well, the agostas used steel from PSM- HY-80What is the capacity in Pakistan to produce military ship grade steel? Does Pakistan even have the capability to produce the steel or is it something that would need to be sourced?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
well, the agostas used steel from PSM- HY-80What is the capacity in Pakistan to produce military ship grade steel? Does Pakistan even have the capability to produce the steel or is it something that would need to be sourced?
What would it take to make it feasible?As far as i know, The capability to work with and produce steel of this grade exists within Pakistan and its industry. But something being technically possible doesn’t mean it’s realistically possible, especially given the state of some of our largest steel plants.
well, the agostas used steel from PSM- HY-80
well, part of it probably had something to do with Indian ties warming with France and in 2011 France disallowed heavy weapons sales to Pakistan. Something probably brewing prior to 2011 really. Follow-up Agosta's were not feasible due to financials yes, but more importantly, the priorities of the states' defense spending were likely counter-insurgency during those times due to the WoT. Lack of funds, combined with WoT probably meant the silent service was neglected and only kept to the minimum amount of vessels needed to maintain at least one continuous patrol.So there was local input atleast in the Steel, What other major areas local resources were used? Unfortunately, In such multi-million or billion dollar projects there isn't much detailed info in public domain that's why many questions comes to mind like:
- Why PN didn't build any more Agostas-90b after PNS Saad that was commissioned in 2006?
Agosta 90b is a capable vessel. Considering PN had received rights & ToT and then Naval Chief had claimed that from then onwards PN not only operate subs but will be building for itself and other countries (Perhaps it was convicted CNS Mansur ul haq who said at that time). It couldn't be just the financial issues as the the matter of fact, one of prime reasons Navy pushed for ToT / copyrights in Agosta deal (or atleast what was told in the newspapers of that era) was that after ToT costs of subs will be greatly reduced as newer subs will be built locally. But 9 years later we signed up for 8 Chinese Hangor-class subs. Why did we choose the chinese subs instead building more agosta-90b? What really failed in agosta-90b deal? Are the chinese subs much more advanced then the agosta-90b? If that's the case then its understandable.
What I think is despite the rhetoric of PN leadership of that era, PN never really absorbed the manufacturing capability to build more agostas-90b. The CNS statements were kind of political in nature and far from reality. Perhaps only the technical limitations pushed us to go for chinese sub deal.
Interestingly, about chinese sub deal, we again heard nearly the same wordings by another CNS that capability to build subs locally in future. But I think those statements are far from reality. Those ToT agreements never really equipped or enabled us to build more platforms ourselves. As @Bilal Khan (Quwa) has pointed out PN needs to focus on original submarine program that may be the right direction.
With the Agosta 90B, the PN and KSEW got the know-how to build that specific design, but not the required industrial capacity to do it without France's help. When French help waned, so did the Agosta 90B as the PN needed specific OEM-supplied inputs, such as the engines, AIP, and so on.So there was local input atleast in the Steel, What other major areas local resources were used? Unfortunately, In such multi-million or billion dollar projects there isn't much detailed info in public domain that's why many questions comes to mind like:
- Why PN didn't build any more Agostas-90b after PNS Saad that was commissioned in 2006?
Agosta 90b is a capable vessel. Considering PN had received rights & ToT and then Naval Chief had claimed that from then onwards PN not only operate subs but will be building for itself and other countries (Perhaps it was convicted CNS Mansur ul haq who said at that time). It couldn't be just the financial issues as the the matter of fact, one of prime reasons Navy pushed for ToT / copyrights in Agosta deal (or atleast what was told in the newspapers of that era) was that after ToT costs of subs will be greatly reduced as newer subs will be built locally. But 9 years later we signed up for 8 Chinese Hangor-class subs. Why did we choose the chinese subs instead building more agosta-90b? What really failed in agosta-90b deal? Are the chinese subs much more advanced then the agosta-90b? If that's the case then its understandable.
What I think is despite the rhetoric of PN leadership of that era, PN never really absorbed the manufacturing capability to build more agostas-90b. The CNS statements were kind of political in nature and far from reality. Perhaps only the technical limitations pushed us to go for chinese sub deal.
Interestingly, about chinese sub deal, we again heard nearly the same wordings by another CNS that capability to build subs locally in future. But I think those statements are far from reality. Those ToT agreements never really equipped or enabled us to build more platforms ourselves. As @Bilal Khan (Quwa) has pointed out PN needs to focus on original submarine program that may be the right direction.
I think STM 500 will be a very attractive option for Pakistan due to it's low cost and Türk Tipi Hücumbot due to it's deadliness.With the Agosta 90B, the PN and KSEW got the know-how to build that specific design, but not the required industrial capacity to do it without France's help. When French help waned, so did the Agosta 90B as the PN needed specific OEM-supplied inputs, such as the engines, AIP, and so on.
That said, the PN leveraged the know-how from that deal as much as possible (e.g., forming NRDI, which later took on the Jinnah-class frigate program). As @arslank03 said, the PN bought the Hangor submarines for a relatively good price and, IMO, it'll help KSEW warm up its capacity to build submarines again.
The next step is an original submarine design. This is where the PN will pursue optimal capability as much as possible while also looping in domestic inputs where feasible (e.g., steel, electronic subsystems, anti-sub and anti-ship weapons, etc.).
The PN needs a stealthy anti-ship/anti-sub hunter, so it'll probably look at a 1600~1800-ton single-hull design with -- ideally -- fuel-cell AIP. I wouldn't expect VLS -- it'll deviate from the core requirement of these subs (A2/AD) and make connecting with input suppliers (e.g., for the engines and the AIP) needlessly more difficult. Moreover, the larger double-hull Hangors will probably take on longer-ranged assignments, while the original SSP will stay closer to home to deter and deny.
I think the PN will work with whoever it chooses for the SWATS program; so, keep an eye for it -- I think it's down to Turkey and Italy via STM and Fincantieri, respectively. South Korea may be a dark horse.
As @arslank03 said, the S800 would be ideal as that was based on a full-sized submarine program and, without doubt, Fincantieri is more experienced and well-connected (e.g., with propulsion and AIP suppliers). OTOH, Turkey will likely be more upfront with transferring know-how and capacity to Pakistan so that NRDI can own the design and KSEW can produce the submarines.
Given the secrecy of the silent service and the stakes, I don't know if we'll ever learn about the winner of the SWATS program. I can imagine a situation where in a few years the PN announces the induction of the first SWATS and the start of an "indigenous submarine" project.
BTW, here's a summary of the PN's original programs:
There are 3 main areas remaining:
- Jinnah-class frigate (mainstay surface warship)
- Sea Sultan (long-range maritime patrol aircraft)
- Patrol boat (38.8 m design in partnership with Swiftships)
- Marine Assault Boat (in partnership with Techno Marine of Poland
- Multirole Helicopter (for shipborne ASuW/ASW and CSAR ops)
- Submarine (to eventually replace the Agosta 90B and expand the fleet)
- FAC (a stealthy fast attack craft for A2/AD)
Haibat Class is a enlarged re-design of Azmat class and is the first indigenously designed vessel by PN/MTC/KSEW.With the Agosta 90B, the PN and KSEW got the know-how to build that specific design, but not the required industrial capacity to do it without France's help. When French help waned, so did the Agosta 90B as the PN needed specific OEM-supplied inputs, such as the engines, AIP, and so on.
That said, the PN leveraged the know-how from that deal as much as possible (e.g., forming NRDI, which later took on the Jinnah-class frigate program). As @arslank03 said, the PN bought the Hangor submarines for a relatively good price and, IMO, it'll help KSEW warm up its capacity to build submarines again.
The next step is an original submarine design. This is where the PN will pursue optimal capability as much as possible while also looping in domestic inputs where feasible (e.g., steel, electronic subsystems, anti-sub and anti-ship weapons, etc.).
The PN needs a stealthy anti-ship/anti-sub hunter, so it'll probably look at a 1600~1800-ton single-hull design with -- ideally -- fuel-cell AIP. I wouldn't expect VLS -- it'll deviate from the core requirement of these subs (A2/AD) and make connecting with input suppliers (e.g., for the engines and the AIP) needlessly more difficult. Moreover, the larger double-hull Hangors will probably take on longer-ranged assignments, while the original SSP will stay closer to home to deter and deny.
I think the PN will work with whoever it chooses for the SWATS program; so, keep an eye for it -- I think it's down to Turkey and Italy via STM and Fincantieri, respectively. South Korea may be a dark horse.
As @arslank03 said, the S800 would be ideal as that was based on a full-sized submarine program and, without doubt, Fincantieri is more experienced and well-connected (e.g., with propulsion and AIP suppliers). OTOH, Turkey will likely be more upfront with transferring know-how and capacity to Pakistan so that NRDI can own the design and KSEW can produce the submarines.
Given the secrecy of the silent service and the stakes, I don't know if we'll ever learn about the winner of the SWATS program. I can imagine a situation where in a few years the PN announces the induction of the first SWATS and the start of an "indigenous submarine" project.
BTW, here's a summary of the PN's original programs:
There are 3 main areas remaining:
- Jinnah-class frigate (mainstay surface warship)
- Sea Sultan (long-range maritime patrol aircraft)
- Patrol boat (38.8 m design in partnership with Swiftships)
- Marine Assault Boat (in partnership with Techno Marine of Poland
- Multirole Helicopter (for shipborne ASuW/ASW and CSAR ops)
- Submarine (to eventually replace the Agosta 90B and expand the fleet)
- FAC (a stealthy fast attack craft for A2/AD)
As a replacement for DA-20 Falcons?Haibat Class is a enlarged re-design of Azmat class and is the first indigenously designed vessel by PN/MTC/KSEW.
And with the changes done to convert Milgem to Babur class (Expansion in length and width to accommodate VLS), i suspect PN/MTC was likely involved in that as well.
I am pretty sure PN has EW Variant of ATR72 in the pipeline as well since we did see a image o that on ideas.
no, PNAs a replacement for DA-20 Falcons?
As a replacement for DA-20 Falcons?
Missed the PN partDA-20s belong to the Air Force.