You took a decision to hold back! Wow! Listen to maneckshaw who himself on bbc said the indian army prepared for an assault for 9 months and attacked when pakistan was most vulnerable. Read books by former indian army officials who themselves admitted to be the mukhti bahini . If supporting mukhti bahini with ground troops and training was holding back then...
New Recruit
East or west it was PAKISTAN then. If we attack rajasthan isnt it still an attack on india as an attack on punjab or kashmir?
It seems everyone - including the PN of course - is aware of the dangers posed by India's strong (and continuously strengthened) ASW capabilities. The only way to put the P-8Is under pressure is to introduce surface ships with good AAW capabilities as well as maritime fighters capable of traversing the Arabian Sea for long periods of time. ASW capable corvettes can be deterred with AShM-equipped aircraft as well as corvettes and FACs.Pakistan, China Finalize 8-Sub Construction Plan
By Usman Ansari 10:37 a.m. EDT October 11, 2015
(Photo: Navy Office of Legislative Affairs via Wikimedia Commons)
10 CONNECT 33 TWEET 1 LINKEDINCOMMENTEMAILMORE
ISLAMABAD — Pakistan has finalized its long-negotiated submarine deal with China, with four to be built in China and four in Pakistan. Analysts believe the submarines will go a long way toward maintaining a credible conventional deterrent against India, and also largely secure the sea-based arm of Pakistan's nuclear triad.
Minister for Defence Production Tanveer Hussain announced the news last week while opening a new exhibition center at the Defence Export Promotion Organization.
Construction is to be undertaken simultaneously in both countries, but Hussain did not say when construction would commence or what type had been selected.
Most analysts believe the subs will be the air independent propulsion (AIP) equipped variant of the S-20, which is an export development of China's Type-039A/Type-041 class diesel-electric submarines.
Though Chinese submarine technology is reported to have improved considerably, Tom Waldwyn, research analyst in the Defence and Military Analysis Programme at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said, "the capabilities of Chinese submarines are not something which can be easily determined as it benefits countries on both sides to keep this a secret.
"The export version of the Type 039A, the S20, is believed to be AIP optional and should the Pakistanis opt for this capability it would give them greater operational flexibility through increased endurance. Other than being AIP optional, it is currently unclear what other differences there would be between a Chinese Navy Type 039A and an export version," he said.
DEFENSE NEWS
Pakistan To Buy 8 Submarines From China
Hussain also highlighted a transfer of technology agreement, with a training facility established in Karachi for this purpose.
State-owned shipyard Karachi Shipyard and Engineering Works (KSEW) already has experience with submarine overhaul and construction and will build the subs.
Analyst, author and former Australian defense attache to Islamabad Brian Cloughley says joint construction suits both parties, but even with a transfer of technology, Pakistan will still be reliant on China.
"It is in the interests of both parties to have as much as possible manufactured in Pakistan, but of course the really high-tech systems will have to come from China, as it's simply not cost-effective for Pakistan to gear up to make them," such as the AIP capability, Cloughley said.
Cloughley believes construction will likely commence next year: "Given the way KSEW has been managed and expanded over the past few years I expect construction could begin as early as mid-2016. There has already been liaison and training in shipbuilding and the training center is formalization of this on a rather larger scale, with the focus entirely on submarines, of course."
These submarines have been linked by analysts to securing the sea-based arm of Pakistan's nuclear triad. However, according to recent Chinese media reports, Pakistan's access to the military grade Chinese Beidou-II (BDS-2) satellite navigation network is perhaps of equal importance.
Mansoor Ahmed, Stanton Nuclear Security junior faculty fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center and expert on Pakistan's nuclear deterrent and delivery systems, said the ability of Pakistan's submarines to accurately position themselves is critical to their nuclear-deterrent role and the country's strategic assets as a whole.
"The BDS-2 satellite system will greatly enhance Pakistan's access to much needed ISR capabilities required for deployment of strategic forces at sea on submarine platforms. Unlike India, which is seeking to build a dedicated fleet of SSBN's [ballistic missile submarines] armed with SLBMs [submarine-launched ballistic missiles], Pakistan's force posture is purely defensive and India-centric for which AIP-equipped conventional submarines provide a reliable solution in terms of maintaining a cost-effective deterrent at sea," he said.
He says these submarines will generally be quieter than India's Arihant SSBNs and deployed within striking distance of India's coastlines armed with the submarine-launched variant of Pakistan's Babur cruise missile.
Ahmed does not believe all eight submarines will be assigned the deterrent role as they also will be required to undertake conventional patrol duties "equally important given the pressing need to continue to improve Pakistan's existing sea-denial capability in the face of the exponentially expanding and modernizing surface and sub-surface fleet of India's Navy."
Therefore, three or four conventional AIP-equipped submarines (though with limited range compared to nuclear-powered submarines) and armed with nuclear or conventional land attack cruise missiles "might offer the best bang for the buck for Pakistan in existing circumstances."
However, Pakistan has been particularly concerned with India's growing anti-submarine warfare (ASW) capabilities.
Accurate assessment of this is, according to Waldwyn, unavailable. "Whilst India has undoubtedly made significant improvements in recent years in its ASW capability in terms of equipment, the necessary data with which to evaluate Indian ASW operations does not currently exist in the public arena."
Nevertheless, Ahmed says Pakistan is taking no chances as the submarines "on their own would not constitute an 'assured' second strike platform in the traditional sense, especially in the face of the growing asymmetry in favor of Indian ASW capabilities.
"India will have the luxury to deploy a significant portion of its ASW assets [including several P8-I aircraft] and its own fleet of AIP-equipped submarines against Pakistan's small submarine fleet during a crisis; especially once it will be assumed that some of the Pakistani subs are equipped with nuclear-armed cruise missiles," making them a prized target for the enemy," he said.
"A triad for Pakistan, based on its 'full-spectrum' deterrence posture, will consist of at least 10 different types of ballistic and cruise missiles, of which the naval Babur will comprise the sea leg, and taken together these offer much greater redundancy, survivability, and targeting and operational flexibility to the decision-makers to employ these assets in counter-force or counter-value roles," he said.
Therefore, he said, China has been instrumental in helping complete the naval leg of Pakistan's "nuclear triad" that had been a critical gap it its "full-spectrum posture."
"The second-strike capability for Pakistan, flows from the survivability of its strategic triad [which is largely solid fueled and road-mobile] than reliance on any one system or 'leg' of the triad," according to Ahmed. "Taken together, it makes it impossible for India to eliminate Pakistan's entire capacity of inflicting unacceptable damage regardless of any 'massive retaliatory strike' by India, and maintaining sufficient survivable strategic capability by Pakistan is essential for securing deterrence stability in the region."
Email: uansari@defensenews.com
New Recruit
Such a twaddle talk on this....I think you already know that if any nation tries to harm/invade another nation, it is quite natural that the latter will not only be defending themselves but might try to show them the strength. Gilbraltar and Grand Slam were actually answers to Indian Invasion/brutality and illegal capturing of Jammu Kashmir. And if you say that you had been having NO FIRST USE policy from the very beginning, then why on the earth, you guys invaded Hyderabed Deccen in 1948 and same question goes for Manawadar and Junagar???
Like I said this is strategically important for Pakistan and seems steps are being taken...
Navy officials arrested in connection with dockyard attack
Security forces arrested three suspects involved in an attack at Karachi naval dockyard from the Lak Pass area of Quetta the other day, a security official said.
A security official, who requested anonymity, told Dawn.com that acting on intelligence reports, security forces conducted raids in the outskirts of Quetta and picked up three suspects.
“The suspects are Navy officials,” he added, giving no details about their ranks.
They were shifted to Karachi on a plane from Quetta for further interrogation.
The suspects were trying to escape to Afghanistan, when they were intercepted by security forces.
He said some suspects were also apprehended by security forces from Ormara and Karachi after the initial interrogation.
The Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) have already claimed responsibility for the attack on the naval dockyard, claiming they had inside help.
Defence Minister Khawaja Asif has on record said “some of the navy staff of commissioned ranks and some outsiders” were involved in the terrorist strike.
Militants attacked the naval dockyard in a raid which left an officer and two insurgents dead.
The Taliban have already threatened a bloody response to a military offensive against insurgents in NorthWaziristan on the Afghan border.
The military launched the offensive in mid-June shortly after a brazen attack on Karachi airport that left dozens dead and extinguished a largely fruitless peace process with the TTP.
The weekend raid was the latest in a series of high-profile attacks on key installations by the Taliban in recent years, including an 2011 assault on a naval base, also in Karachi, and on the military’s headquarters in 2009.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
^^^ Interesting who is sponsoring these attacks.
On another note - I keep hearing about the Qing class that Pakistan is getting referred to as the S-20, S-26 and even the S-30 class. Some blogs say that there will be four S-26 and four S-30 (with differing sizes). The S-26s have been trialling in Wuhan, China since 2012 will come in much earlier than the S-30's.
The S-26
Length : 92.6 metres,
Breadth: 10 metres,
Hydroplane width : 13 metres
Height : 17.2 metres.
Draught: 6.85 metres (surfaced)
Displacement : 3,797 tons.
Submerged depth : 160 metres, max dive depth: 200 metres plus.
Maximum surface speed : 10 Knots
Maximum submerged speed : 14 Knots.
Crew: 88 for 30 days without resupply, or 200 crewmen for three days.
The S-30's will be a bit larger (longer) with a submerged displacement of 6,628 tons (roughly double that of the S-26 class), and will be armed with four vertically-launched marine version of Babur or Hatf-III long-range land-attack cruise missiles and two/three submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBM), most likely the upgraded JL-2 SLBM.
This is interesting to onlookers like myself because of academic interest only - and by no means am I asking to discuss sensitive details of a classified, strategic military asset.
Experimental modified Qing class (S-30) with large sail and extension underneath to carry three JL-2 SLBM missiles
Of further interest is the fact that Thailand Navy is also purchasing the same modified Qing class subs (S26T).
As discussed in posts here at PDF and other blogs - the Thai navy needs SSKs for normal naval warfare and to prevent denial and blockage of its shipping lanes unlike Pakistan which is building a sea-based second strategic strike capability. Bangladesh's sea-lane denial prevention scenario is not unlike the Thai example. For the next batch of subs (two at minimum) - we should consider S-26's purchases with ToT to be built locally as the infrastructure in our yards is largely similar to KSEW.
In my opinion, the purchase of Bangladesh' obsolete Ming class was a mistake and at 200 million each, they were not really all that cheap compared to the 300 million Thailand is paying for the modern S-26T's. Chalk it up to massive corruption and our current puppet regime being manipulated by external interests. What a waste....
As stated previously by brother @Shotgunner51 in a previous Thai Navy thread - "complete sea-based second strategic strike capability (for Pakistan) would at least include the 8 heavy SSK/SSG (min 3600 tonnes), LACM (maybe ToT depends on how Babur gets in the pic), Satcom system, surface fleet (sub support/tender e.g. Type 926, 930), supporting aircrafts, port equipments, C4ISR system, etc."
Here is a newspaper write-up on the Thai Navy's whitepaper - which makes it clear as to why smaller navies like Thailand needs subs. This scenario would also apply to Bangladesh - being sandwiched by trade competitors...
"THE NAVY has released a nine-page document detailing what it says are the reasons why the country needs to spend Bt36 billion on buying three submarines from China.
The move came after Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha suspended the procurement of the Yuan Class S26T submarines and told the Navy to explain to the public the necessity of protecting the country's marine interests and why it wanted to buy the subs.
In the document, drafted on the order of Navy chief Admiral Kraisorn Chansuwanit, the Navy stated that Thailand's maritime interests amounted to Bt24 trillion per year with an increasing value. They include marine natural resources, marine transport, downstream industries and tourism.
The submarines would be only 0.006 per cent of the total marine interests because they could be used for at least 30 years, the Navy stated.
Almost 95 per cent of the country's imports and exports are transported by sea, it said, adding that about 15,000 cargo vessels passed through the Gulf of Thailand per year. If the gulf, which is 400 kilometres wide, were blocked, as happened during World War II, the country would be badly affected.
The Navy said although there was no war looming, maritime conflicts between countries existed and no one could guarantee that the conflicts would not descend into wars. Having the submarines would be a defensive strategy against wars and a balance of power mechanism.
In terms of its marine capability, the country is lagging 10 years behind neighbouring countries like Singapore, Vietnam and Indonesia.
In response to claims the Yuan Class S26T would not be useful because it can only dive in shallow water and are easy targets for enemies, the Navy argued that the Gulf of Thailand is about 50 metres deep and some operations need to be done near the shore. Planes cannot see submarines which dive down 20 metres, it said.
The Navy said it wanted to buy the submarine because it was efficient and the most value for money. Five other countries would provide only two submarines for Bt36 billion.
The Chinese submarine also had air-independent propulsion that enabled it to stay under water for 21 days compared with subs from other countries that had to emerge to charge batteries every four or five days.
The Chinese subs are also equipped with weapons, including torpedoes and sea mines, the Navy said, adding that their safety is on par with European submarines with a double-hull body.
China also offered eight years of parts service and a two-year guarantee on all equipment in the sub, while other countries offered only a one-year guarantee. China would also transfer knowledge on the sub maintenance, its systems and weapons.
The Navy said the Bt36-billion fund would be paid through instalments over seven to 10 years, or around Bt3 billion to 5 billion per year depending on how much each instalment was set at. The money would not be taken from the central fund or special funds but the Navy's annual budget allocation from the government."
