What's new

Ballistic missile submarine don't need to be nuclear powered. PNS could build one

Status
Not open for further replies.
My dear rando, your big little non-ops navy is very new to the "harpoon" missile, where we have been firing it and using it since the 80s, and also from the submarines. That harpoon in you neck should soften a bit now. For an experienced user of Harpoon, we know how to stop it, and you have forgotten CIWS and other remedies already in place.

Operating something and being able to stop it are two entirely different things. Ask the Royal Navy what happened during the Falklands and when they achieved the ability to stop such missiles.

Your ships need a working air defence system first.

The chakra is nothing more than one torpedo off its stbd bow.

You will be lucky to detect anything that's even 300m below the waterline in the Arabian Sea, let alone something that has a normal diving depth of more than 400m.

I want to take you seriously, but it doesn't look like you are aware of naval systems in general.

It's all hypothetical. The question remains does your chakra have the balls to use that fire power against Pakistan in 2018? If chakra had the balls we would have seen it by now.

We don't go to war based on bravado. We make calculated decisions.

After losing 28 Indian soldiers and officers at LOC and IB in 2018, we surely can see the kind of balls these guys have

They are better at lynching people in mobs.

Let's see how long your PA takes to admit the truth about the surgical strikes first.
 
But you do make loud noises about your capabilities without having the balls to use such capabilities.

As I said, we make calculated decisions. That's what gave you your country.
 
China should help Pakistan building a nuclear sub.
 
Pakistan will get it's nuckear sub but not anytime soon not before 2028
 
Agosta subs are french designs. It's like made in India Su-30MKI's.

And why are you triggered? lol...


Only fuss is made in india and u called it 6th generation which is even not to be called 4 generation:cheesy::D:D:enjoy::rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
why r u triggered? is it ur dad thread???:partay:

Make in India shit class shtealth deshtruyers will dishtroy pak and China.... I telling u

first let them come out of dockyard :cheesy::cheesy::partay:, probably sepending whole life there
 
Operating something and being able to stop it are two entirely different things. Ask the Royal Navy what happened during the Falklands and when they achieved the ability to stop such missiles.

Your ships need a working air defence system first.



You will be lucky to detect anything that's even 300m below the waterline in the Arabian Sea, let alone something that has a normal diving depth of more than 400m.

I want to take you seriously, but it doesn't look like you are aware of naval systems in general.



We don't go to war based on bravado. We make calculated decisions.



Let's see how long your PA takes to admit the truth about the surgical strikes first.
Hi @randomradio
Instead of wasting time on whose navy is better, I guess it would be far more fruitful to discuss the topic at hand and that is-
"Ballistic missile submarine don't need to be nuclear powered. PNS could build one"
As for the balance of conventional power, I do not think anyone doubts where both the navies stand vis-a-vis each other.
Ok, back to the topic of ballistic missiles being conventionally powered, I believe it is not really a good idea to place BMs on a sub that has to come frequently to the surface. A small AIP equipped sub with SLCM can still be considered ok, but BMs a big no. In order to carry a 20t SLBM, the sub would have to be stretched by at least 30-40m in order to make space for vertical silos. This will not only only increase the mass of the sub but also put tremendous stress on the diesel-electric propulsion system. Having an effective and workable system is very different from makeshift system. Pakistan is far far from "designing" any kind of sub let alone a nuclear one.
 
Only fuss is made in india and u called it 6th generation which is even not to be called 4 generation:cheesy::D:D:enjoy::rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
why r u triggered? is it ur dad thread???:partay:
What? :what: Do you make sense? Don't quote me for idiotic blabbers. :)
 
Hi @randomradio
Instead of wasting time on whose navy is better, I guess it would be far more fruitful to discuss the topic at hand and that is-
"Ballistic missile submarine don't need to be nuclear powered. PNS could build one"
As for the balance of conventional power, I do not think anyone doubts where both the navies stand vis-a-vis each other.
Ok, back to the topic of ballistic missiles being conventionally powered, I believe it is not really a good idea to place BMs on a sub that has to come frequently to the surface. A small AIP equipped sub with SLCM can still be considered ok, but BMs a big no. In order to carry a 20t SLBM, the sub would have to be stretched by at least 30-40m in order to make space for vertical silos. This will not only only increase the mass of the sub but also put tremendous stress on the diesel-electric propulsion system. Having an effective and workable system is very different from makeshift system. Pakistan is far far from "designing" any kind of sub let alone a nuclear one.

I was actually saying the same thing and telling the Chinese dude that. Post 4 and 6. The Pakistanis took it personally.
 
As per best info project never stopped but running like tortoise, still on papers but I hope they started to build sub end of this year.
Why I also believe if we field a ssbn it would be diesel electric much easier to make we have 1000s of km of sea area such sub can hide easily for.months no need to deploy em for years like nuclear
We can build several conventional one at price of single nuclear ssbn they wouldn't need to go into enemy territory we just need a longer range missile like marine version of shheen 3 3000km or even ababeel mirved of 2200 km
So would not need as sophisticated stealth as ssk and conventional r already more stealthy then nuclear anyway
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom