://c4news.me/nedvq , you can use translator. STM's general manager explains that the design activities were started with the company's own resources. (In this respect, it is similar to TF4500)
> 
> ADA class, which is the base model of the first 3 corvettes purchased by Pakistan; ship design, classification services, model tests, design services for main propulsion systems and all other systems, construction equipment to be used during the construction of the ship, provided partly or completly by STM.
> 
> Meanwhile, the MILGEMs to be produced in Pakistan are under the responsibility of Asfat, but who is responsible for the infrastructure improvements of the shipyard? Could it be STM?https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/turkeys-stm-wins-pakistani-naval-infrastructure-contract.509902/
> 
> The MILGEM program is a much longer and more comprehensive program and is originally planned for the Turkish Navy. Therefore, the workload of STM is being used in the MILGEM program. But I suppose you still claim STM is a shipyard and kind of blue collar company? Pakistan is the country that wants to acquire this infrastructure. Asfat is a state-owned subsidiary where military factories and naval shipyards are assembled around the country. In other words, it is a component of the same central structure, although it has no organic link with TSKGV companies.



What SWAT submarine have they designed, and which one is in production?



cabatli_53 said:


> Bro, Best thing to do is to let him alone. I have tried to discuss with this guy before when he claimed “Aselpod is an Israeli product Turks just producing minor things under licence bla bla” but It never serve the purpose. Generally, He firstly make an absurd claims about any thing without any source/background info as if he know something that others don’t know, then hope to get good attention and respect. No matter How false his claims are. When someone told him to prove what He is talking, He starts telling with a rude attitude How professional background He has and How old is he. If you tell him that What He is talking is certainly not true, then He starts playing as if a serious official reprehending a small boy while implying how delusional and brainwashed you are. I think He has serious problems in his life so That must be the way getting attention and respect in social area. Let him to talk whatever he want. Let him suppose STM is a shipyard or STM lost in Pakistani Milgem deal or whatever He want...



Have you seen Aselpod in the factory? Have you been to Aselsan? My absurd claims are just my opinion. You dont have to agree. Yes, this is my way of getting attention. Long live STM and its followers, cheer leaders, and fan base.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## dBSPL

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Have you seen Aselpod in the factory? Have you been to Aselsan? My absurd claims are just my opinion. You dont have to agree. Yes, this is my way of getting attention. Long live STM and its followers, cheer leaders, and fan base.


You used a completely false expression here, and those who wanted to fix it we're cheerleader?



Bilal Khan 777 said:


> STM is a shipyard ...
> They are not designing any submarines...
> They are only providing TKMS and other german solutions packaged as Turkish systems...



and many more...

You Shamelessly lying here and responding with only insults to those who respond your claims. Honor is an important for me and I prefer to talk with those who value it.

It is not my choice to have STM as its main partner in Pakistan's new naval infrastructure and many floating platforms. However, if you are uncomfortable with this, you should explain this with honesty. Not with lying.




Bilal Khan 777 said:


> What SWAT submarine have they designed, and which one is in production?



As I said above, the company's design activities for two different submarine concept systems are driven by their own resources. In the context of MILDEN, the TS1700 concept is already introduced and we will see the realistic projection at Idef 2019 after 5 months.

Are you expecting only a 10-year-old company that uses most of its capacity with its DIMDEG, REIS class and MILGEM to build ships with its own resources on a matter that is not a priority for the country's navy? Are you really sure you have information in this industry? Launching ship without taking the order? Is there an example of this in the world? As a designer or system engineer ? Partly but What the BMT is doing in England, STM try to make same here, in naval systems.










There are 3 main platforms which are design activities are shared with press and scale models are introduced in international maritime fairs. With derivatives total 5 platform creating by current activities of the design department. TF4500, TTHB, TS1700,These projects are run by the company's own resources, independent from jobs given by SSB such as DIMDEG, MILGEM etc.You can find images and information about these topics on the Internet. Or come to IDEF and ask the authorities yourself.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

dBSPL said:


> You used a completely false expression here, and those who wanted to fix it we're cheerleader?
> 
> 
> 
> and many more...
> 
> You Shamelessly lying here and responding with only insults to those who respond your claims. Honor is an important for me and I prefer to talk with those who value it.
> 
> It is not my choice to have STM as its main partner in Pakistan's new naval infrastructure and many floating platforms. However, if you are uncomfortable with this, you should explain this with honesty. Not with lying.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As I said above, the company's design activities for two different submarine concept systems are driven by their own resources. In the context of MILDEN, the TS1700 concept is already introduced and we will see the realistic projection at Idef 2019 after 5 months.
> 
> Are you expecting only a 10-year-old company that uses most of its capacity with its DIMDEG, REIS class and MILGEM to build ships with its own resources on a matter that is not a priority for the country's navy? Are you really sure you have information in this industry? Launching ship without taking the order? Is there an example of this in the world? As a designer or system engineer ? Partly but What the BMT is doing in England, STM try to make same here, in naval systems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are 3 main platforms which are design activities are shared with press and scale models are introduced in international maritime fairs. With derivatives total 5 platform creating by current activities of the design department. TF4500, TTHB, TS1700,These projects are run by the company's own resources, independent from jobs given by SSB such as DIMDEG, MILGEM etc.You can find images and information about these topics on the Internet. Or come to IDEF and ask the authorities yourself.



Thank you


----------



## MastanKhan

dBSPL said:


> You used a completely false expression here, and those who wanted to fix it we're cheerleader?
> 
> 
> 
> and many more...
> 
> You Shamelessly lying here and responding with only insults to those who respond your claims. Honor is an important for me and I prefer to talk with those who value it.
> 
> It is not my choice to have STM as its main partner in Pakistan's new naval infrastructure and many floating platforms. However, if you are uncomfortable with this, you should explain this with honesty. Not with lying.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As I said above, the company's design activities for two different submarine concept systems are driven by their own resources. In the context of MILDEN, the TS1700 concept is already introduced and we will see the realistic projection at Idef 2019 after 5 months.
> 
> Are you expecting only a 10-year-old company that uses most of its capacity with its DIMDEG, REIS class and MILGEM to build ships with its own resources on a matter that is not a priority for the country's navy? Are you really sure you have information in this industry? Launching ship without taking the order? Is there an example of this in the world? As a designer or system engineer ? Partly but What the BMT is doing in England, STM try to make same here, in naval systems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are 3 main platforms which are design activities are shared with press and scale models are introduced in international maritime fairs. With derivatives total 5 platform creating by current activities of the design department. TF4500, TTHB, TS1700,These projects are run by the company's own resources, independent from jobs given by SSB such as DIMDEG, MILGEM etc.You can find images and information about these topics on the Internet. Or come to IDEF and ask the authorities yourself.



Hi,

Are you affiliated with those companies---?


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> Are you affiliated with those companies---?


Is there a basis to this question?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MastanKhan

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Is there a basis to this question?



Hi,

Yessir---he was coming on a little too strong---so just wanted to know if his confidence in his statement had any substance to it or is it just hot air ( nationalism )---.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> Yessir---he was coming on a little too strong---so just wanted to know if his confidence in his statement had any substance to it or is it just hot air ( nationalism )---.



I wonder too.


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> Yessir---he was coming on a little too strong---so just wanted to know if his confidence in his statement had any substance to it or is it just hot air ( nationalism )---.


So there is no basis, just cynicism borne out of pettiness and an inability to argue back with verifiable facts?

Seriously, "coming on a little too strong" ?? @dBSPL and @cabatli_53's confidence comes from years of following their country's defence developments. Evidently unlike others here, those two actually follow what Ismail Demir, Temel Kotil, Davut Yilmaz, etc say to the media, read magazines like MSI to see what TUBITAK-SAGE, STM, etc are up to, and practically everything else an informed Pakistani defence enthusiast would do re: JF-17.

What you see above is a reflection of one side clearly knowing its sh!t, and the other, sadly, looking like it's spewing random claims. The fact that you all would resort to insinuations instead of responding to facts with facts looks bad, and unprofessional.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Is there a basis to this question?





Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> So there is no basis, just cynicism borne out of pettiness and an inability to argue back with verifiable facts?
> 
> Seriously, "coming on a little too strong" ?? @dBSPL and @cabatli_53's confidence comes from years of following their country's defence developments. Evidently unlike others here, those two actually follow what Ismail Demir, Temel Kotil, Davut Yilmaz, etc say to the media, read magazines like MSI to see what TUBITAK-SAGE, STM, etc are up to, and practically everything else an informed Pakistani defence enthusiast would do re: JF-17.
> 
> What you see above is a reflection of one side clearly knowing its sh!t, and the other, sadly, looking like it's spewing random claims. The fact that you all would resort to insinuations instead of responding to facts with facts looks bad, and unprofessional.



What random claims I am spewing? What random claims are you spewing?


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> What random claims I am spewing? What random claims are you spewing?


Let's start here,

"You seemed to be deeply, commercially, or emotionally connected with STM. May the force be with you."

Not to mention the insinuation that anyone correcting you suddenly becomes a company shill. That's a random claim, or a cheap exit to a losing argument, you pick.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MastanKhan

cabatli_53 said:


> I think He has serious problems in his life so That must be the way getting attention and respect in social area.  .



Hi,

That is not an intelligent comment from a poster like you---. It was not neccessary---.



Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> So there is no basis, just cynicism borne out of pettiness and an inability to argue back with verifiable facts?
> 
> Seriously, "coming on a little too strong" ?? @dBSPL and @cabatli_53's confidence comes from years of following their country's defence developments. Evidently unlike others here, those two actually follow what Ismail Demir, Temel Kotil, Davut Yilmaz, etc say to the media, read magazines like MSI to see what TUBITAK-SAGE, STM, etc are up to, and practically everything else an informed Pakistani defence enthusiast would do re: JF-17.
> 
> What you see above is a reflection of one side clearly knowing its sh!t, and the other, sadly, looking like it's spewing random claims. The fact that you all would resort to insinuations instead of responding to facts with facts looks bad, and unprofessional.



Hi,

You need to calm down buddy---.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GriffinsRule

The quality of the posts by our Turkish friends here speak for themselves. The other old "senior" members are best skipped over and ignored as they really have little to nothing to contribute themselves.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Let's start here,
> 
> "You seemed to be deeply, commercially, or emotionally connected with STM. May the force be with you."
> 
> Not to mention the insinuation that anyone correcting you suddenly becomes a company shill. That's a random claim, or a cheap exit to a losing argument, you pick.



Okay. I will not bother you guys anymore. Carry on.



GriffinsRule said:


> The quality of the posts by our Turkish friends here speak for themselves. The other old "senior" members are best skipped over and ignored as they really have little to nothing to contribute themselves.



yes, you have a point. Its best I not give any more opinions.



MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> That is not an intelligent comment from a poster like you---. It was not neccessary---.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> You need to calm down buddy---.



Some people have become holy cows and above board. Experts who read defence magazines, websites, and become experts and suddenly can have more insight then people who operate, analyze, and develop these systems, and who are still in the loop with all the major decision makers, being their mentors and counsels.. The standard of original material on this forum is going to the dumps.



Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Let's start here,
> 
> "You seemed to be deeply, commercially, or emotionally connected with STM. May the force be with you."
> 
> Not to mention the insinuation that anyone correcting you suddenly becomes a company shill. That's a random claim, or a cheap exit to a losing argument, you pick.



I didnt allege anyone to be a company propagandist, rather being national fan boys who cannot hear anything against their country. However, I honestly admire such loyalty.

Since you are the last word on anything and everything defence in Pakistan, why dont you get my account deleted and be done with it?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Dazzler

Turkish technology is not GOD sent, so those advocating it as such should reconsider it. Sometimes, the reality is contrary to what is being claimed. Case in point being the performance of PNS Muawin.

Despite clearing trials, it is proving to be a problematic system thus far. As per "those onboard", the tanker is having difficulties getting to terms with PN's operational requirements. Quite a few years ago, PN inducted MRTP-33s, and never expanded on the initial order for the same reason.

I stand in agreement to professionals who have used, and know the technology inside out.



cabatli_53 said:


> I think He has serious problems in his life so That must be the way getting attention and respect in social area. Let him to talk whatever he want. Let him suppose STM is a shipyard or STM lost in Pakistani Milgem deal or whatever He want...



Being an int'l mod, the quoted part of your post is truly below the belt. Just because someone does not agree with your stance, does not mean he is having problems in life.

Try going through your posts next time before addressing senior professionals.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## cabatli_53

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Some people have become holy cows and above board. Experts who read defence magazines, websites, and become experts and suddenly can have more insight then people who operate, analyze, and develop these systems, and who are still in the loop with all the major decision makers, being their mentors and counsels.. The standard of original material on this forum is going to the dumps.



First of all, You do not have any idea about me and my profession. You can never know How do I know some information that you don’t have any idea so forget about me. I am not the actual subject which is the problem in here since I am not the one who bring forward my carrier and age into agenda to back up my words so just concentrate on info I reveal instead of composing many things based on your personal assumptions.

Secondly, It is the first time I have seen a person like you who is fighting against members who want to provide truths about his own country's technical matters. All those openly shows me again that You are just a guy who is pretending to have deep and serious info but actually you don’t have any idea what you are talking. When It is asked you to prove about, you just start accusing members with personal matter while implying How professional guy you are to underestimate the facts of your opponent instead of providing the technical aspects of your claims to back up your assertive claims. I haven't seen you yet while talking about some serious technical matters but just your so called insider references, age and professional career. When the situation even went worse for you, You suddenly start typing "It was just "*your opinion"*. What is the reason of those reaction*. * Nobody have to agree on *your opinion*."

_Opinion is a claim that was brang forward by the people who haven't operated, analyzed, developed, seen the related things before but reaching some info with *reasoning* on his own. _You as a "professional" who accuse members not to have any idea about subjects you talk about, then claim that They are "opinion"?
Later, you again play important guy games with those speeches to gain some support from members!
_



become experts and suddenly can have more insight then people who operate, analyze, and develop these systems

Click to expand...

_
I advice you to determine whether they are just opinion or _information from a guy who operate, analyze, and develop these systems ?

_
Let me tell you what is the actual meaning of opinion and serious truths !


*That is opinion of mine:* You are a guy who seeks respect among forum pages with pretending to behave as somebody who is senior about Turkish Naval, Air and Land technology matters. You regularly spread nonsense about Turkish matters (I don't know about technical matters of Pakistani systems since I don't have any idea about your reliability for Pakistani matters) as if they are true but actually Not even close to be true. What I see is that You behave with an old age complex to teach the place for members who tell your faults. You frequently triggered when someone tell something adverse to your claims and acting rude while using "delusion, fanboy, ultra-nationalist" like words to convert issue into a personal matter instead of technical subject to hide your deficiency. When It was advised you to calm down, You bring forward your age again.

Those sentences typed above are* my opinion and they are open to discussion*. That is the reason I have called it as opinion. Some members may agree on my approach about you, While others don't. That is the nature of revealing an opinion.



_“STM is a shipyard, STM lost in Pakistani tender, ANKA has many Israeli component, AselPod is a Israeli product produced under the licence, STM mini sub is German....etc”
_

Those subjects don't have any doubt to allege an opinion from any senior members. They are not even open to discussion to agree on whether It is true or false. If you tell those under the cover of *"opinion", *then accuse members with a rude way who fixes your "opinions", then I just call you not a senior but an attention lover who seeks respect among pages, Than Someone from original country of systems you talk about, come here and tell you What is the differences between opinion and certain truths while asking you to prove what you are talking and advice you about How you should gain respect with correcting your words.


To end up those nonsense, I invite you again to just prove them technically instead of walking around the words with important guy behaviors _who operate, analyze, and develop these systems_. Your age, rank or any other things you can reveal in front of the members can not be an excuse to back up all those nonsense claims, even if you want to improve the respectability of your false accusations with using those personal cards. _If Your statements above are your opinion, Then you should respect the statements of professionals with a humble manner. If you claim that They are your professional analyze reached from first hand sources who have insight info while developing, operating, analyzing them, Then Let's prove them here to finish this conversation. _

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## cabatli_53

Dazzler said:


> Turkish technology is not GOD sent, so those advocating it as such should reconsider it.



Did you witness anybody in here who talk about Turkish technology/products like this way in here ? We all have good will to improve our relations, infrastructure for mutual benefits of our states. There are some projects that Turkish institutes have many difficulties to meet the requirements of Turkish Navy and AirForce as well so the projects are delaying. Turkish Coast Guard has also selected Ares boats against Yonca Onuk. If they were such a perfect things, They would have wiped all tenders inside/outside... Why did you gain such an impression to type as if the discussion above has anything to do with being perfect or not? A "professional" guy frequently claim absurd and unprofessional things about Turkish matters under the cover of some personal leverage and Turkish members refuse what He claims. I think You should read the whole story before reaching a "GOD sent" like result.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## dBSPL

We love Pakistan as we love our homeland. This love and respect is firmly grounded. And will not diminished by insults to be given to us here.

We come when the state of Pakistan says "come". we go when the state of Pakistan says "go". We have no geopolitical goals on Pakistan, like some others. We only have prayers because Pakistan carries the DNA of the great and powerful Muslim Asia.

We are not forced to sell any system to the Pakistani state. Those who question the effectiveness of the Turkish industry in the Pakistan defense sector should start with the state organs of Pakistan.

We made one request from you. If you are uncomfortable with this situation, if you want to proceed with more Chinese systems, be honest. Do not manipulate the Turkish defense industry with lies. Look, there are at least 7-8 lies on the last two pages. When we wanted to correct them, we were accused of wrongdoing or as a cheerleader...

Do not do this. In the most difficult time these Turkish brothers will be shoulder to shoulder with you. We want you to have fairness and honesty.

This is the last message I have written under this title. Thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Dazzler

cabatli_53 said:


> Did you witness anybody in here who talk about Turkish technology/products like this way in here ? We all have good will to improve our relations, infrastructure for mutual benefits of our states. There are some projects that Turkish institutes have many difficulties to meet the requirements of Turkish Navy and AirForce as well so the projects are delaying. Turkish Coast Guard has also selected Ares boats against Yonca Onuk. If they were such a perfect things, They would have wiped all tenders inside/outside... Why did you gain such an impression to type as if the discussion above has anything to do with being perfect or not? A "professional" guy frequently claim absurd and unprofessional things about Turkish matters under the cover of some personal leverage and Turkish members refuse what He claims. I think You should read the whole story before reaching a "GOD sent" like result.



Keep the national rhetoric aside. It is all business. You sell, we buy - and as customers having used/ using Turkish, Chinese or even American defence products, we will have the right to express opinion. @Bilal Khan 777 is an experienced professional who knows more than many on defence matters. I am not here to defend any xyz but the condescending tone used against senior members must be discouraged. 

Promote your products all you like but have the courage to listen/ respectfully disagree with those who differ. 

Carry on with your stuff.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Dazzler said:


> Keep the national rhetoric aside. It is all business. You sell, we buy - and as customers having used/ using Turkish, Chinese or even American defence products, we will have the right to express opinion. @Bilal Khan 777 is an experienced professional who knows more than many on defence matters. I am not here to defend any xyz *but the condescending tone used against senior members must be discouraged.*
> 
> Promote your products all you like but have the courage to listen/ respectfully disagree with those who differ.
> 
> Carry on with your stuff.


This should run both ways, no?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Dazzler

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> This should run both ways, no?



What offended you?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

cabatli_53 said:


> First of all, You do not have any idea about me and my profession. You can never know How do I know some information that you don’t have any idea so forget about me. I am not the actual subject which is the problem in here since I am not the one who bring forward my carrier and age into agenda to back up my words so just concentrate on info I reveal instead of composing many things based on your personal assumptions.
> 
> Secondly, It is the first time I have seen a person like you who is fighting against members who want to provide truths about his own country's technical matters. All those openly shows me again that You are just a guy who is pretending to have deep and serious info but actually you don’t have any idea what you are talking. When It is asked you to prove about, you just start accusing members with personal matter while implying How professional guy you are to underestimate the facts of your opponent instead of providing the technical aspects of your claims to back up your assertive claims. I haven't seen you yet while talking about some serious technical matters but just your so called insider references, age and professional career. When the situation even went worse for you, You suddenly start typing "It was just "*your opinion"*. What is the reason of those reaction*. * Nobody have to agree on *your opinion*."
> 
> _Opinion is a claim that was brang forward by the people who haven't operated, analyzed, developed, seen the related things before but reaching some info with *reasoning* on his own. _You as a "professional" who accuse members not to have any idea about subjects you talk about, then claim that They are "opinion"?
> Later, you again play important guy games with those speeches to gain some support from members!
> 
> 
> I advice you to determine whether they are just opinion or _information from a guy who operate, analyze, and develop these systems ?
> 
> _
> Let me tell you what is the actual meaning of opinion and serious truths !
> 
> 
> *That is opinion of mine:* You are a guy who seeks respect among forum pages with pretending to behave as somebody who is senior about Turkish Naval, Air and Land technology matters. You regularly spread nonsense about Turkish matters (I don't know about technical matters of Pakistani systems since I don't have any idea about your reliability for Pakistani matters) as if they are true but actually Not even close to be true. What I see is that You behave with an old age complex to teach the place for members who tell your faults. You frequently triggered when someone tell something adverse to your claims and acting rude while using "delusion, fanboy, ultra-nationalist" like words to convert issue into a personal matter instead of technical subject to hide your deficiency. When It was advised you to calm down, You bring forward your age again.
> 
> Those sentences typed above are* my opinion and they are open to discussion*. That is the reason I have called it as opinion. Some members may agree on my approach about you, While others don't. That is the nature of revealing an opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> _“STM is a shipyard, STM lost in Pakistani tender, ANKA has many Israeli component, AselPod is a Israeli product produced under the licence, STM mini sub is German....etc”
> _
> 
> Those subjects don't have any doubt to allege an opinion from any senior members. They are not even open to discussion to agree on whether It is true or false. If you tell those under the cover of *"opinion", *then accuse members with a rude way who fixes your "opinions", then I just call you not a senior but an attention lover who seeks respect among pages, Than Someone from original country of systems you talk about, come here and tell you What is the differences between opinion and certain truths while asking you to prove what you are talking and advice you about How you should gain respect with correcting your words.
> 
> 
> To end up those nonsense, I invite you again to just prove them technically instead of walking around the words with important guy behaviors _who operate, analyze, and develop these systems_. Your age, rank or any other things you can reveal in front of the members can not be an excuse to back up all those nonsense claims, even if you want to improve the respectability of your false accusations with using those personal cards. _If Your statements above are your opinion, Then you should respect the statements of professionals with a humble manner. If you claim that They are your professional analyze reached from first hand sources who have insight info while developing, operating, analyzing them, Then Let's prove them here to finish this conversation. _



Thank you. Is there anything else left? Where is the discussion on SWAT?



Dazzler said:


> Turkish technology is not GOD sent, so those advocating it as such should reconsider it. Sometimes, the reality is contrary to what is being claimed. Case in point being the performance of PNS Muawin.
> 
> Despite clearing trials, it is proving to be a problematic system thus far. As per "those onboard", the tanker is having difficulties getting to terms with PN's operational requirements. Quite a few years ago, PN inducted MRTP-33s, and never expanded on the initial order for the same reason.
> 
> I stand in agreement to professionals who have used, and know the technology inside out.
> 
> 
> 
> Being an int'l mod, the quoted part of your post is truly below the belt. Just because someone does not agree with your stance, does not mean he is having problems in life.
> 
> Try going through your posts next time before addressing senior professionals.



NFT was mentioned so many times by the flag wavers. Lest I submit something about prototypes, the whole group will come after me like here, picking out sentences and spewing their abuse. We can also discuss MRTP 16, MRTP 33, and all other Turkish "gifts" that we have. Some of the kit is good though, like Aselsan RWS, but they use US bushmaster cannons and now a serious issue for PN to support.



cabatli_53 said:


> Did you witness anybody in here who talk about Turkish technology/products like this way in here ? We all have good will to improve our relations, infrastructure for mutual benefits of our states. There are some projects that Turkish institutes have many difficulties to meet the requirements of Turkish Navy and AirForce as well so the projects are delaying. Turkish Coast Guard has also selected Ares boats against Yonca Onuk. If they were such a perfect things, They would have wiped all tenders inside/outside... Why did you gain such an impression to type as if the discussion above has anything to do with being perfect or not? A "professional" guy frequently claim absurd and unprofessional things about Turkish matters under the cover of some personal leverage and Turkish members refuse what He claims. I think You should read the whole story before reaching a "GOD sent" like result.



You guys cant take criticism can you?



Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> This should run both ways, no?



Whose side are you on, sir?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JamD

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> They are pushing a non-built German design, that is only at concept. STM is a builder, and not a designer. They do not have any experience of submarine design, let alone a small submarine which is twice as difficult since you have put all the same machinery in a small space. Lets see what PN decides.



This was the technical point raised and in all the replies I have not seen THIS PARTICULAR point answered. Yes laurels of STM have been detailed (I am sure they are doing great things) but the fact remains the original point raised was not answered. In this battle of BilalKhans I will have to side with 777. We are the buyer and we have the right to ask questions about things we may be sinking money into. Just because someone is from a "brotherly country" doesn't mean they get a free pass from technical scrutiny.

That being said accusations were thrown around from both sides, which spoils the atmosphere of the forum. But I still feel 777's original technical question was never answered and a lot of "hey look at this other stuff" mixed in with nationalism was thrown around.

Also, for a second there I thought @Bilal Khan (Quwa) account got hacked or something. Very out of character from you.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Dazzler said:


> Keep the national rhetoric aside. It is all business. You sell, we buy - and as customers having used/ using Turkish, Chinese or even American defence products, we will have the right to express opinion. @Bilal Khan 777 is an experienced professional who knows more than many on defence matters. I am not here to defend any xyz but the condescending tone used against senior members must be discouraged.
> 
> Promote your products all you like but have the courage to listen/ respectfully disagree with those who differ.
> 
> Carry on with your stuff.



I have a lot of love and respect for Turkey, they are our real iron brothers and will always be, but I simply cannot close my eyes on operational and technical matters as it related to Turkish Defence industry trying to appear like they are the final word on everything.

Again, where is the SWAT discussion? Let me guess, there is none, hence all this Halabaloo about my words.
Kindly present a SWAT from Turkey, STM or ASFAT, or wherever, or otherwise accept that there is no SWAT in development or in production in Turkey that Pakistan Navy can bank on. This was the original argument, and sadly due to my bitter old man parlance, all the Kebab lovers get all riled up.



JamD said:


> This was the technical point raised and in all the replies I have not seen THIS PARTICULAR point answered. Yes laurels of STM have been detailed (I am sure they are doing great things) but the fact remains the original point raised was not answered. In this battle of BilalKhans I will have to side with 777. We are the buyer and we have the right to ask questions about things we may be sinking money into. Just because someone is from a "brotherly country" doesn't mean they get a free pass from technical scrutiny.
> 
> That being said accusations were thrown around from both sides, which spoils the atmosphere of the forum. But I still feel 777's original technical question was never answered and a lot of "hey look at this other stuff" mixed in with nationalism was thrown around.
> 
> Also, for a second there I thought @Bilal Khan (Quwa) account got hacked or something. Very out of character from you.



Wish I was as objective as you. BZ.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## JohnWick

What's new in PN submarine fleet ?


----------



## JamD

Also I think it is best to be extremely suspicious of defence manufacturer claims. I will give a Pakistani example from the recent IDEAS. Look at this absolute horse****:








Some company that IMPORTS some QUADROTORS made this and was allowed to show this embarrassment. There are other things about Cavalier/Blitzkrieg/Pasha/ThisMonthsNewName that are equally embarrassing but "parday main rehnay do". The point is defence companies REGULARLY oversell their products. It is OKAY to ask probing specific questions to get to the bottom of such things. I've given Pakistani examples here just to show you this isn't a Turkish problem. This is a human problem.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

JohnWick said:


> What's new in PN submarine fleet ?



Apparently, nothing but an old man fighting a lost cause.



JamD said:


> Also I think it is best to be extremely suspicious of defence manufacturer claims. I will give a Pakistani example from the recent IDEAS. Look at this absolute horse****:
> View attachment 525576
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some company that IMPORTS some QUADROTORS made this and was allowed to show this embarrassment. There are other things about Cavalier/Blitzkrieg/Pasha/ThisMonthsNewName that are equally embarrassing but "parday main rehnay do". The point is defence companies REGULARLY oversell their products. It is OKAY to ask probing specific questions to get to the bottom of such things. I've given Pakistani examples here just to show you this isn't a Turkish problem. This is a human problem.



Which company posted this?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## JamD

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Which company posted this?


The company's name is actually on the poster UAS-G. I had to google too.
http://uas-global.com/


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

dBSPL said:


> We love Pakistan as we love our homeland. This love and respect is firmly grounded. And will not diminished by insults to be given to us here.
> 
> We come when the state of Pakistan says "come". we go when the state of Pakistan says "go". We have no geopolitical goals on Pakistan, like some others. We only have prayers because Pakistan carries the DNA of the great and powerful Muslim Asia.
> 
> We are not forced to sell any system to the Pakistani state. Those who question the effectiveness of the Turkish industry in the Pakistan defense sector should start with the state organs of Pakistan.
> 
> We made one request from you. If you are uncomfortable with this situation, if you want to proceed with more Chinese systems, be honest. Do not manipulate the Turkish defense industry with lies. Look, there are at least 7-8 lies on the last two pages. When we wanted to correct them, we were accused of wrongdoing or as a cheerleader...
> 
> Do not do this. In the most difficult time these Turkish brothers will be shoulder to shoulder with you. We want you to have fairness and honesty.
> 
> This is the last message I have written under this title. Thanks.



My dear, if "we" are not ready to any more insult, then "we" should not be giving insults. We also retain the right to be critical of anyone, and with all due respect, stop acting like you are doing us favors, and are some kind of saviors.



JamD said:


> The company's name is actually on the poster UAS-G. I had to google too.
> http://uas-global.com/



Very interesting. Loves to takes and posts pictures. Pakistan's only authorized UAV company is a bit stretch. Also, most of these meetings and customers are governed by Official Secrets Act 1923, so posting everything on the website is a bit of a violation. Could be some consequences there. Everyone has a right to make marketing strategies, and his is a bit "different." I have my doubts about a mono wing stealth UCAV since i know the challenges.

To all our dear Turkish contributors who I seem to have so deeply offended, I apologize. In no way do I or we as a country not value your efforts, opinions, or contribution to the defence of our country. I am just a old man who is ready to die and move on. Please accept my sincere apology. Kindly keep contributing to this forum to the best of your abilities and understanding.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

JamD said:


> This was the technical point raised and in all the replies I have not seen THIS PARTICULAR point answered. Yes laurels of STM have been detailed (I am sure they are doing great things) but the fact remains the original point raised was not answered. In this battle of BilalKhans I will have to side with 777. We are the buyer and we have the right to ask questions about things we may be sinking money into. Just because someone is from a "brotherly country" doesn't mean they get a free pass from technical scrutiny.
> 
> That being said accusations were thrown around from both sides, which spoils the atmosphere of the forum. But I still feel 777's original technical question was never answered and a lot of "hey look at this other stuff" mixed in with nationalism was thrown around.
> 
> Also, for a second there I thought @Bilal Khan (Quwa) account got hacked or something. Very out of character from you.


@JamD I wasn't making the point whether Turkey is all that (or not), but that when the Turks post info or thoughts that don't align with 777, the insinuation that the Turkish enthusiasts are connected to certain companies was, for me, crossing a line. Don't you think that's a statement or thought that could've been kept away? Don't you think 777 could've just ended this saying that both sides aren't on the same plane in terms of info and focus on the technical issues?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## dBSPL

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> My dear, if "we" are not ready to any more insult, then "we" should not be giving insults. We also retain the right to be critical of anyone, and with all due respect, stop acting like you are doing us favors, and are some kind of saviors.



I didn't say that, or even not implied.

You don't understand what I wrote? If you want something from us, we will be pleased. If you don't want anything, we won't force you to do anything.

Pakistan's savior is God , then noble people who made Pakistan.

First you lied, then you didn't fix your lie. And insult us . Now you have begun to read the minds of people from your magic sphere.

It's really sad. Please not continue this discussion anymore. Because I'm ashamed to be dragged into such a debate.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dazzler

dBSPL said:


> I didn't say that, or even not implied.
> 
> You don't understand what I wrote? If you want something from us, we will be pleased. If you don't want anything, we won't force you to do anything.



Do "you" have any idea how "you" literally dragged PA into buying ATAK, and the now regretted PNS Muawin?? Should i re-share the news pieces where Turks literally claimed to have signed the helicopter deal on their own without a word from Pakistani authorities?

If that's not dragging, what is?



Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> @JamD I wasn't making the point whether Turkey is all that (or not), but that when the Turks post info or thoughts that don't align with 777, the insinuation that the Turkish enthusiasts are connected to certain companies was, for me, crossing a line. Don't you think that's a statement or thought that could've been kept away? Don't you think 777 could've just ended this saying that both sides aren't on the same plane in terms of info and focus on the technical issues?



Are you Faisal.K from Pakdef by some chance? Just asking.


----------



## JamD

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> @JamD I wasn't making the point whether Turkey is all that (or not), but that when the Turks post info or thoughts that don't align with 777, the insinuation that the Turkish enthusiasts are connected to certain companies was, for me, crossing a line. Don't you think that's a statement or thought that could've been kept away? Don't you think 777 could've just ended this saying that both sides aren't on the same plane in terms of info and focus on the technical issues?


It's not that they don't align with 777. It's that they indulged in a lot of "whataboutism". I'm not defending any insinuations made by 777, but I can understand his frustration in the face of whataboutism when his single point technical issue is completely ignored. 777 could have ended the discussion with what you said. And our Turkish friends could have ended the discussion with "yes we haven't designed and built a mini-sub but we intend to and have the technical expertise for it" or "here's a mini-sub designed and built by us".

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## dBSPL

Dazzler said:


> Do "you" have any idea how "you" literally dragged PA into buying ATAK, and the now regretted PNS Muawin?? Should i re-share the news pieces where Turks literally claimed to have signed the helicopter deal on their own without a word from Pakistani authorities?
> 
> If that's not dragging, what is?


Am I the addressee for these questions?

I have no idea of the truth of the claims you're saying. If you have proof that the Pakistani state has been damaged by the Turkish authorities, we can discuss it here.

My reason for my involvement in the subject is the disinformation. And I explained in my previous posts where is the wrong expressions. Please talk with your conscience, is it a crime to correcting a false expression?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

JamD said:


> It's not that they don't align with 777. It's that they indulged in a lot of "whataboutism". I'm not defending any insinuations made by 777, but I can understand his frustration in the face of whataboutism when his single point technical issue is completely ignored. 777 could have ended the discussion with what you said. And our Turkish friends could have ended the discussion with "yes we haven't designed and built a mini-sub but we intend to and have the technical expertise for it" or "here's a mini-sub designed and built by us".


I absolutely agree.

@Dazzler Yes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

dBSPL said:


> I didn't say that, or even not implied.
> 
> You don't understand what I wrote? If you want something from us, we will be pleased. If you don't want anything, we won't force you to do anything.
> 
> Pakistan's savior is God , then noble people who made Pakistan.
> 
> First you lied, then you didn't fix your lie. And insult us . Now you have begun to read the minds of people from your magic sphere.
> 
> It's really sad. Please not continue this discussion anymore. Because I'm ashamed to be dragged into such a debate.



I have apologized to you and others from Turkey. here is it again.

To all our dear Turkish contributors who I seem to have so deeply offended, I apologize. In no way do I or we as a country not value your efforts, opinions, or contribution to the defence of our country. I am just a old man who is ready to die and move on. Please accept my sincere apology. Kindly keep contributing to this forum to the best of your abilities and understanding.

I now reserve comment on your words, past, present and future. All the best to you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dBSPL

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> I have apologized to you and others from Turkey. here is it again.
> 
> To all our dear Turkish contributors who I seem to have so deeply offended, I apologize. In no way do I or we as a country not value your efforts, opinions, or contribution to the defence of our country. I am just a old man who is ready to die and move on. Please accept my sincere apology. Kindly keep contributing to this forum to the best of your abilities and understanding.
> 
> I now reserve comment on your words, past, present and future. All the best to you.


The answers I wrote about the subject are in the previous pages. Under the titles such as STM's current design activities, current workload which comes from SSB, MILDEN TS1700 works and other design activities for IDEF 2019 preparation... Here you were claim that the STM not have any design activity and that it is a typical blue collar company, a shipyard. When I said STM is not a shipyard, the all these discussion came out.

I cant understand how i be a unfair, when i just want to correct some misinformation. Title of Cheerleader was not enough, and I was labeled as an arrogant idiot who saw himself as the savior of Pakistan. If this is not a communication accident, I learned something that opened my horizons about some friends today. 

Please forgive me for what i writing here and all make Helal your rights for me in this...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Once on my travels to South America, the local Spanish speaking officers used the word "propaganda" for marketing. While we consider it as a negative word, thats the literal translation they use for all things marketing. I have been accused to spread dis-information, but for last three years, I have tried to inform the users to the best of my ability. Information, or disinformation, is quite relative and is your perspective really.

I was a fighter pilot once, and now, just an old man who sometimes does not have control over his words. Yes, I sometimes offend, but I have no agenda against Turkey, or any other country. I will continue to call spade a spade, and some of you will not find my opinions kind, well worded, or diplomatic.

All the personal attacks, personal life insinuations, and personal insults are not really needed. You can simply disagree with my opinion, or choice of words. While in my 80s, i cannot really change the way i think or write.



dBSPL said:


> The answers I wrote about the subject are in the previous pages. Under the titles such as STM's current design activities, current workload which comes from SSB, MILDEN TS1700 works and other design activities for IDEF 2019 preparation... Here you were claim that the STM not have any design activity and that it is a typical blue collar company, a shipyard. When I said STM is not a shipyard, the all these discussion came out.
> 
> I cant understand how i be a unfair, when i just want to correct some misinformation. Title of Cheerleader was not enough, and I was labeled as an arrogant idiot who saw himself as the savior of Pakistan. If this is not a communication accident, I learned something that opened my horizons about some friends today.
> 
> Please forgive me for what i writing here and all make Helal your rights for me in this...



I encourage you to always speak your mind, now and in the future, even if it offends and irks the likes of old fools like myself. My only submission to intellectuals like yourself, if free and not tied to anyone, is to be critical thinkers and question everything that you come across, even if it was from your own country.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
8


----------



## dBSPL

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Once on my travels to South America, the local Spanish speaking officers used the word "propaganda" for marketing. While we consider it as a negative word, thats the literal translation they use for all things marketing. I have been accused to spread dis-information, but for last three years, I have tried to inform the users to the best of my ability. Information, or disinformation, is quite relative and is your perspective really.
> 
> I was a fighter pilot once, and now, just an old man who sometimes does not have control over his words. Yes, I sometimes offend, but I have no agenda against Turkey, or any other country. I will continue to call spade a spade, and some of you will not find my opinions kind, well worded, or diplomatic.
> 
> All the personal attacks, personal life insinuations, and personal insults are not really needed. You can simply disagree with my opinion, or choice of words. While in my 80s, i cannot really change the way i think or write.
> 
> 
> 
> I encourage you to always speak your mind, now and in the future, even if it offends and irks the likes of old fools like myself. My only submission to intellectuals like yourself, if free and not tied to anyone, is to be critical thinkers and question everything that you come across, even if it was from your own country.


I have been operating in the maritime sector in Turkey and I have a close relationship with many shipyards. STM is not a shipyard as you claim, and all my writings are about that.

I know closely the many falses and shortcomings in Turkey's maritime industry sectors and if anyone wants i can explain them one by one. But at this point we must adopt a fair and honest approach.

I'm sorry to see that you could not even show the virtue to correct your words that you have spent without knowledge. Therefore, first you should apply your advice in your own life.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

dBSPL said:


> I have been operating in the maritime sector in Turkey and I have a close relationship with many shipyards. STM is not a shipyard as you claim, and all my writings are about that.
> 
> I know closely the many falses and shortcomings in Turkey's maritime industry sectors and if anyone wants i can explain them one by one. But at this point we must adopt a fair and honest approach.
> 
> I'm sorry to see that you could not even show the virtue to correct your words that you have spent without knowledge. Therefore, first you should apply your advice in your own life.



Thank you for confirming your relationships with these commercial entities. I rest my case.

I have tried to be back down and be nice to you, but seems like you have some agenda?

For the rest of your continued monotonous tirade, i extended an apology to you. if you are unable to read, or understand, then continue on with your tirade.

When there is a Turkish Mini-Sub available that is suitable for Pakistan market, do please visit this thread again.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MastanKhan

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Once on my travels to South America, the local Spanish speaking officers used the word "propaganda" for marketing. While we consider it as a negative word, thats the literal translation they use for all things marketing. I have been accused to spread dis-information, but for last three years, I have tried to inform the users to the best of my ability. Information, or disinformation, is quite relative and is your perspective really.
> 
> I was a fighter pilot once, and now, just an old man who sometimes does not have control over his words. Yes, I sometimes offend, but I have no agenda against Turkey, or any other country. I will continue to call spade a spade, and some of you will not find my opinions kind, well worded, or diplomatic.
> 
> All the personal attacks, personal life insinuations, and personal insults are not really needed. You can simply disagree with my opinion, or choice of words. While in my 80s, i cannot really change the way i think or write.
> 
> 
> 
> I encourage you to always speak your mind, now and in the future, even if it offends and irks the likes of old fools like myself. My only submission to intellectuals like yourself, if free and not tied to anyone, is to be critical thinkers and question everything that you come across, even if it was from your own country.



Hi,

Young people don't understand that it is also a technique of getting the truth out---.

You say something outrageous---and a young buck---to prove his presence would spit out the truth---.

I myself have sparsely used it and the posters have spilled their's and their uncles and their dad's guts out and laid all the secrets on the table---.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## dBSPL

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Thank you for confirming your relationships with these commercial entities. I rest my case.
> 
> I have tried to be back down and be nice to you, but seems like you have some agenda?
> 
> For the rest of your continued monotonous tirade, i extended an apology to you. if you are unable to read, or understand, then continue on with your tirade.
> 
> When there is a Turkish Mini-Sub available that is suitable for Pakistan market, do please visit this thread again.


You're doing this on purpose, now I'm sure.

You are well trained in manipulation. I didn't said I am in the shipbuilding sector, I'm in the maritime sector.

70% of the civilian shipbuilding industry is in Tuzla region. Port operations, logistics and shipbuilding are intertwined. The distance between the two furthest shipyards are 5000 meters. Many of these businesses moved here from Haliç*. Most businesses have more than 30 years of history and are predominantly operated by people of a particular region.

The subjects you are not familiar with. If you'd asked, I would answered. However, I think there is a behavior problem. They didn't teach you psychological warfare at war academy to cover your lies.

Let me write more clearly this time:

There is a project developed by STM and Bahcesehir University. And i think Pakistan has an interest in this project. The source belongs to one of the most respected defense publications in the country. https://defence.pk/pdf/attachments/stm-pakistan-navy-png.372205/ This issue has been discussed in Turkish defense forums since the beginning of 2017 and has been confirmed by many professionals. What's wrong with sharing this information with you?

Within the scope of this project, STM and BAU have already developed prototypes of optical communications systems that will enable communication between underwater units / platforms, ,air vehicles, surface vehicles and stationary ground platforms.

With the protocol signed in EURONAVAL 2018, the integration of German HENSOLDT's Optical Surveillance System into 'Submarine-to-Divers Optical Communication System' developed by STM and BAU, was agreed. Also an agreement was signed with DNV GL for a platforms safety certificate and clasification. http://defenceandtechnology.com/2018/10/24/stm-alman-hensdolt-firmasi-ile-isbirligi-yapacak/ http://www.c4defence.com/Gundem/stm-dnv-gl-ile-el-sikisti/7283/1

About the latest state of work, General Manager of Defense Technologies Engineering and Trade Inc. (STM), said in the briefing given to the press last week:

" Instead of starting from a large class submarine, we working on systems called pocket class. We think that these can be developed nationally and we continue our work on this issue. In addition, our family of autonomous vehicles with unmanned submarines and surface platforms will expand.

We plan to move with an ecosystem in the pocket class submarine. A calendar has not yet appeared. We have created a very serious ability. STM will not do this alone. National and international companies working in this field are moving together. We started our design works with our own resources.

We have an engineering accumulation and works including unmanned systems, indigenous and national submarine design, pocket class submarine designs, and our work in this field will be deepened. "

http://www.c4defence.com/Gundem/ikinci-stm-milgemde-hep-olacak/7506/1

***

Also the CosMoS CE4F SDV, which had not previously passed the qualification tests of the Turkish Navy and was not taken into the inventory, was given for redesign and research. Turkey's works on SDVs are not open to the press .There is another project in this area which is based on YTU. http://www.hisutton.com/CosMoS CE4F SDV.html

Apart from this, the TS1700 project from MILDEN, as Turkey's possibly new generation AIP submarines concept is introduced in all maritime exhibitions. If you are a professional, you can find more information about the process at these fairs. http://www.millisavunma.com/x-ts1700-denizaltisi-milden-konsepti/

There is nothing between my writings without evidence. Which system of the Pakistan Navy will choose is another issue and its outside of my area. All I know is that the Turkish navy will benefit greatly from these works.

But you called an engineering company as a shipyard.And you said these are no design capability. Unfortunately, if there is someone here who has no knowledge about what talking about, it is you.

When I speak with the relevant authorities in Idef19, I will inform my Pakistani brothers under this title or in a separate title.



MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> Young people don't understand that it is also a technique of getting the truth out---.
> 
> You say something outrageous---and a young buck---to prove his presence would spit out the truth---.
> 
> I myself have sparsely used it and the posters have spilled their's and their uncles and their dad's guts out and laid all the secrets on the table---.


Snap out of it! Is that all you can do? To create foolish ideas about the people, Instead of writing something about the subject. This is not an adult and educated person behavior. I understand that it is not possible to conduct a proper discussion here.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
8


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

dBSPL said:


> You're doing this on purpose, now I'm sure.
> 
> You are well trained in manipulation. I didn't say I was in the shipbuilding sector, I'm in the maritime sector.
> 
> 70% of the civilian shipbuilding industry is in Tuzla region. Port operations, logistics and shipbuilding are intertwined. The distance between the two furthest shipyards are 5000 meters. Many of these businesses moved here from Taşkızak. Most businesses have more than 30 years of history and are predominantly operated by people of a particular region.
> 
> The subjects you are not familiar with. If you'd asked, I would answered. However, I think there is a behavior problem. They didn't teach you psychological warfare at war academy to cover your lies.
> 
> Let me write more clearly this time:
> 
> There is a project developed by STM and Bahcesehir University. And i think Pakistan has an interest in this project. The source belongs to one of the most respected defense publications in the country. https://defence.pk/pdf/attachments/stm-pakistan-navy-png.372205/ This issue has been discussed in Turkish defense forums since the beginning of 2017 and has been confirmed by many professionals. What's wrong with sharing this information with you?
> 
> Within the scope of this project, STM and BAU have already developed prototypes of optical communications systems that will enable communication between underwater units / platforms, ,air vehicles, surface vehicles and stationary ground platforms.
> 
> With the protocol signed in EURONAVAL 2018, the integration of German HENSOLDT's Optical Surveillance System into 'Submarine-to-Divers Optical Communication System' developed by STM and BAU, was agreed. Also an agreement was signed with DNV GL for a platforms safety certificate and clasification.
> 
> About the latest state of work, General Manager of Defense Technologies Engineering and Trade Inc. (STM), said in the briefing given to the press last week:
> 
> " Instead of starting from a large class submarine, we working on systems called pocket class. We think that these can be developed nationally and we continue our work on this issue. In addition, our family of autonomous vehicles with unmanned submarines and surface platforms will expand.
> 
> We plan to move with an ecosystem in the pocket class submarine. A calendar has not yet appeared. We have created a very serious ability. STM will not do this alone. National and international companies working in this field are moving together. We started our design works with our own resources.
> 
> We have an engineering accumulation and works including unmanned systems, indigenous and national submarine design, small class pocket class submarine designs, and our work in this field will be deepened. "
> 
> ***
> 
> Also the CosMoS CE4F SDV, which had not previously passed the qualification tests of the Turkish Navy and was not taken into the inventory, was given for redesign and research. Turkey's works on SDVs are not open to the press . If some trusted members contact me privately, I can give some information. There is another project in this area which is based on YTU.
> 
> Within the scope of this project, STM and BAU have already developed prototypes of optical communications systems that will enable communication between underwater units / platforms, underwater-air vehicles, over-water vehicles and stationary ground platforms.
> 
> With the protocol signed in EURONAVAL 2018, the integration of German HENSOLDT's Optical Surveillance System into 'Submarine-to-Divers Optical Communication System' developed by STM and BAU, was agreed. An agreement was signed with DNV GL for a safety certificate.
> 
> Apart from this, the TS1700 project from MILDEN, as Turkey's possibly new generation AIP submarines concept is introduced in all maritime exhibitions. If you are a professional, you can find more information about the process at these fairs.
> 
> There is nothing between my writings without evidence. Which system of the Pakistan Navy will choose is another issue and its outside of my area. All I know is that the Turkish navy will benefit greatly from these works.
> 
> But you called an engineering company as a shipyard.And you said these are no design capability. Unfortunately, if there is someone here who has no knowledge about what talking about, it is you.
> 
> When I speak with the relevant authorities in Idef19, I will inform my Pakistani brothers under this title or in a separate title.



Thank you for your contribution.


----------



## dBSPL

Rector of BAU, Prof.Dr. Şenay Yalçın's comments about the underwater electro optic communication system for special operation units, I mentioned above. He saying the works began five years ago and that some meetings were held with Pakistan and Australia.

https://www.aksam.com.tr/ekonomi/tu...iversite-tarafindan-gelistirildi/haber-788787

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

dBSPL said:


> Rector of BAU, Prof.Dr. Şenay Yalçın's comments about the underwater electro optic communication system for special operation units, I mentioned above. He saying the works began five years ago and that some meetings were held with Pakistan and Australia.
> 
> https://www.aksam.com.tr/ekonomi/tu...iversite-tarafindan-gelistirildi/haber-788787


Interesting. I hope we meet at IDEF '19.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Islamic faith&Secularism

dBSPL said:


> Rector of BAU, Prof.Dr. Şenay Yalçın's comments about the underwater electro optic communication system for special operation units, I mentioned above. He saying the works began five years ago and that some meetings were held with Pakistan and Australia.
> 
> https://www.aksam.com.tr/ekonomi/tu...iversite-tarafindan-gelistirildi/haber-788787



Friendly comment...

After reading last pages; without hesitation, You and some others have been fished for some quality information, milked for some ''respect'' and credibility over you to them; and worse been insulted in the end based on lies despite your honest factual answers.

I hope no time spared in such enviroment and for such ''people'' next time.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

dBSPL said:


> Rector of BAU, Prof.Dr. Şenay Yalçın's comments about the underwater electro optic communication system for special operation units, I mentioned above. He saying the works began five years ago and that some meetings were held with Pakistan and Australia.
> 
> https://www.aksam.com.tr/ekonomi/tu...iversite-tarafindan-gelistirildi/haber-788787



How does this relate to a SWAT?



Islamic faith&Secularism said:


> Friendly comment...
> 
> After reading last pages; without hesitation, You and some others have been fished for some quality information, milked for some ''respect'' and credibility over you to them; and worse been insulted in the end based on lies despite your honest factual answers.
> 
> I hope no time spared in such enviroment and for such ''people'' next time.



Thank you for your valuable contribution.


----------



## Rafi

DRASS DG450


----------



## Rafi



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Rafi said:


> DRASS DG450



Any update on this program?


----------



## Rafi

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Any update on this program?



Progress has been made, negotiations on custom boat for PN with technical information exchanged, boats dual capability as coastal sub and Spec Fcs carrier is very attractive for the navy.

The PN has other options, which I can't revel which includes a indigenous / partnership, which is early days.

If money was no problem, the Italians would be favourite IMO, they are one of the best in the world in this field. 

The navy is going full steam ahead with a number of programs, which if successfully completed would make it unrecognisable in a decade.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Rafi said:


> Progress has been made, negotiations on custom boat for PN with technical information exchanged, boats dual capability as coastal sub and Spec Fcs carrier is very attractive for the navy.
> 
> The PN has other options, which I can't revel which includes a indigenous / partnership, which is early days.
> 
> If money was no problem, the Italians would be favourite IMO, they are one of the best in the world in this field.
> 
> The navy is going full steam ahead with a number of programs, which if successfully completed would make it unrecognisable in a decade.


The PN also has a requirement for a submarine rescue and salvage vessel. 

Any idea if Drass is competing for that bid as well?


----------



## Rafi

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> The PN also has a requirement for a submarine rescue and salvage vessel.
> 
> Any idea if Drass is competing for that bid as well?



I have no idea, but will endeavour to find out, do know that the Turks were pushing their own indigenous solution, also rumours about a Chinese offer.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Rafi said:


> I have no idea, but will endeavour to find out, do know that the Turks were pushing their own indigenous solution, also rumours about a Chinese offer.



Turks don't have a DSRV, only a ROV fitted to a ship, which means cant get the crew out.



Rafi said:


> Progress has been made, negotiations on custom boat for PN with technical information exchanged, boats dual capability as coastal sub and Spec Fcs carrier is very attractive for the navy.
> 
> The PN has other options, which I can't revel which includes a indigenous / partnership, which is early days.
> 
> If money was no problem, the Italians would be favourite IMO, they are one of the best in the world in this field.
> 
> The navy is going full steam ahead with a number of programs, which if successfully completed would make it unrecognisable in a decade.



Is there still an indigenous program? If there is, it should be with a company that already makes them, and hopefully not a designer with submarine already industrialized. That would be real disappointment and waste of funds where navy wont be able to get any tangible product for years to come.


----------



## dBSPL

Turkey don't have indeginous DSRV solution and protocols yet and I agree. I'll explain below why that Turkey did not rush in this area.

Centered around the International Submarine Escape and Rescue Liaison Office (ISMERLO), an organization created in the wake of the Kursk tragedy as an international hub for information and coordination on submarine rescue, the exercises are designed to demonstrate multi-national submarine rescue co-operation and interoperability as well as share SMER related knowledge amongst worldwide partners. So this is not a restricted area, and also Pakistan is a part of these common programs. Contrary to the above, Turkey is one of the few countries in NATO, capable of deep water rescue missions. Having not yet to produce domestic DSRV solution is due to accessibility and common protocols. The development of deep-sea rescue equipment in this area is often dealt with by allied countries. Implemented by Turkey Submarine Escape and Rescue (SMER) procedures are fully NATO compatible.

TCG Alemdar( which is latest submarine rescue mother ship of TN ) is currently the one of the most modern submarine rescue mother ship in the world. These surface platform include HARDSUIT atmospheric diving suits (ADS), personnel transfer capsules (PTC), a McCann submarine rescue chamber (SRC), launch and recovery system (LARS), and a towed side-scan sonar system.

It also features transfer-under-pressure equipment, dive systems, a NATO submarine rescue system (NSRS), a US submarine rescue diving and recompression system (SRDRS) and post-modern decompression / recompression pressure chambers. A submarine ventilation system, pressurised breathing air system and HeO2 mixed gas system are also included. Two interconnected L-type SRV connectible pressure chambers are provided aboard the vessel to facilitate the housing of up to 32 survivors.

A flight deck is fitted behind the bridge structure amidships to support helicopter operations, while the aft deck features a hydraulic / telescopic crane used for deployment and recovery of rescue systems. Additionally, the MOSHIP carries one remotely-operated vehicle (ROV) and a rigid-hulled inflatable boat (RHIB), as well as two rescue boats to assist during rescue operations.

Turkey has highly specialized team ( within NATO standards ) in this field. For this reason, Turkey is continous member of major submarine rescue drills carried out under NATO. Let's examine the biggest submarine rescue exercise in recent years.

NATO Centre for Maritime Research and Experimentation (CMRE) participated for the first time in the DYNAMIC MONARCH 2017-Aksaz/Turkey exercise, bringing to the operational players a new digital underwater acoustic communications capability that may increase significantly the effectiveness of distressed submarines escape and rescue operations. (In this area many new underwater communication protocol research is being carried out in Turkey. You may find some information in previous posts of the topic.)

In total, the 2017 exercise included approximately 1,000 personnel, command and control ship TCG Gemlik, three submarines (TCG Burakreis, TCG Preveze and ESPS Tramontana), four submarine rescue ships (TCG Alemdar with Turkish and US submarine rescue chambers onboard, TCG Inebolu, ITS Anteo and SD Northern River with embarked NATO Submarine Rescue System (NSRS) operated by the United Kingdom, France and Norway), four Turkish patrol boats, four Turkish aircraft (helicopters, Maritime Patrol Aircraft and a C-130), diving teams from Canada, Italy, Poland and Turkey, Medical teams from Canada, Turkey and NSRS (France, Norway and the UK), a Submarine Parachute Assistance Group from Turkey and significant support from host nation Turkey in administration, accommodation, contracting, logistics, transportation and personnel. Nine NATO Allies participated in the exercise with equipment or personnel including Canada, France, Italy, Norway, Poland, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. In addition, observers from Bangladesh, Indonesia, Japan, Pakistan, Poland, Spain, South Korea, Sweden and the United Kingdom experienced various portions of the exercise as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Rafi

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Turks don't have a DSRV, only a ROV fitted to a ship, which means cant get the crew out.
> 
> 
> 
> Is there still an indigenous program? If there is, it should be with a company that already makes them, and hopefully not a designer with submarine already industrialized. That would be real disappointment and waste of funds where navy wont be able to get any tangible product for years to come.



As I understand the Turks are pushing a future indigenous program (I don't know the time scale) and want Pakistan to join as a partner, (western tech is their pitch) however there is a rival Chinese offer, and the recent Survey ship construction shows that they are also coming on strong.

The indigenous programme is using the mini subs already in service as a template for an upgraded vessel, with tech assistance from friendly countries, the problem with that is that they are currently no where near the sophistication and capability of the Drass DG 450, at the end of the day, if we can find the cash the PN will go with the Italians IMO.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Rafi said:


> As I understand the Turks are pushing a future indigenous program (I don't know the time scale) and want Pakistan to join as a partner, (western tech is their pitch) however there is a rival Chinese offer, and the recent Survey ship construction shows that they are also coming on strong.
> 
> The indigenous programme is using the mini subs already in service as a template for an upgraded vessel, with tech assistance from friendly countries, the problem with that is that they are currently no where near the sophistication and capability of the Drass DG 450, at the end of the day, if we can find the cash the PN will go with the Italians IMO.


It would be a mistake to upgrade mini subs which are well beyond their useful life.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rafi

Rafi said:


> As I understand the Turks are pushing a future indigenous program (I don't know the time scale) and want Pakistan to join as a partner, (western tech is their pitch) however there is a rival Chinese offer, and the recent Survey ship construction shows that they are also coming on strong.





Rafi said:


> As I understand the Turks are pushing a future indigenous program (I don't know the time scale) and want Pakistan to join as a partner, (western tech is their pitch) however there is a rival Chinese offer, and the recent Survey ship construction shows that they are also coming on strong.





Bilal Khan 777 said:


> It would be a mistake to upgrade mini subs which are well beyond their useful life.



I agree, the Italians are the best option, finances are the only hindrance. We shall see if the Navy can convince the govt.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Seeing the recent trends, I am confident PN will make the right decision. Great progress being made by Navy and on the right path for development and growth.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Quwa

Rafi said:


> I agree, the Italians are the best option, finances are the only hindrance. We shall see if the Navy can convince the govt.


The ideal scenario would be to open a manufacturing line of the mini-SSK and add 1 every 2-3 years following the initial order. If AShW/ASW capable, a large mini-SSK fleet would make accessing Pakistan's littoral waters a high-risk venture (a mini-SSK = small acoustics already + further masked by littoral activity). This frees the 11 AIP subs to venture into deeper parts of the EEZ, further adding to their strategic credence.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Quwa said:


> The ideal scenario would be to open a manufacturing line of the mini-SSK and add 1 every 2-3 years following the initial order. If AShW/ASW capable, a large mini-SSK fleet would make accessing Pakistan's littoral waters a high-risk venture (a mini-SSK = small acoustics already + further masked by littoral activity). This frees the 11 AIP subs to venture into deeper parts of the EEZ, further adding to their strategic credence.



A fleet of 3-4 SWATS in PN with multiple AShW/ASW/SOF capability is more dangerous than a fleet of 3-4 SSKs.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Quwa

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> A fleet of 3-4 SWATS in PN with multiple AShW/ASW/SOF capability is more dangerous than a fleet of 3-4 SSKs.


The adjacent coastline is a major factor for SWATS. The notion that 1 or 2 of those can just enter and loiter near the enemy coast will see the IN thin out its ASW coverage. Difficult to see how imposing a presence against larger SSKs out in the open seas is sustainable if a SWATS threat lingers right at home.

But I'd keep an eye on AIP options. The ideal would be fuel cell thanks to its lower acoustic issues (no moving parts, no vibration). I'm not sure about sizing, but I imagine fuel cells may also be easier to use in a small submarine than say Stirling or MESMA?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LKJ86

China's MS2000 mini submarine (about 200 tons)

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## syed_yusuf

Quwa said:


> The adjacent coastline is a major factor for SWATS. The notion that 1 or 2 of those can just enter and loiter near the enemy coast will see the IN thin out its ASW coverage. Difficult to see how imposing a presence against larger SSKs out in the open seas is sustainable if a SWATS threat lingers right at home.
> 
> But I'd keep an eye on AIP options. The ideal would be fuel cell thanks to its lower acoustic issues (no moving parts, no vibration). I'm not sure about sizing, but I imagine fuel cells may also be easier to use in a small submarine than say Stirling or MESMA?



what is really a fuel cell?


----------



## ziaulislam

syed_yusuf said:


> what is really a fuel cell?


means of producing power from hydrogen..call it a hydrogen battery


----------



## syed_yusuf

ziaulislam said:


> means of producing power from hydrogen..call it a hydrogen battery


Is it different than what is in A90B


----------



## ziaulislam

syed_yusuf said:


> Is it different than what is in A90B


Subs have diesel engines and batteries 
Modern AIP subs have the above 2 plus a third system that runs without air(air indep propulsion) hence more submerge endurance

Currently three such systems are famous
1. Sterling 2. MSMA 3. Fuel cell..agosta has MSMA 
Fuel cell is like a battery so the quietest of all

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Quwa said:


> The adjacent coastline is a major factor for SWATS. The notion that 1 or 2 of those can just enter and loiter near the enemy coast will see the IN thin out its ASW coverage. Difficult to see how imposing a presence against larger SSKs out in the open seas is sustainable if a SWATS threat lingers right at home.
> 
> But I'd keep an eye on AIP options. The ideal would be fuel cell thanks to its lower acoustic issues (no moving parts, no vibration). I'm not sure about sizing, but I imagine fuel cells may also be easier to use in a small submarine than say Stirling or MESMA?



Acoustic noise is not the problem in our seas. Even if there was piston pumps installed in this SWATS nobody will hear them till they are well in the kill zone.



ziaulislam said:


> Subs have diesel engines and batteries
> Modern AIP subs have the above 2 plus a third system that runs without air(air indep propulsion) hence more submerge endurance
> 
> Currently three such systems are famous
> 1. Sterling 2. MSMA 3. Fuel cell..agosta has MSMA
> Fuel cell is like a battery so the quietest of all



There is CCD, or close circuit diesel, through which you run a high frequency generator to charge your batteries underwater with argon and LOX. Due to high frequency, your noise propagation is in yoru favor and not to anyone listening to you.

MESMA is a failed technology.

Sterling engine is limited to who uses and releases.

Fuel Cell is promising, but bulky and expensive still, and highly controlled technology.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ziaulislam

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Acoustic noise is not the problem in our seas. Even if there was piston pumps installed in this SWATS nobody will hear them till they are well in the kill zone.
> 
> 
> 
> There is CCD, or close circuit diesel, through which you run a high frequency generator to charge your batteries underwater with argon and LOX. Due to high frequency, your noise propagation is in yoru favor and not to anyone listening to you.
> 
> MESMA is a failed technology.
> 
> Sterling engine is limited to who uses and releases.
> 
> Fuel Cell is promising, but bulky and expensive still, and highly controlled technology.


lot of proliferation of fuel cell tech has happened in civilian market ..and cars ...whether that tech can be applied to military use..? Dont know..

Efficiency of sterling is questionable in warm waters


----------



## syed_yusuf

ziaulislam said:


> lot of proliferation of fuel cell tech has happened in civilian market ..and cars ...whether that tech can be applied to military use..? Dont know..
> 
> Efficiency of sterling is questionable in warm waters


Is fuel technology same as used by electric cars, is so can they be recharged ? Is it possible to just replace batteries and put fuel cell instead ?


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

LKJ86 said:


> China's MS2000 mini submarine (about 200 tons)
> View attachment 536564



I believe this is a concept proposal, and not designed or industrialized yet since there is no current customer to take the risk.



syed_yusuf said:


> Is fuel technology same as used by electric cars, is so can they be recharged ? Is it possible to just replace batteries and put fuel cell instead ?



Submarine main propulsion batteries will never be replaced. This is what a Hybrid system is what you see in cars. However, the types of batteries is being evolved to increase the energy density and safety. AIP is always a third system to bring the Indiscretion rate in your favour.



ziaulislam said:


> lot of proliferation of fuel cell tech has happened in civilian market ..and cars ...whether that tech can be applied to military use..? Dont know..
> 
> Efficiency of sterling is questionable in warm waters



What is in civilian market would need to be marinized, and then Military qualified, and then made compact enough to or a mini sub, and then rugged enough to be used and abused in the field. Maybe then.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ziaulislam

syed_yusuf said:


> Is fuel technology same as used by electric cars, is so can they be recharged ? Is it possible to just replace batteries and put fuel cell instead ?


yes..problem is that fuel cells are run by hydrogen and hydrogen is very expensive to make and even more problematic to distribute

The upsize is that its lighter than a battery thus much better range and much fesible in heavy automobiles ..

So fuel cells excellent range but expensive as you have to make hydrogen and use that to run the fuel cell ..lithium batteries very cheap as its just electricity storage

German U boats use fuel cell a 2 decades ago..now common in cars ..so technology has already proliferated enough

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

dBSPL said:


> Turkey don't have indeginous DSRV solution and protocols yet and I agree. I'll explain below why that Turkey did not rush in this area.
> 
> Centered around the International Submarine Escape and Rescue Liaison Office (ISMERLO), an organization created in the wake of the Kursk tragedy as an international hub for information and coordination on submarine rescue, the exercises are designed to demonstrate multi-national submarine rescue co-operation and interoperability as well as share SMER related knowledge amongst worldwide partners. So this is not a restricted area, and also Pakistan is a part of these common programs. Contrary to the above, Turkey is one of the few countries in NATO, capable of deep water rescue missions. Having not yet to produce domestic DSRV solution is due to accessibility and common protocols. The development of deep-sea rescue equipment in this area is often dealt with by allied countries. Implemented by Turkey Submarine Escape and Rescue (SMER) procedures are fully NATO compatible.
> 
> TCG Alemdar( which is latest submarine rescue mother ship of TN ) is currently the one of the most modern submarine rescue mother ship in the world. These surface platform include HARDSUIT atmospheric diving suits (ADS), personnel transfer capsules (PTC), a McCann submarine rescue chamber (SRC), launch and recovery system (LARS), and a towed side-scan sonar system.
> 
> It also features transfer-under-pressure equipment, dive systems, a NATO submarine rescue system (NSRS), a US submarine rescue diving and recompression system (SRDRS) and post-modern decompression / recompression pressure chambers. A submarine ventilation system, pressurised breathing air system and HeO2 mixed gas system are also included. Two interconnected L-type SRV connectible pressure chambers are provided aboard the vessel to facilitate the housing of up to 32 survivors.
> 
> A flight deck is fitted behind the bridge structure amidships to support helicopter operations, while the aft deck features a hydraulic / telescopic crane used for deployment and recovery of rescue systems. Additionally, the MOSHIP carries one remotely-operated vehicle (ROV) and a rigid-hulled inflatable boat (RHIB), as well as two rescue boats to assist during rescue operations.
> 
> Turkey has highly specialized team ( within NATO standards ) in this field. For this reason, Turkey is continous member of major submarine rescue drills carried out under NATO. Let's examine the biggest submarine rescue exercise in recent years.
> 
> NATO Centre for Maritime Research and Experimentation (CMRE) participated for the first time in the DYNAMIC MONARCH 2017-Aksaz/Turkey exercise, bringing to the operational players a new digital underwater acoustic communications capability that may increase significantly the effectiveness of distressed submarines escape and rescue operations. (In this area many new underwater communication protocol research is being carried out in Turkey. You may find some information in previous posts of the topic.)
> 
> In total, the 2017 exercise included approximately 1,000 personnel, command and control ship TCG Gemlik, three submarines (TCG Burakreis, TCG Preveze and ESPS Tramontana), four submarine rescue ships (TCG Alemdar with Turkish and US submarine rescue chambers onboard, TCG Inebolu, ITS Anteo and SD Northern River with embarked NATO Submarine Rescue System (NSRS) operated by the United Kingdom, France and Norway), four Turkish patrol boats, four Turkish aircraft (helicopters, Maritime Patrol Aircraft and a C-130), diving teams from Canada, Italy, Poland and Turkey, Medical teams from Canada, Turkey and NSRS (France, Norway and the UK), a Submarine Parachute Assistance Group from Turkey and significant support from host nation Turkey in administration, accommodation, contracting, logistics, transportation and personnel. Nine NATO Allies participated in the exercise with equipment or personnel including Canada, France, Italy, Norway, Poland, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. In addition, observers from Bangladesh, Indonesia, Japan, Pakistan, Poland, Spain, South Korea, Sweden and the United Kingdom experienced various portions of the exercise as well.



What the depth rating of the submarine rescue and transfer of the Mccan bell?


----------



## syed_yusuf

ziaulislam said:


> yes..problem is that fuel cells are run by hydrogen and hydrogen is very expensive to make and even more problematic to distribute
> 
> The upsize is that its lighter than a battery thus much better range and much fesible in heavy automobiles ..
> 
> So fuel cells excellent range but expensive as you have to make hydrogen and use that to run the fuel cell ..lithium batteries very cheap as its just electricity storage
> 
> German U boats use fuel cell a 2 decades ago..now common in cars ..so technology has already proliferated enough



lithium batteries very cheap as its just electricity storage. So the modern fuel cell is basically really big lithium battery carried by submarine?


----------



## PAR 5

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> What the depth rating of the submarine rescue and transfer of the Mccan bell?



600 meters. Beyond that comes the hull crush depth


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

PAR 5 said:


> 600 meters. Beyond that comes the hull crush depth



The Mccan bell is rated to 300 meters, and ROV is rated to 600 meters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

PAR 5 said:


> Shallow Water Attack (SWAT) Submarines are the best choice for both defense and offense purposes for Pakistan Navy. I have an eye on this thread and in due course of time will share some interesting information on the said matter (if allowed). Stay Tuned



Waiting for your interesting information.


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Any update on this program? Has PN decided on their SWAT S/M?


----------



## PAR 5

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Any update on this program? Has PN decided on their SWAT S/M?



Not Yet. Work in Progress


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sulman Badshah

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 549648
> View attachment 549649
> View attachment 549650
> View attachment 549651
> View attachment 549653
> View attachment 549654


Any link to their further Specifications ?


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 549648
> View attachment 549649
> View attachment 549650
> View attachment 549651
> View attachment 549653
> View attachment 549654



I believe these are only concepts, not engineering designs or under production.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> I believe these are only concepts, not engineering designs or under production.


First 3 are single hull concepts, last one is the export variant of the Type 041A.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> I believe these are only concepts, not engineering designs or under production.


Not just concepts.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ziaulislam

syed_yusuf said:


> lithium batteries very cheap as its just electricity storage. So the modern fuel cell is basically really big lithium battery carried by submarine?


Problem is lithium batteries are very heavy..this problem rises exponential with weight...so reason why dumper trucks cant get lithium cells at this moment ..fuel cells aren't


----------



## Zarvan

@Rashid Mahmood Sir G the April of 2019 is going to be over soon still we have no news of construction of first submarine which we ordered beginning. What is going on

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rashid Mahmood

Zarvan said:


> @Rashid Mahmood Sir G the April of 2019 is going to be over soon still we have no news of construction of first submarine which we ordered beginning. What is going on



Wait till 2022.
Only the concerned are required to know that information.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

ziaulislam said:


> Problem is lithium batteries are very heavy..this problem rises exponential with weight...so reason why dumper trucks cant get lithium cells at this moment ..fuel cells aren't



the energy density, Joules per gram of Lithium battery is superior to lead acid. This is the way to the future.



Zarvan said:


> @Rashid Mahmood Sir G the April of 2019 is going to be over soon still we have no news of construction of first submarine which we ordered beginning. What is going on



First SWAT? Whats the update on this?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> the energy density, Joules per gram of Lithium battery is superior to lead acid. This is the way to the future.
> 
> 
> 
> First SWAT? Whats the update on this?


First what ???


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Zarvan said:


> First what ???



Is Navy decided on the SWAT program? When is the first one being built?


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Just a side point.

Source: Defence Turkey (Issue 91. Volume 13. 2019)

STM will also take part in the PN’s new Miniature Submarine Program. 

As per the PN’s request, STM had studied the feasibility of upgrading the Cosmos MG110 (SX756/W) mini-submarines, which were bought in the 1980s to replace the SX404 mini-submarines, but both sides then concluded that this was not an affordable route. 

The PN Submarine Force took pride in operating 3 X-Craft (Cosmos MG110s), which were transferred to the Squadron in March 2005 from the Special Service Group Navy (SSG[N]). This has enhanced the number of sub-surface units to 8 instead of 5 having been in operation prior March 2005.

STM, later on put a *proposal on the table covering the joint development and marketing of a new generation mini-submarine* intended for special forces operations (such as insertions and extractions of SEAL Teams) in littoral waters not only to meet the PN’s (to replace aging Cosmos MG110 in the inventory) but also the Turkish Navy’s (considered TKMS Type 200 and Type 300 mini-sub designs in the past) and other potential customers (Azerbaijan is said to have already declared its interest according to our sources) requirements. 

So, STM has *designed a new type of mini-submarine platform for the PN from scratch* and STM General Manager Murat IKINCI presented a scaled model of this mini-submarine to Pakistan’s Ministry of Defence Production during the signing ceremony for the second contract amendment held in Rawalpindi, Pakistan.​It seems that scaled mock-up is this:

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Thorough Pro

nopes, they are very light and more efficient in terms of charge per gram of weight




ziaulislam said:


> Problem is lithium batteries are very heavy..this problem rises exponential with weight...so reason why dumper trucks cant get lithium cells at this moment ..fuel cells aren't



Remote controlled submerged drones are the future, a lot cheaper than the subs, no humans thus unlimited time at sea, much smaller in size, hence very difficult to locate

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PAR 5

What Pakistan needs for future development is an in-house concept, design and development of surface and sub surface platforms. Hodge Podge of technologies from other countries will simply be a logistical nightmare 



Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Just a side point.
> 
> Source: Defence Turkey (Issue 91. Volume 13. 2019)
> 
> STM will also take part in the PN’s new Miniature Submarine Program.
> 
> As per the PN’s request, STM had studied the feasibility of upgrading the Cosmos MG110 (SX756/W) mini-submarines, which were bought in the 1980s to replace the SX404 mini-submarines, but both sides then concluded that this was not an affordable route.
> 
> The PN Submarine Force took pride in operating 3 X-Craft (Cosmos MG110s), which were transferred to the Squadron in March 2005 from the Special Service Group Navy (SSG[N]). This has enhanced the number of sub-surface units to 8 instead of 5 having been in operation prior March 2005.
> 
> STM, later on put a *proposal on the table covering the joint development and marketing of a new generation mini-submarine* intended for special forces operations (such as insertions and extractions of SEAL Teams) in littoral waters not only to meet the PN’s (to replace aging Cosmos MG110 in the inventory) but also the Turkish Navy’s (considered TKMS Type 200 and Type 300 mini-sub designs in the past) and other potential customers (Azerbaijan is said to have already declared its interest according to our sources) requirements.
> 
> So, STM has *designed a new type of mini-submarine platform for the PN from scratch* and STM General Manager Murat IKINCI presented a scaled model of this mini-submarine to Pakistan’s Ministry of Defence Production during the signing ceremony for the second contract amendment held in Rawalpindi, Pakistan.​It seems that scaled mock-up is this:

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Armchair

Thorough Pro said:


> Remote controlled submerged drones are the future, a lot cheaper than the subs, no humans thus unlimited time at sea, much smaller in size, hence very difficult to locate



kudos to you, precisely the discussion I was having with @bilalkhan777 that if we built, instead of these "multi purpose" mini subs, that will insert SEAL teams and do all kinds of other missions, single mission UUVs - they will simply submerge, putter to an Indian port, and let loose. It could be done inhouse, cost a lot less, and cause maximum mayhem. 

If we thought of this simply, and did not overcomplicate things with SSG and what not, we could have built these UUVs during the time we are having these discussions (for the past few years now!)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GriffinsRule

Armchair said:


> kudos to you, precisely the discussion I was having with @bilalkhan777 that if we built, instead of these "multi purpose" mini subs, that will insert SEAL teams and do all kinds of other missions, single mission UUVs - they will simply submerge, putter to an Indian port, and let loose. It could be done inhouse, cost a lot less, and cause maximum mayhem.
> 
> If we thought of this simply, and did not overcomplicate things with SSG and what not, we could have built these UUVs during the time we are having these discussions (for the past few years now!)



How would one control/communicate an unmanned sub hundreds of miles out in the ocean and underwater? And if that communication is lost for whatever reason, how would that link be re-established and would that mean the sub sinks to the bottom of the ocean in the meantime or surfaces for anyone to come in and grab it?

Overall the idea sounds completely unfeasible to me, bar some giant technological leap that sprouts up in Pakistan. What the likelihood of that happening is, we can all guess, but I think this idea can be shelved and revisited maybe after another 30 years or so.


----------



## Armchair

GriffinsRule said:


> How would one control/communicate an unmanned sub hundreds of miles out in the ocean and underwater? And if that communication is lost for whatever reason, how would that link be re-established and would that mean the sub sinks to the bottom of the ocean in the meantime or surfaces for anyone to come in and grab it?
> 
> Overall the idea sounds completely unfeasible to me, bar some giant technological leap that sprouts up in Pakistan. What the likelihood of that happening is, we can all guess, but I think this idea can be shelved and revisited maybe after another 30 years or so.



The idea, well my idea at least, is to keep it simple. War starts with India, let the little buggers putter away towards an Indian port, once in the vicinity, target anything that moves. No need for us to communicate. Self-destruct once all torpedoes are lost, or go kamakazi.

If anyone tries to grab it, blow up, after shooting all torpedoes of course. Think of it as an underwater MIRV cum cruise missile.

where is @Bilal Khan 777 ? 

Indian ports are relatively close to Pakistan, and many of their major ports including Mumbai could easily be targeted this way in case of war.


----------



## Armchair

Solomon2 said:


> Translation: a the new weapon to enable the next generation of 26/11 terrorists.



Translation: American trying to make shallow statements about things he does not understand, half way around the world. Pakistan has had mini-submarines for decades, and never have they been found to be used by anyone other than the SSG(N).

these are actually replacements of the mini-submarines Pak has, which are now too old to be safely operated.

BTW, the biggest terrorists in the world are the zionist jews like yourself.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## dBSPL

GriffinsRule said:


> How would one control/communicate an unmanned sub hundreds of miles out in the ocean and underwater? And if that communication is lost for whatever reason, how would that link be re-established and would that mean the sub sinks to the bottom of the ocean in the meantime or surfaces for anyone to come in and grab it?
> 
> Overall the idea sounds completely unfeasible to me, bar some giant technological leap that sprouts up in Pakistan. What the likelihood of that happening is, we can all guess, but I think this idea can be shelved and revisited maybe after another 30 years or so.



Therefore, remote control has no meaning, anymore. The concept that stands out here is autonomous machines. Today, even in the simplest tactical UAV systems, the most intensive field of study is the decision support systems and ECM components.

In underwater communication, the use of Optical Communication Systems is increasing.

Conventionally, RF and acoustic technologies are used in submarine communication systems. This has several disadvantages. In these, jamming , signal-cutting and listening can be done by enemy-counterparts. Optical systems are developed as an alternative to RF communication and as a hybrid model. It will be a very important multiplier to gain the ability to communicate, inaudible, uncuttable and unjamable, especially between submarine-helicopters, submarine-divers(or UUVs) and at the same time with surface ships.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ziaulislam

Thorough Pro said:


> nopes, they are very light and more efficient in terms of charge per gram of weight
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Remote controlled submerged drones are the future, a lot cheaper than the subs, no humans thus unlimited time at sea, much smaller in size, hence very difficult to locate


and what will be the means of "remote control" in the sea? i am curious


----------



## GriffinsRule

dBSPL said:


> Therefore, remote control has no meaning, anymore. The concept that stands out here is autonomous machines. Today, even in the simplest tactical UAV systems, the most intensive field of study is the decision support systems and ECM components.
> 
> In underwater communication, the use of Optical Communication Systems is increasing.
> 
> Conventionally, RF and acoustic technologies are used in submarine communication systems. This has several disadvantages. In these, jamming , signal-cutting and listening can be done by enemy-counterparts. Optical systems are developed as an alternative to RF communication and as a hybrid model. It will be a very important multiplier to gain the ability to communicate, inaudible, uncuttable and unjamable, especially between submarine-helicopters, submarine-divers(or UUVs) and at the same time with surface ships.



What is the visibility like underwater during day or night time for these Optical Communication Systems to work?


----------



## Thorough Pro

Drone needs to be submerged, not its antenna, and antenna does not have to be vertical to be visible, it can be horizontal just floating on the surface a few inches above water, secured to the drone via cable, along with solar or wave charger with backup regular fuel for attack mode. It's doable, at least should be experimented with. it will be at least 10/15 times cheaper than the mini sub, will cover a larger area, will be quite and at the same time can listen with underwater microphones and transmit limited/selected data to sat. 




GriffinsRule said:


> How would one control/communicate an unmanned sub hundreds of miles out in the ocean and underwater? And if that communication is lost for whatever reason, how would that link be re-established and would that mean the sub sinks to the bottom of the ocean in the meantime or surfaces for anyone to come in and grab it?
> 
> Overall the idea sounds completely unfeasible to me, bar some giant technological leap that sprouts up in Pakistan. What the likelihood of that happening is, we can all guess, but I think this idea can be shelved and revisited maybe after another 30 years or so.



satellite, what else?

you know they control rovers on moon and mars from earth? 




ziaulislam said:


> and what will be the means of "remote control" in the sea? i am curious


----------



## GriffinsRule

Thorough Pro said:


> satellite, what else?
> 
> you know they control rovers on moon and mars from earth?



So basically my timeline of 2050 is more or less correct as Pakistan does not have the capability to control any underwater crafts at any distances being envisioned here.


----------



## Thorough Pro

We already use satellites for telecommunication, its the same principal, only highly encrypted. I worked on this conceptual design (theoretical) sometime back, believe me very doable. at least worth spending 5/10 million on proof of concept.




GriffinsRule said:


> So basically my timeline of 2050 is more or less correct as Pakistan does not have the capability to control any underwater crafts at any distances being envisioned here.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Armchair

all the while you are ignoring that an autonomous UUV does not need to be controlled, they can simple use INS to get to a location, and use its weapons. 

So now, by ignoring this you then go into a long winded argument of how "this remote control" won't happen till 2050 and what not, all the while leaving PN with a disruptive technology to put to threat some of India's most major ports. 

This is what we call myopia.

We can field a system that works now, at minimal cost. But you will ignore it instead. 

The UK found submarines way before the rest, but kept this technology out of the game for as long as they could. What advantage do we have in keeping this technology in a bag for so long?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## GriffinsRule

Armchair said:


> all the while you are ignoring that an autonomous UUV does not need to be controlled, they can simple use INS to get to a location, and use its weapons.
> 
> So now, by ignoring this you then go into a long winded argument of how "this remote control" won't happen till 2050 and what not, all the while leaving PN with a disruptive technology to put to threat some of India's most major ports.
> 
> This is what we call myopia.
> 
> We can field a system that works now, at minimal cost. But you will ignore it instead.
> 
> The UK found submarines way before the rest, but kept this technology out of the game for as long as they could. What advantage do we have in keeping this technology in a bag for so long?


It's not myopia. I'm just showing that your idea is not feasible in the near or medium term. And even if feasible, it's full of potential pitfalls. But again it's my opinion vs yours, so take it as that

As for your fully autonomous idea, what would happen in this hypothetical scenario? War breaks out, Pakistan launches a few of these fully autonomous uuvs towards different Indian ports. Takes them say 7 days to get there, war however ended after 5 days. Now they have shot their full load of weapons into ships (civil and military) at the port without reason during peacetime. What would be the fallout of that?

There are better technologies we can spend our time, brainpower and money towards that would yield far better results then and have a more far reaching impact then day UUVs. It's okay as far as though experiments go, but not realistic

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Armchair

GriffinsRule said:


> It's not myopia. I'm just showing that your idea is not feasible in the near or medium term. And even if feasible, it's full of potential pitfalls. But again it's my opinion vs yours, so take it as that
> 
> As for your fully autonomous idea, what would happen in this hypothetical scenario? War breaks out, Pakistan launches a few of these fully autonomous uuvs towards different Indian ports. Takes them say 7 days to get there, war however ended after 5 days. Now they have shot their full load of weapons into ships (civil and military) at the port without reason during peacetime. What would be the fallout of that?
> 
> There are better technologies we can spend our time, brainpower and money towards that would yield far better results then and have a more far reaching impact then day UUVs. It's okay as far as though experiments go, but not realistic



Oh my. oh my. You imagine that a UUV would take 7 days to reach Mumbai port from Karachi? I'm afraid you need to re-evaluate the facts that you are living with.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## GriffinsRule

Armchair said:


> Oh my. oh my. You imagine that a UUV would take 7 days to reach Mumbai port from Karachi? I'm afraid you need to re-evaluate the facts that you are living with.


Haha, good try. First off there are a lot more ports of interest we would attack then just Mumbai, which btw I did not specify. Second, you can keep trying to playing with numbers to try to score cheap points but your idea still fails on its merits. The point of the hypothetical example was simple, war can end before your supposed fully autonomous sub ever reaches it's target. Only the most idiotic policy maker would ever use a weapon they can't control for as long as possible. But you can keep dreaming. No harm no foul there

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Armchair

GriffinsRule said:


> Haha, good try. First off there are a lot more ports of interest we would attack then just Mumbai, which btw I did not specify. Second, you can keep trying to playing with numbers to try to score cheap points but your idea still fails on its merits. The point of the hypothetical example was simple, war can end before your supposed fully autonomous sub ever reaches it's target. Only the most idiotic policy maker would ever use a weapon they can't control for as long as possible. But you can keep dreaming. No harm no foul there



So, you then admit that we can use such a simple autonomous UUV to attack Mumbai port during a war? How many ports and naval bases do you think we can attack with such a system? Even if that number is 5, imagine the nightmare such devices could create for these ports and naval bases. 

_In previous wars, we were not able to attack a single  Indian port or naval base. _

If you note, I have said from the first that the aim of such a device would be to hit their Western theater. No one claimed we are going to Kolkata with them bruv.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GriffinsRule

Armchair said:


> So, you then admit that we can use such a simple autonomous UUV to attack Mumbai port during a war? How many ports and naval bases do you think we can attack with such a system? Even if that number is 5, imagine the nightmare such devices could create for these ports and naval bases.
> 
> _In previous wars, we were not able to attack a single  Indian port or naval base. _
> 
> If you note, I have said from the first that the aim of such a device would be to hit their Western theater. No one claimed we are going to Kolkata with them bruv.


No I dont admit it. Pakistan does not have the capability, and "even if it did" the idea is unfeasible.

India seaports here;
https://www.mapsofindia.com/maps/sea-ports/


----------



## Armchair

GriffinsRule said:


> No I dont admit it. Pakistan does not have the capability, and "even if it did" the idea is unfeasible.
> 
> India seaports here;
> https://www.mapsofindia.com/maps/sea-ports/



Still sticking to "Indian ports are 7 days away"? Well, I think your words are self-explanatory to everyone. If only everyone was as smart as you and could give such intelligent arguments such as "the idea is unfeasible" along with the infamous 7 days story. There is no purpose in beating this dead horse with you, so I'm going to leave you to it.


----------



## GriffinsRule

Armchair said:


> Still sticking to "Indian ports are 7 days away"? Well, I think your words are self-explanatory to everyone. If only everyone was as smart as you and could give such intelligent arguments such as "the idea is unfeasible" along with the infamous 7 days story. There is no purpose in beating this dead horse with you, so I'm going to leave you to it.


Your posts keep getting more idiotic every time respond.
Since you dont understand the meaning of the word hypothetical, why dont you put some numbers behind your cockamamie theory and come back with some "Facts". Feel free to ignore what I was trying to convey in my prior post, which clearly went over your head.


----------



## araz

@Armchair and @GriffinsRule . Gentlemen can I please request you to take this conversation to PM if you want to continue it. The points you both wanted to make have been made and the bickering is distasteful. As always this note to the two of you is with all due respects.
Kind regards
A

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Just a side point.
> 
> Source: Defence Turkey (Issue 91. Volume 13. 2019)
> 
> STM will also take part in the PN’s new Miniature Submarine Program.
> 
> As per the PN’s request, STM had studied the feasibility of upgrading the Cosmos MG110 (SX756/W) mini-submarines, which were bought in the 1980s to replace the SX404 mini-submarines, but both sides then concluded that this was not an affordable route.
> 
> The PN Submarine Force took pride in operating 3 X-Craft (Cosmos MG110s), which were transferred to the Squadron in March 2005 from the Special Service Group Navy (SSG[N]). This has enhanced the number of sub-surface units to 8 instead of 5 having been in operation prior March 2005.
> 
> STM, later on put a *proposal on the table covering the joint development and marketing of a new generation mini-submarine* intended for special forces operations (such as insertions and extractions of SEAL Teams) in littoral waters not only to meet the PN’s (to replace aging Cosmos MG110 in the inventory) but also the Turkish Navy’s (considered TKMS Type 200 and Type 300 mini-sub designs in the past) and other potential customers (Azerbaijan is said to have already declared its interest according to our sources) requirements.
> 
> So, STM has *designed a new type of mini-submarine platform for the PN from scratch* and STM General Manager Murat IKINCI presented a scaled model of this mini-submarine to Pakistan’s Ministry of Defence Production during the signing ceremony for the second contract amendment held in Rawalpindi, Pakistan.​It seems that scaled mock-up is this:



Is the Navy buying from STM a submarine design? Has this contract been signed?



Armchair said:


> The idea, well my idea at least, is to keep it simple. War starts with India, let the little buggers putter away towards an Indian port, once in the vicinity, target anything that moves. No need for us to communicate. Self-destruct once all torpedoes are lost, or go kamakazi.
> 
> If anyone tries to grab it, blow up, after shooting all torpedoes of course. Think of it as an underwater MIRV cum cruise missile.
> 
> where is @Bilal Khan 777 ?
> 
> Indian ports are relatively close to Pakistan, and many of their major ports including Mumbai could easily be targeted this way in case of war.



In the hospital most of the time.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PDF

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> In the hospital most of the time.


What happened Sir?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Is the Navy buying from STM a submarine design? Has this contract been signed?
> 
> 
> 
> In the hospital most of the time.


From what I can see, STM only submitted a design proposal in 2019. So, if anything, the Navy would actually need to evaluate this and other options.


----------



## Armchair

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Is the Navy buying from STM a submarine design? Has this contract been signed?
> In the hospital most of the time.



Sorry to hear this, we have all learnt so much from you. I wish we could push a simple solution in terms of a simple armed UUV that is expendable and can attack Mumbai port during war, and other nearby ports.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Armchair said:


> Sorry to hear this, we have all learnt so much from you. I wish we could push a simple solution in terms of a simple armed UUV that is expendable and can attack Mumbai port during war, and other nearby ports.


I think part of the requirement is inserting SOF deep into enemy territory. The other side is laying mines, but if they opt for torpedo tubes as well (for HWTs & AShM), you can have an impressive A2/AD asset too. Basically, mask it in the acoustic noise of shallow waters, the adjacent coastline becomes a no-go for intruding naval systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Armchair

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> I think part of the requirement is inserting SOF deep into enemy territory. The other side is laying mines, but if they opt for torpedo tubes as well (for HWTs & AShM), you can have an impressive A2/AD asset too. Basically, mask it in the acoustic noise of shallow waters, the adjacent coastline becomes a no-go for intruding naval systems.



BUT this is a somewhat different issue. You see, Pak has never been successful in using SOF in war to any meaningful advantage. And creating a defensive no go area can be done in so many ways.
We are forever stuck thinking defensively. We choke like the South African cricket team whenever push comes to shove.

There is a clear possibility for building a low cost system that will cause mayhem on Indian ports and naval installations, but instead we want to do something silly like buy an expensive submarine from Italy, put SOF in them and send them to India... Or sit like a fool in its own waters to deny access to the Indians.
Our whole mindset is wrong. It is that of a country that is unsure of itself. Has no ideology.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TsAr

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> Is the Navy buying from STM a submarine design? Has this contract been signed?
> Get well soon sir.
> 
> 
> In the hospital most of the time.


----------



## ghazi52



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Armchair said:


> BUT this is a somewhat different issue. You see, Pak has never been successful in using SOF in war to any meaningful advantage. And creating a defensive no go area can be done in so many ways.
> We are forever stuck thinking defensively. We choke like the South African cricket team whenever push comes to shove.
> 
> There is a clear possibility for building a low cost system that will cause mayhem on Indian ports and naval installations, but instead we want to do something silly like buy an expensive submarine from Italy, put SOF in them and send them to India... Or sit like a fool in its own waters to deny access to the Indians.
> Our whole mindset is wrong. It is that of a country that is unsure of itself. Has no ideology.


tsk bro, Rahat Fateh Ali Khan doesn't sing to UUVs (sorry, bad joke, I know).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Inception-06

Indigenous design and construction of 01 Midget Submarines underway source ministry of defence!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## syed_yusuf

Inception-06 said:


> Indigenous design and construction of 01 Midget Submarines underway source ministry of defence!


Is this a replacement for existing midget subs ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PAR 5

Inception-06 said:


> Indigenous design and construction of 01 Midget Submarines underway source ministry of defence!



A task undertaken by MTC and KSEW

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Fawadqasim1

Armchair said:


> Sorry to hear this, we have all learnt so much from you. I wish we could push a simple solution in terms of a simple armed UUV that is expendable and can attack Mumbai port during war, and other nearby ports.


Absolutely it can carry a nuclear warhead too.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hallian_Khan

Sorry for ignorance but can we make kind of sucide submarines

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Hallian_Khan said:


> Sorry for ignorance but can we make kind of sucide submarines


What suicide sub what you're talking about there is no suicide submarine in the world Navies, let alone Pakistan @Hallian_Khan


----------



## Armchair

Hallian_Khan said:


> Sorry for ignorance but can we make kind of sucide submarines



A UUV would essentially be an armed suicide submarine that doesn't have people in it. We can easily make it, and would be incredibly effective, but some are too dumb and too arrogant to see the light of this. 

Result? right now if the IN attacked, we would be in very bad shape.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tipu7

Armchair said:


> A UUV would essentially be an armed suicide submarine that doesn't have people in it. We can easily make it, and would be incredibly effective, but some are too dumb and too arrogant to see the light of this.
> 
> Result? right now if the IN attacked, we would be in very bad shape.


UUV tech is yet to mature.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Armchair

Because a guy on the Internet says so...


----------



## Hallian_Khan

pakistanipower said:


> What suicide sub what you're talking about there is no suicide submarine in the world Navies, let alone Pakistan @Hallian_Khan


so if the world doesn't make something we won't make that either... world navies have destroyers, carriers do we have one too? 
all i am saying is if one can make drone sub why can't they change it into suicide one. difficult to detect because of their size n carry more ammo than any cruise missile with more range

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jamal18

Hallian_Khan said:


> so if the world doesn't make something we won't make that either... world navies have destroyers, carriers do we have one too?
> all i am saying is if one can make drone sub why can't they change it into suicide one. difficult to detect because of their size n carry more ammo than any cruise missile with more range



Underwater guided 'missile'?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hallian_Khan

jamal18 said:


> Underwater guided 'missile'?


bhai sub pani me rah sakti ha hum apni marzi se jb chahain use kr sakty hn but we cant do the same with missile


----------



## Ultima Thule

Hallian_Khan said:


> so if the world doesn't make something we won't make that either... world navies have destroyers, carriers do we have one too?
> all i am saying is if one can make drone sub why can't they change it into suicide one. difficult to detect because of their size n carry more ammo than any cruise missile with more range


most useless idea, Submarine is one of the most expensive military tech, can you throw millions of $$$ for destroying enemy, Torpedo are more cheaper way to destroy enemy, We have no aircraft carrier because it is not needed, and we do have a destroyer a bit old one (British origin) @Hallian_Khan

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Accountant

pakistanipower said:


> most useless idea, Submarine is one of the most expensive military tech, can you throw millions of $$$ for destroying enemy, Torpedo are more cheaper way to destroy enemy, We have no aircraft carrier because it is not needed, and we do have a destroyer a bit old on (British origin) @Hallian_Khan


Guys I think this is a difference in terminologies. I think there is no difference between smart onlg range tarpedo and a drone submarine.


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

FYI DRASS Galeazzi has taken the covers off its miniature SSK line. 

http://www.drass.tech/defence-solutions-drass/

@Bilal Khan 777 @Rafi

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## HAIDER

Turkish STM started designing a mini submarine for the Pakistani navy to replace 3 Italian Cosmos MG110 class miniature submarines that where commissioned in 1993

Cosmos MG110 (110 tonnes)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Accountant

Hallian_Khan said:


> so if the world doesn't make something we won't make that either... world navies have destroyers, carriers do we have one too?
> all i am saying is if one can make drone sub why can't they change it into suicide one. difficult to detect because of their size n carry more ammo than any cruise missile with more range


Bro .. what are tarpedos? arent they remote control automatic submarines? However, they have to be much cheaper in comparision to its intended target. For example you cant make a suicide mini sub with 100 million dollars (due to higher ammunition and range to attach a 200 dollar ship. This will be stupidity.


----------



## Rafi

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> FYI DRASS Galeazzi has taken the covers off its miniature SSK line.
> 
> http://www.drass.tech/defence-solutions-drass/
> 
> @Bilal Khan 777 @Rafi



This was the favourite to win the contract, the Turks have no production model, so it is a long shot. Maybe the production of erm erm mini SSK will be the Drass 450, we have a good relationship with the Italians.

Just goes to show that the PN is the most interesting part of the Pak Mil.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

seven0seven said:


> most useless idea, Submarine is one of the most expensive military tech, can you throw millions of $$$ for destroying enemy, Torpedo are more cheaper way to destroy enemy, We have no aircraft carrier because it is not needed, and we do have a destroyer a bit old one (British origin) @Hallian_Khan


I dont think we have one


----------



## Ultima Thule

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> I dont think we have one


yes we have old UK destroyer of 50s/60s


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

seven0seven said:


> yes we have old UK destroyer of 50s/60s


U mean F 21?


----------



## Ultima Thule

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> U mean F 21?


yeah old British type 21 destroyer


----------



## Amigator

Do we have any of these? Somebody has updated Pakistan Navy Assets Page a while ago. Is that true? @Rashid Mahmood


----------



## PAR 5

Amigator said:


> View attachment 583338
> 
> 
> Do we have any of these? Somebody has updated Pakistan Navy Assets Page a while ago. Is that true? @Rashid Mahmood



CORRECTION PLEASE: The 110 ton X-Craft supplied to PN by COSMOS of Italy in late 80's is NOT A SWAT Submarine. SWAT's are from 500-700 tons. The PN X-Crafts are now very old, overhauled many times with the original manufacturer COSMOS gone out of business. These are used primarily by SSGN for covert ops

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## khanasifm

X-Craft 908 P/A as Shallow Water Attack Submarine(SWAS) is used to carryout mine laying torpedo attack, frogman operations and commando landing. The contract of these mini submarines was signed with Italian firm M/s COSMOS in 1986. First of these craft was brought to Pakistan in semi knock down condition in 1988. Subsequently all X-Craft were assembled in Pakistan with TOT. Presently, X-Craft are being operated under COMSUBS alongwith other conventional submarines

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rashid Mahmood

Amigator said:


> View attachment 583338
> 
> 
> Do we have any of these? Somebody has updated Pakistan Navy Assets Page a while ago. Is that true? @Rashid Mahmood



Yes.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Signalian

Amigator said:


> View attachment 583338
> 
> 
> Do we have any of these? Somebody has updated Pakistan Navy Assets Page a while ago. Is that true? @Rashid Mahmood


For insertion of small teams like of SSG (N).

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

PAR 5 said:


> CORRECTION PLEASE: The 110 ton X-Craft supplied to PN by COSMOS of Italy in late 80's is NOT A SWAT Submarine. SWAT's are from 500-700 tons. The PN X-Crafts are now very old, overhauled many times with the original manufacturer COSMOS gone out of business. These are used primarily by SSGN for covert ops



What a is a SWAT, other than a made up term? Anything above 500 tons is a coastal submarine, and not shallow water. That said, every customer's requirements are unique, and to meet operational requirements, tonnage is required.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PAR 5

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> What a is a SWAT, other than a made up term? Anything above 500 tons is a coastal submarine, and not shallow water. That said, every customer's requirements are unique, and to meet operational requirements, tonnage is required.



Its not a made up term. Its an operational term that PN uses to define a certain class of submarine for a certain purpose. X CRAFT hence by this definition is NOT a SWAT

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

PAR 5 said:


> Its not a made up term. Its an operational term that PN uses to define a certain class of submarine for a certain purpose. X CRAFT hence by this definition is NOT a SWAT



It's a made up term, albeit by PN. You don't have to agree with me. These are all new terminologies and different people mean different things. Shallow water submarine is anything that operates in a 10-40 meter column, which the cosmos X-craft did. Its past history now. Subs that are design to operate in 200-300 meter water column don't come into the 10-40 meter water column as these are competing requirements. S/Ms that are >500 tons are coastal submarine.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PAR 5

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> It's a made up term, albeit by PN. You don't have to agree with me. These are all new terminologies and different people mean different things. Shallow water submarine is anything that operates in a 10-40 meter column, which the cosmos X-craft did. Its past history now. Subs that are design to operate in 200-300 meter water column don't come into the 10-40 meter water column as these are competing requirements. S/Ms that are >500 tons are coastal submarine.



Thanks. I’ll launch a complaint tomorrow with NHQ on why are they doing multi billion dollar projects under made-up terms


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

PAR 5 said:


> Thanks. I’ll launch a complaint tomorrow with NHQ on why are they doing multi billion dollar projects under made-up terms



Instead, why dont you tell the readers which "SWATS" PN is buying?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## time pass

*Pakistan Proceeds With New Miniature Submarine*

The Pakistan Ministry of Defence Production (MoDP) listed the development and construction of a miniature submarine as a target for 2016-2017.

This may be related to talks in 2016 between the Pakistan Navy and the Turkish defence vendor Savunma Teknolojileri Mühendislik ve Ticaret A.Ş. (STM) for the joint development of a mini-submarine to supplant the Pakistan Navy’s aging Cosmos MG110 (SX756/W) mini-submarines.

The Cosmos MG110 displaces 119 tons submerged. It can carry eight special operation forces (SOF) divers and two swimmer delivery vehicles (SDV). The MG110s were bought in the 1980s to replace the SX404 mini-submarines.

According to MSI Turkish Defence Review, Pakistan and STM had studied the feasibility of upgrading the MG110s, but both sides concluded that this was not an affordable route.

Subsequently, STM proposed “designing a submarine platform from scratch,” which – if inked – would be considered a “different and strategic” collaborative effort between the two countries.

Turkish shipbuilder Yonca-Onuk is proposing its Underwater Offensive Team boat.










__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=160845338604644

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

time pass said:


> *Pakistan Proceeds With New Miniature Submarine*
> 
> The Pakistan Ministry of Defence Production (MoDP) listed the development and construction of a miniature submarine as a target for 2016-2017.
> 
> This may be related to talks in 2016 between the Pakistan Navy and the Turkish defence vendor Savunma Teknolojileri Mühendislik ve Ticaret A.Ş. (STM) for the joint development of a mini-submarine to supplant the Pakistan Navy’s aging Cosmos MG110 (SX756/W) mini-submarines.
> 
> The Cosmos MG110 displaces 119 tons submerged. It can carry eight special operation forces (SOF) divers and two swimmer delivery vehicles (SDV). The MG110s were bought in the 1980s to replace the SX404 mini-submarines.
> 
> According to MSI Turkish Defence Review, Pakistan and STM had studied the feasibility of upgrading the MG110s, but both sides concluded that this was not an affordable route.
> 
> Subsequently, STM proposed “designing a submarine platform from scratch,” which – if inked – would be considered a “different and strategic” collaborative effort between the two countries.
> 
> Turkish shipbuilder Yonca-Onuk is proposing its Underwater Offensive Team boat.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=160845338604644



So the Turks will be building Pakistan's new miniature submarine?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dazzler



Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Armchair

what an unorthodox and fascinating design!


----------



## Cornered Tiger

Dazzler said:


> View attachment 637279



Seems MG-100 Mini Submarine.


----------



## ziaulislam

Armchair said:


> what an unorthodox and fascinating design!








old italian origin sub .. now retired

n the late 1960s, Pakistan ordered six SX-404s to a slightly modified design. The Pakistani Navy deployed its six boats against the Indian Navy during the 1971 war. One of them, reportedly fitted with external torpedo tubes fired on an Indian naval frigate, INS Kukri, but the torpedo remained stuck in its external launcher. Of the six, one was lost with all hands as a result of an accident on December 27, 1976. Following removal from service, four were scrapped and one was placed ashore as an exhibit in the Pakistan Maritime Museum in Karachi.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Armchair

ziaulislam said:


> old italian origin sub .. now retired
> 
> n the late 1960s, Pakistan ordered six SX-404s to a slightly modified design. The Pakistani Navy deployed its six boats against the Indian Navy during the 1971 war. One of them, reportedly fitted with external torpedo tubes fired on an Indian naval frigate, INS Kukri, but the torpedo remained stuck in its external launcher. Of the six, one was lost with all hands as a result of an accident on December 27, 1976. Following removal from service, four were scrapped and one was placed ashore as an exhibit in the Pakistan Maritime Museum in Karachi.



Thank you for the interesting history. I thought it was a full sized submarine in the Kukri engagement guess I learnt something new today. Would be interesting if a slightly larger coastal submarine can be engineered cheaply and locally.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Armchair

Was just reading the H. I. Sutton website and how mine laying submarines bagged the largest number of enemy ships yet are the least known submarines as their work was not particularly "heroic" or "fashionable". 
http://www.hisutton.com/German-WW1-Type-UC-1-U-Boat.html

The UC II had the highest number of kills of any platform. Imagine that. These are very simple submarines that don't need long duration on station, as they are not ambushing anything. They simply go to a shipping lane / outside a port and deploy mines, come back. 

Doesn't need AIP, doesn't need much but _the deadliest ships_. What if Pakistan designed a UC II type submarine today? 400 tons, 18 mines, 6 crew, 2 torpedoes for self defense. India's Eastern coast would be in deep trouble. 

Such small submarines would be difficult to spot even on sonar. They are a lot less vulnerable due to them not needing to stay on station. If Pak had say 10 such boats, they could deploy hundreds of mines along the Indian coast in a handful of days.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ghazi52

_(USS Diablo in 1964, after the Fleet Snorkel Conversion and just before the submarine transferred to Pakistan. This photo gives a good view of the plexiglass bridge windshield which was later recovered off the wreck.)_

_USS Diablo_ underwent the conversion in 1963. As modified, _USS Diablo_ displaced 1,570t surfaced and 2,414t submerged. The refitted submarine could make 20kts surfaced, 12kts snorkeling with the diesels, or 8 ¾kts submerged on battery power. The underwater endurance on battery power remained limited; 97NM at 2kts or 48 hours maximum. _USS Diablo_ now had a crew of 76 (9 officers and 68 enlisted men). The submarine carried the SS-2 radar with an average range of 21NM, the AN/BLR-6 ESM system, and AN/BQR-2 sonar with a range of 4 NM.

The armament of _USS Diablo_ in postwar American (and later, Pakistani) service remained the WWII-era Mk14 torpedo. The Mk14 was the main US Navy submarine torpedo of WWII. It had a range of 2 ¼NM at 46kts or 4 ½NM at 30kts, and had a 507 lbs TNT warhead. This was an unguided, straight-running torpedo inferior to the post-WWII homing designs. None the less, because of the huge quantity built, it remained in frontline US Navy use through the Korean War and in second-line service into the 1970s. The Mk14 was always the torpedo type included with exported American WWII-veteran submarines.






_(The WWII-era Mk14 which was heavily exported after the war and used in the US Navy until the early 1970s.)_

*Transfer to Pakistan*

In 1963, _USS Diablo_ was loaned to Pakistan on a four-year basis under terms of the Security Assistance Program (SAP) with an option to renew or purchase afterwards. On 1 June 1964, the Pakistani ensign was raised and _USS Diablo_ became _PNS Ghazi_.

_USS Diablo_ was selected as the freshly-done Fleet Snorkel upgrade would give the Pakistani navy a quality asset, but would not take one of the more valuable GUPPY-upgraded WWII submarines out of American use.

_PNS Ghazi_ arrived at her new home port of Karachi, Pakistan in September 1964. 
_PNS Ghazi_ was Pakistan’s first-ever submarine.






_(PNS Ghazi arrives at Karachi, Pakistan in September 1964.)_

*THE 1965 WAR*

The 1965 Indo-Pakistani War was the culmination of several border disputes. The war started on 5 August 1965. _PNS Ghazi_ was assigned to patrol south of West Pakistan, and ordered to seek out only “major” Indian warships, understood to be carriers, cruisers, and possibly large destroyers. India tried throughout the war to de-escalate the conflict and limit it as much as possible to a regional ground war. As such, _PNS Ghazi_‘s prime target; the aircraft carrier _INS Vikrant_; was not to be found.

_(INS Vikrant had been launched as HMS Hercules by Great Britain during WWII but left unfinished when WWII ended. The incomplete carrier was later bought by India and finished to Indian specifications.)_

The Indian navy was on the lookout of_ PNS Ghazi_ and the submarine had to be wary of detection. On 9 September, the Indian frigate _INS Beas_ made an unsuccessful depth charge attack. Later an Indian Alize ASW plane flew directly over _PNS Ghazi_ while the submarine had the snorkel mast and periscope exposed. It was a miracle that the plane didn’t detect the submarine.








_(The cramped control room of PNS Ghazi.)_


On 17 September 1965, _PNS Ghazi_ acquired a surface contact which was identified as the frigate _INS Brahmaputra_, one of the Indian navy’s more modern warships at the time. _PNS Ghazi_ fired three WWII-era Mk14 torpedoes at the contact and increased depth to evade counter-attack. According to the submarine’s logs, three distinct explosions were heard at the time the torpedoes should have impacted, and _PNS Ghazi_ was credited with sinking _INS Brahmaputra_.






_
(A photo taken inside PNS Ghazi’s engine room during the 1965 war. The Fleet Snorkel-converted submarines retained their WWII propulsion system, four Fairbanks-Morse diesel engines and two Elliot electric motors.)_

In fact, _INS Brahmaputra_ was not sunk, and had not even been hit. The frigate never acquired either a submarine nor incoming torpedoes, and had not dropped any depth charges. No ships were damaged or sunk in the area. It’s unknown to this day what _PNS Ghazi_‘s target was or what the three explosions were.

The war ended on 23 September 1965 and _PNS Ghazi_ was recalled to Karachi.
*
Refit in Turkey*

The USA placed a weapons embargo on Pakistan in 1965. _PNS Ghazi_ badly needed a refit at that time. To circumvent the embargo, Pakistan negotiated a shipyard deal with Turkey. Turkish shipyards were well familiar with WWII-vintage American submarines as the Turkish navy was operating several. Moreover, in 1953 Gölcük Shipyard in Turkey had been provided the Fleet Snorkel blueprints and had actually done two Fleet Snorkel conversions, on _TCG Gür_ and _TCG Inonu_ (formerly _USS Chub_ and _USS Brill _during WWII) which had transferred unmodified in 1948. The refit cost $1.5 million ($11.1 million in 2015 dollars) which was a fairly good bargain.






_(PNS Ghazi in Karachi harbor in 1970, following the Turkish refit.)_

Because the Suez Canal was still closed from the Arab-Israeli Six Day War, _PNS Ghazi_ had to go the long way around South Africa and up through the Atlantic. The refit started in March 1968 and was completed in April 1970. It’s believed that the WWII American mines _PNS Ghazi_ used in 1971 were bought “under the table” from Turkey at this time.

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
1


----------



## S A L M A N.

Dazzler said:


> View attachment 637279


These boats don't have names since they are not actually commissioned units. They're known as X-Craft 01,02 & 03.
One of these was lost with all hands at sea during an SSGN training mission in 1994-95. The entire crew (15 men) made a 'wet' escape through the main hatch from a depth of about 30 meters.
The submarine was later raised in the PN's first submarine salvage operation in mid-1995. It was overhauled and returned to service a few years later and remains in service to this day.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

PAR 5 said:


> CORRECTION PLEASE: The 110 ton X-Craft supplied to PN by COSMOS of Italy in late 80's is NOT A SWAT Submarine. SWAT's are from 500-700 tons. The PN X-Crafts are now very old, overhauled many times with the original manufacturer COSMOS gone out of business. These are used primarily by SSGN for covert ops



So whats the progress now?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## HRK

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> So whats the progress now?


Sir posting after a long time ... hope you are fine

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Bilal Khan 777

HRK said:


> Sir posting after a long time ... hope you are fine



I was undergoing refit by STM

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Tipu7

Bilal Khan 777 said:


> I was undergoing refit by STM


Nice to see you back Sir ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Incog_nito

I'm sure PN is making Chinese ones at home but they should also get license for EU ones too.


----------



## vizier

One thing that came to my mind for a while about mini subs is underwater glider concept. it just surfaces and takes in water and the wings do the rest gliding the mini submarine.









Underwater glider - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org










No propeller and possbly almost no noise. It can go very long distances compared to normal propellers. 

This one for example has recharge option and can glide 3000kms.






SEAEXPLORER | ALSEAMAR innovation & services at sea







www.alseamar-alcen.com










Only downside would be it is slower than normal propeller submarines. You can install propeller as well when you want the drone to follow the target for example moving ships and send back the location data for you to target the ships.
If you install a passive sonar on it it can patrol in a large area. When it detects the target it can go active sonar and use normal propeller to follow the target and send back continious target data be it enemy submarines or ships.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Incog_nito

How many mini-submarines PN will going to acquire/built?


----------



## FuturePAF

The PN should look at deeper diving mini-submarines (as they could hide in key sea lanes, but well below other standard attack submarine depths), and use the advantage of newer battery technology to just stay on station (such as outside our ports, and littoral sea lanes) for a couple of weeks at a time; until relieved by another submarine.

In this way, the submarine could help maintain a “bastion” in our littoral coastline, and act as an early line of defense from attack from the sea.

Used in coordination with gliders and a Sosus net, it could take the burden off of longer range submarines; which could use those resources to better take the fight to the enemy

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Incog_nito

FuturePAF said:


> The PN should look at deeper diving mini-submarines (as they could hide in key sea lanes, but well below other standard attack submarine depths), and use the advantage of newer battery technology to just stay on station (such as outside our ports, and littoral sea lanes) for a couple of weeks at a time; until relieved by another submarine.
> 
> In this way, the submarine could help maintain a “bastion” in our littoral coastline, and act as an early line of defense from attack from the sea.
> 
> Used in coordination with gliders and a Sosus net, it could take the burden off of longer range submarines; which could use those resources to better take the fight to the enemy



But they are deployed by large ships or subamrines. PN I guess building 6 or 8 Mini Submarines like the Chinese ones and I'm sure they are also building some with Turkey.


----------



## FuturePAF

Incog_nito said:


> But they are deployed by large ships or subamrines. PN I guess building 6 or 8 Mini Submarines like the Chinese ones and I'm sure they are also building some with Turkey.



Sure, deploy them by a larger submarine or quietly by a submarine tender and have the submarine be recovered similarly. Something akin to the soviet “Piranha” class.

a couple of torpedo tubes with advanced Torpedos or advanced anti-ship cruise missiles and the ability to dive deep, to carry out a hit and run attack. The run part would be dictated by the capabilities of the propulsion; hence the need to explore modern battery technology. If the propulsion technology is there to allow a modest sprint at high speed after an attack, it might be a viable option to guard the coast and sea lanes, while the large subs can focus on offensive operations.

There small size would allow keep costs low; a fraction of the cost of the planned Hangor Class, but with just the right punch to be a coastal defense force. Like a “picket sub”. Might even work as an unmanned platform and get the attention of the Chinese navy, for their potential Taiwan invasion protection requirement. 



H I Sutton - Covert Shores


----------



## Incog_nito

Dazzler said:


> View attachment 637279



These should be scrapped.


HAIDER said:


> Turkish STM started designing a mini submarine for the Pakistani navy to replace 3 Italian Cosmos MG110 class miniature submarines that where commissioned in 1993
> 
> Cosmos MG110 (110 tonnes)



Where are CGIs for the Turkish STM mini-submarine? I am sure PN is involved in the R&D with Turkey over submarines:

*Mini-Submarines*
*SSK Class Submarines*
*SSN Submarines* (may be in future)


----------



## imranyounus

PN is looking to have 2 to 3 different force structures in future. on the west coast it will mostly be OPV and Older ships mostly performing anti submarine function and coastal patrol. 

While the larger ships and submarines will be assigned open water operation in Arabian sea. 

The most important theater will be on eastern coast close to Indian border. this is where it will need these unconventional assets. Along with FAC Gun boat, helicopter PN will definitely deploy these small coastal submarines. And they will be a very potent area assess denial assets and can also be used as surprise attack options as well targeting Indian ships with torpedoes and if they can be equipped with small cruise missiles that will be even more effective for both anti ship and land attack as well.


----------



## vizier

The underwater - glider scheme can be used as a very long range detection platform. Actually I see it is currently used for this purpose.









Liberdade class underwater glider - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





"It is an experimental class whose models were originally intended to track quiet diesel electric submarines in littoral waters, move at 1–3 knots and remain on station for up to six months"







Satcom would be necessary like uavs. When it surfaces it transmits data back.

Another option that comes to my mind is usage of solar panels(open-close hatch at the top) to recharge it on surface. That way it can stay on duty for years and have ranges competing with nuclear subs. And it will be very cheap making life much more difficult for enemy sub fleet.


Another idea that comes to my mind is two passive sonars seperated side by side on it can estimate range of the target as well as direction quietly without giving away its location or I think they can work in pairs. This way two passive sonars can separate away from each other and communicate getting range data from the target.

There wont be anything hidden under water.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ziya



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## ziya

its almıst clear this design for pakistan by STM

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Zarvan

We should replace our Midget submarines with these.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Zarvan said:


> We should replace our Midget submarines with these.


Pakistan is already making its own.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Zarvan

iLION12345_1 said:


> Pakistan is already making its own.


I don't think those have this kind of capability which these have


----------



## iLION12345_1

Zarvan said:


> I don't think those have this kind of capability which these have


How do you know their capability? If they weren’t good enough then PN would have ordered foreign ones already, it’s not like they’re shy about purchasing things from Turkey.

A midget submarine is not hard to make Compared to other things Pakistan has already worked on. Even if it’s not as good, a local option has many other benefits.

Though maybe PN can buy both, we operate two types currently, the modernized Cosmos class and the local SWAS. These could replace the cosmos.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## araz

iLION12345_1 said:


> Pakistan is already making its own.


Are you able to elaborate a bit more. I know we had a few X crafts from Italy and we do have some capability to manufacture them. However, to the best of my knowledge other than one highly speculative article which based its theory only on a picture , there has not been any information that we are manufacturing SWATS. Help would be greatly appreciated.
Regards
A

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## iLION12345_1

araz said:


> Are you able to elaborate a bit more. I know we had a few X crafts from Italy and we do have some capability to manufacture them. However, to the best of my knowledge other than one highly speculative article which based its theory only on a picture , there has not been any information that we are manufacturing SWATS. Help would be greatly appreciated.
> Regards
> A


HI Sutton is a trusted source when it comes to naval matters. It was his article that highlighted the submarine originally based off the satellite images. (https://www.forbes.com/sites/hisutt...ce-with-pakistani-navy-seals/?sh=6cf3d3613ba2)
But this submarine was listed in the ministry of defense production yearbooks, which means it was definitely constructed and inducted. According to the yearbook the design and manufacturing was both done locally. I suppose that based on the PN and SSG(N)s needs, more will be inducted as well, however we don’t know about it’s capabilities.
The other midget submarines PN operates are the MG110 “Cosmos” class submarines, these are Italian origin, 110 ton submarines. PN has three of them, they are pretty old but PN has modernized them, I remember a modernization project for them back in the 2000s.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## ziya

stm officals says that STM 500 sub designed accordingly from an foreign country order,although he did not say the name of that country most probably its pakistan

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

iLION12345_1 said:


> HI Sutton is a trusted source when it comes to naval matters. It was his article that highlighted the submarine originally based off the satellite images. (https://www.forbes.com/sites/hisutt...ce-with-pakistani-navy-seals/?sh=6cf3d3613ba2)
> But this submarine was listed in the ministry of defense production yearbooks, which means it was definitely constructed and inducted. According to the yearbook the design and manufacturing was both done locally. I suppose that based on the PN and SSG(N)s needs, more will be inducted as well, however we don’t know about it’s capabilities.
> The other midget submarines PN operates are the MG110 “Cosmos” class submarines, these are Italian origin, 110 ton submarines. PN has three of them, they are pretty old but PN has modernized them, I remember a modernization project for them back in the 2000s.
> View attachment 772636
> View attachment 772637
> View attachment 772638
> View attachment 772639
> 
> View attachment 772641


The PN has 2 requirements.

1. the mini-sub replacing the Cosmos MG110

2. shallow water attack (SWAT) sub -- basically a fully capable AShW/ASW sub with ELINT in a smaller package.

We may be working on the mini-sub/Cosmos MG110 replacement on our own, but the SWAT will be an import.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Blacklight

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> The PN has 2 requirements.
> 
> 1. the mini-sub replacing the Cosmos MG110
> 
> 2. shallow water attack (SWAT) sub -- basically a fully capable AShW/ASW sub with ELINT in a smaller package.
> 
> We may be working on the mini-sub/Cosmos MG110 replacement on our own, but the SWAT will be an import.


What about 2nd strike capability, excluding Babur?


----------



## Dreamer.

Blacklight said:


> What about 2nd strike capability, excluding Babur?


Surely that's not to be via a mini submarine?? The subject is mini submarines, not all PN requirements.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blacklight

Dreamer. said:


> Surely that's not to be via a mini submarine?? The subject is mini submarines, not all PN requirements.


Sorry for the off topic post


----------



## Marker

iLION12345_1 said:


> HI Sutton is a trusted source when it comes to naval matters. It was his article that highlighted the submarine originally based off the satellite images. (https://www.forbes.com/sites/hisutt...ce-with-pakistani-navy-seals/?sh=6cf3d3613ba2)
> But this submarine was listed in the ministry of defense production yearbooks, which means it was definitely constructed and inducted. According to the yearbook the design and manufacturing was both done locally. I suppose that based on the PN and SSG(N)s needs, more will be inducted as well, however we don’t know about it’s capabilities.
> The other midget submarines PN operates are the MG110 “Cosmos” class submarines, these are Italian origin, 110 ton submarines. PN has three of them, they are pretty old but PN has modernized them, I remember a modernization project for them back in the 2000s.


_Mystery Submarine In Service With Pakistan’s Navy SEALs_
By H I Sutton Former Contributor
Aerospace & Defense

Some of the best-kept secrets are hidden in plain sight. Sitting on the quayside at PNS Iqbal, a special naval base in Karachi, Pakistan, is a submarine that you won’t find in any reference books, including my own World Submarines Covert Shores Recognition Guide. To my knowledge this will be the first article detailing this submarine, which appears to be in service with Pakistani Navy SEALs.






Artist’s impression of the new Pakistan Navy[+]
H I SUTTON

The submarine is a small special forces type, measuring around 55 feet long by 7 to 8 feet across. That is a fraction of the size of a regular submarine. Its location and size both point to use by the Pakistani Navy’s Special Service Group, known as SSG (N). They are equivalent to the U.S. Navy SEALs and use the ‘SEAL’ terminology. They have a long tradition of training with the American unit.

This category of submarine is called an X-Craft in Pakistani Navy parlance. The term was inherited from the Italian manufacturer Cos.Mo.S (commonly written Cosmos) who sold Pakistan two sets of midget submarines in the past. The Italian firm itself borrowed the term from the Royal Navy midget submarines of World War II. The American equivalent to the X-Craft is the Dry Combat Submersible (DCS) now entering service with the U.S. Navy SEALs.

It may be intended to replace the Pakistani Navy’s existing X-Craft. Pakistan operates three MG-110 X-Craft which were built locally between 1993 and 1996. They are getting long in the tooth and are due for replacement. But the Italian firm which designed them, Cos.Mo.S was closed down twenty years ago. Today its designs are continued by respected Italian manufacturer Drass. They offer a series of modern X-Craft that may be ideal for Pakistan.

But this mystery submarine does not appear to be a Drass design. The smallest publicly revealed Drass design is the DG-85, which is slightly larger than the boat seen in Pakistan.

One clue is that the boat first appeared in 2016. This may tie to a statement in the Pakistani Defence Production Division (MoDP) 2015-16 yearbook. It listed the “Indigenous design and construction of 01 Midget Submarine” as a target for 2016-2017.

Since then there have been reports that Turkish firm STM (Savunma Teknolojileri Mühendislik ve Ticaret A.Ş.) was jointly developing a mini-submarine with Pakistan. This could indicate that the mystery craft was not successful and so a new design is being developed. Another possibility is that the Turkish partnership will focus on smaller ‘chariots.’ These are similar to the U.S. Navy’s SDVs (SEAL delivery vehicles). In the Pakistani Navy the Chariots can be carried by the larger X-Craft.

Analysis of commercial satellite imagery shows that the boat rarely (if ever) goes in the water. The only clear image showing it in the water is from 2016. The operational status is therefore unclear. The tent that covers it is often moved, however, suggesting ongoing maintenance. So the sub cannot be written off, but what it’s called and what exactly it does remains a mystery.

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/hisutt...ine-in-service-with-pakistani-navy-seals/amp/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shayyman

Pakistan eyeing shallow-water warfare capability with mini attack submarines from Turkey​

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## imranyounus

There are also some Images of new small Chinese sub in circulation 









New Chinese Diesel-Electric Submarine Breaks Cover


The latest Chinese submarine design to emerge remains enigmatic but seems to utilize a notably small hull.




www.thedrive.com





That can also be an option. Remember quite recently the new NC also hinted on possible purchase of such systems

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aziqbal

latest news is that PN is looking into a shallow water submarine 

possibly for insertion of special forces like SSGN 

to be honest the SSGN would love to get their hands on a submarine and they deserve it too

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

aziqbal said:


> latest news is that PN is looking into a shallow water submarine
> 
> possibly for insertion of special forces like SSGN
> 
> to be honest the SSGN would love to get their hands on a submarine and they deserve it too












My bet is between these two.


----------



## Dreamer.

aziqbal said:


> latest news is that PN is looking into a shallow water submarine
> 
> possibly for insertion of special forces like SSGN
> 
> to be honest the SSGN would love to get their hands on a submarine and they deserve it too


Hardly 'latest' , but thanks for telling us (again).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Super Falcon

STM 500 subs are very reliable

Pak navy is inducting these ulin future


----------



## FOOLS_NIGHTMARE

*The Saffron Hunters Patch



*


----------

