Pakistan Navy's Submarine Plans: S-20 vs Type 214

[CriticalThought]

I think there are two different perspectives on this thread and both are highly valuable in their own way. Pak defence insiders drop pointers about capabilities not publicly disclosed. Based on the poster's seniority and access to such knowledge, these claims cannot be outrightly denied. But an Analyst cannot start writing articles in magazines based on info from an internet forum. So, in order to do justice to his role, the Analyst is limited to statements based on publicly available information, or his own network of informants whom he knows personally and can vouch for the veracity of their claims.

Peace!

 

[Penguin]

@Penguin
The shaheen is an entirely solid fuel program. I cannot offer anything on this beside my word unfortunately, but I cannot not post regarding liquid fuelled as incorrect information.

The ghauri is purely the Nodong with some improvised guidance added over the years based on improving technology.
The first ghauris were literally painted over Nodongs.

@Oscar

You are 100% correct. I went back and checked my base sources and these indeed say solid fueled.

So, Lord knows how come, but I have incorrectly reproduced/listed these as liquid fueled in post #46. However, as is evident from the concluding paragraph (in between the Chinese and US SLBM info in post #46), in the discussion, I did operate under the assumption that these were in fact solid fueled (otherwise I would not have said that Shaheen I/IA were a possible baseline after having ruled out liquid fueled missiles). Hence my conclusion would remain the same. I see I also did not refer to Shaheen II in the sentence about missile length, where my intention was to indicate II and III as too long.

Pakistan does not have a JL-2/Df-31 equivalent missile. A liquid fueled missile would be out of the question. Ghauri I and II as well as Shaheen II and III would likely be too long for a submarine application. This leaves Shaheen I and IA as potential baseline. Note that these are single RV and warhead vehicles. This couple to a 2 silo Type 032 would give very limited firepower, less then or at best equivalent to a 1950s era Soviet Golf class.

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/pakistan...-s-20-vs-type-214.459191/page-4#ixzz4PoXJAX1j

Anyway, thanks for pointing this out. (In a civilized manner ;-)

People might be interested to know that when Pakistan conducts Missile tests, especially over water, neighboring countries, not just India, but Iran, Oman, and UAE are informed in advance.

'Over water' is not the same as 'from submerged missile silo's'.

 

[SQ8]

@amardeep mishra Please learn to disagree and move on rather than repeating again and again with the same.

 

[Khafee]

People might be interested to know that when Pakistan conducts Missile tests, especially over water, neighboring countries, not just India, but Iran, Oman, and UAE are informed in advance.

Try explaining that to an armchair general!

 

[SQ8]

@Oscar

You are 100% correct. I went back and checked my base sources and these indeed say solid fueled.

So, Lord knows how come, but I have incorrectly reproduced/listed these as liquid fueled in post #46. However, as is evident from the concluding paragraph (in between the Chinese and US SLBM info in post #46), in the discussion, I did operate under the assumption that these were in fact solid fueled (otherwise I would not have said that Shaheen I/IA were a possible baseline after having ruled out liquid fueled missiles). Hence my conclusion would remain the same.


Source: https://defence.pk/threads/pakistan...-s-20-vs-type-214.459191/page-4#ixzz4PoXJAX1j

Anyway, thanks for pointing this out. (In a civilized manner ;-)


'Over water' is not the same as 'from submerged missile silo's'.

There is honestly no need to replicate silo based tests if a sufficient design is available.

Again, there is a FUNDAMENTAL difference is how India and Pakistan operate their R&D. If something is available to Pakistan from sources abroad at a cheaper cost than it takes to engineer it at home; we dont. In addition, it is preferred in all circles of the military to adapt and amalgamate ideas and concepts; technologies and chemistry from pre-done research as much as possible to avoid needless expenditure of time and money.

A case in point and one that I will use as it is publicly available
http://carepvtltd.com/Communication_Systems/cms.php?id=Taeerun
The case for the radio, the chipset, knobs and all are made in China. The design for it however, from the power board, chipset (uses a T.I ARM+DSP chip) all were done in Pakistan. There was a RFQ sent to various electronic firms in China that do such manufacturing, the first 10 or so examples were really bad so QC was implemented; but eventually a workable system came into being.

Hence, any expenditure in electronics manufacturing, procurement and installation was avoided.
Now, it is not to say that Pakistan does not desire to make everything in this at home; but that right now the paucity of funds forces a more short term cost effective solution.

This is pretty analogous to a LOT of R&D developmental work carried out in Pakistan; a lot of which will NEVER see the light of day or ever be spoken about. Projects are created and abandoned with half of them never leaving the drawing board.

Sorry for the off topic

Now, regarding the SLBM; it is simply not a priority as the Israeli approach for nuclear deterrence is seen as better suited to our environment and economy.

 

[amardeep mishra]

@amardeep mishra Please learn to disagree and move on rather than repeating again and again with the same.

@Oscar
Yeah exactly,indeed. Normal rules of science and technology do not apply to pakistan. King's College London's report also do not apply to pakistan.
What I am saying is,of course, you or for that matter anyone else cant prove anything--i agree--in part because of the very clandestine and shady ways with which pakistani research establishments work,however one can indeed analyse the feasibility of a project based on the established engineering/industrial and research capabilities of pakistan. I wonder,how come folks who would have never even seen a proper wind tunnel make claims as wonderful as the guy above who I responded to!

 

[SQ8]

@Oscar
Yeah exactly,indeed. Normal rules of science and technology do not apply to pakistan. King's College London's report also do not apply to pakistan.
What I am saying is,of course, you or for that matter anyone else cant prove anything--i agree--in part because of the very clandestine and shady ways with which pakistani research establishments work,however one can indeed analyse the feasibility of a project based on the established engineering/industrial and research capabilities of pakistan. I wonder,how come folks who would have never even seen a proper wind tunnel make claims as wonderful as the guy above who I responded to!

How can you determine based on never having met a person or spoken to him. I believe you are letting your very few years in education and work experience get to your head. As I said earlier, there is a complete cultural difference in R&D between India and Pakistan; something you will never accept or understand. Those that know sleep soundly , those that do not can also sleep soundly.

 

[amardeep mishra]

If something is available to Pakistan from sources abroad at a cheaper cost than it takes to engineer it at home; we dont. In addition, it is preferred in all circles of the military to adapt and amalgamate ideas and concepts; technologies and chemistry from pre-done research as much as possible to avoid needless expenditure of time and money.

Hi dear @Oscar
This approach is good and will work for non-strategic cases,However countries normally do not part away with critical technologies such as proprietary metallurgical processes,flight control design to name a few.In the case above you have highlighted the case of software defined radio(?),wherein the initial design was carried out in pakistan and since pakistan lack the industrial manufacturing capabilities to mass produce certain ICs,it was outsourced to china. This approach will work as long as china is willing to mass produce --I know there is no reason for china to not help pakistan.
Now I want to highlight that,NOT ALL components/sub-systems are available off the shelf. It is those components and systems for which research effort must be made in the country and industrial set up improved for the same.
Now since I am not aware of the extent of strategic cooperation between china and pakistan,I can not make a firm comment as to what they(chinese) are willing to supply pakistan.Going just by their past record,I think the cooperation is much more deep in strategic realm than what is known in public.

I believe you are letting your very few years in education and work experience get to your head.

@Oscar
My dear friend Oscar,Regardless of "quantum of experience" ,the college I come from and my work speaks about myself. I can assure you,you can find a lot of professors in some of the best univs in states(particularly MIT) who are alumni of my college. I could only wish,you were here to see how rigorous our system is at least in IITs. I am afraid we are veering off course.

 

[SQ8]

Hi dear @Oscar
This approach is good and will work for non-strategic cases,However countries normally do not part away with critical technologies such as proprietary metallurgical processes,flight control design to name a few.In the case above you have highlighted the case of software defined radio(?),wherein the initial design was carried out in pakistan and since pakistan lack the industrial manufacturing capabilities to mass produce certain ICs,it was outsourced to china. This approach will work as long as china is willing to mass produce --I know there is no reason for china to not help pakistan.
Now I want to highlight that,NOT ALL components/sub-systems are available off the shelf. It is those components and systems for which research effort must be made in the country and industrial set up improved for the same.
Now since I am not aware of the extent of strategic cooperation between china and pakistan,I can not make a firm comment as to what they(chinese) are willing to supply pakistan.Going just by their past record,I think the cooperation is much more deep in strategic realm that what is known in public.


@Oscar
My dear friend Oscar,Regardless of "quantum of experience" ,the college I come from and my work speaks about myself. I can assure you,you can find a lot of professors in some of the best univs in states(particularly MIT) who are alumnus of my college. I could only wish,you were here to see how rigorous our system is at least in IITs. I am afraid we are veering off course.

It is deep, and not deep. And its not just Chinese. Based on your premise that is all I can state.
Again, I do not doubt the education standard; but object to your biased ideals that are based on simply having NO information. Any engineer worth his salt, does not shoot conclusions in the dark.

 

[CriticalThought]

Mr @amardeep mishra regularly and systematically debases Pakistani capabilities. It is my suspicion that in part his attacks derive from a hope that somewhere someone will lose his/her cool and divulge more than needed. His negative attacks can be safely ignored. He does provide some very insightful knowledge in some of his posts and no doubt he has respectable education under his belt.

 

[amardeep mishra]

It is my suspicion that in part his attacks derive from a hope that somewhere someone will lose his/her cool and divulge more than needed. His negative attacks can be safely ignored.

Hi dear @CriticalThought
Maybe in your country pakistan,asking for proof and credible scientific literature amounts to "negative remarks and attacks" but not in india. You can go ahead and ask me for credible proof of various research projects going on in india and believe me I will happily feed you with ample scientific literature,patents to satisfy you. I hope you understand my point!
Thanks in advance.

 

[Corsair255]

@Penguin

Could you please assist , truth or wishful thinking of someone new here ? Thank you.

-------

@Corsair255

It would be nice if you could please inform me and other interested members about "details" of a Turkish project without any material packages,

which is nowhere mentioned. Thank you

I made my homework. Please answer me and don't use "suspicious" accounts created 3 days ago, for attacking cause some unknown reasons .

..................
................

I wrote much before about that problems with Germany, an other member mentioned it too

........................................../

Being new in here doesn't make me necessarily suspcious, does it?
Beside it even doesn't mean i wasn't reading, following or watching the forum before i became a member.
And i was not attacking you but, just trying to express a fact.
Yet, you've posted irrelevant links to what we're discussing.
Your post speaks for yourself.

 

[Penguin]

There is honestly no need to replicate silo based tests if a sufficient design is available.

Valid point. Questions then become: "is a sufficient design available?, "from where?", "when?", and "at what price?" (which does not necessarily imply monetary terms).

Again, there is a FUNDAMENTAL difference is how India and Pakistan operate their R&D. If something is available to Pakistan from sources abroad at a cheaper cost than it takes to engineer it at home; we dont. In addition, it is preferred in all circles of the military to adapt and amalgamate ideas and concepts; technologies and chemistry from pre-done research as much as possible to avoid needless expenditure of time and money.

Yes, from a rational pov, that makes sense. Then again, it is not always a completely financially/economically rational process. Some states feel a need to demonstrate their (fledgling or more mature) domestic capabilities, for political or symbolic reasons. Or there is a wish for self-sufficiency/autarky (with a price card attached). A variety of states could be mentioned here, outside of the immediate India and Pakistan context.

Now, regarding the SLBM; it is simply not a priority as the Israeli approach for nuclear deterrence is seen as better suited to our environment and economy.

I would agree with that. But that would make for a stronger case for e.g. S-20 or derivative S-26 rather than e.g. a Type 032 or derivative (allthough a version with only hull VLS and no sail silo's could be relevant if a long - over 8m - cruisemissiles missile were used since 032 has a lager hull diameter of 10m versus the 8m of S-20 and -26). The thing to watch for in any of the new boats would then be: torpedo tube diameter, number of tubes, number/space for reloads, any hull-mounted VLS (in relation also to submarine hull diameter and missile length).

 

[SQ8]

Valid point. Questions then become: "is a sufficient design available?, "from where?", "when?", and "at what price?" (which does not necessarily imply monetary terms).


Yes, from a rational pov, that makes sense. Then again, it is not always a completely financially/economically rational process. Some states feel a need to demonstrate their (fledgling or more mature) domestic capabilities, for political or symbolic reasons. Or there is a wish for self-sufficiency/autarky (with a price card attached). A variety of states could be mentioned here, outside of the immediate India and Pakistan context.


I would agree with that. But that would make for a stronger case for e.g. S-20 or derivative S-26 rather than e.g. a Type 032 or derivative (allthough a version with only hull VLS and no sail silo's could be relevant if a long - over 8m - cruisemissiles missile were used since 032 has a lager hull diameter of 10m versus the 8m of S-20 and -26). The thing to watch for in any of the new boats would then be: torpedo tube diameter, number of tubes, number/space for reloads, any hull-mounted VLS (in relation also to submarine hull diameter and missile length).

Lets take the example of the M-11s and the Nodongs. Unlike the Nodongs which were bought by KRL on freighters from NK, painted and fired away; the M-11s were delivered CKD along with basic motor design and guidance. That motor design and guidance principle let to the development of the Shaheen as a evolution. Ideas were taken from people coming out of the former CCCP who spent some time as consultants and moved on. So what began as a scaled up M-11 had concepts and ideas , technology incorporated from very diverse sources. That knowledge was also kept within the system and imparted to people sent abroad to study "similar" if not the same field. The result is a very homegrown and proprietary weapons system.

The same goes for the Babur, it is a bastard of a US airframe and design idea, a Chinese Turbojet and a Pakistani guidance system; I could tell you which Exact processor is in it but then I cant go back to Pakistan safely .

At the end of the day, the cost savings were with designing a rocket airframe from scratch, propulsion design and guidance principles. It would have taken costs in both time and money to do it from scratch and one could argue the benefits of doing it for complete self reliance. But Pakistan is a poor nation that faces a threat 10 times in both population and resource; the end justifies the means and not the other way around. Other nations also do it and we are not alone in proliferation of technology and certainly not the leader in it; just unlucky that we got caught and get a bad rep for it.

 

[Armstrong]

But Pakistan is a poor nation that faces a threat 10 times in both population and resource; the end justifies the means and not the other way around. Other nations also do it and we are not alone in proliferation of technology and certainly not the leader in it; just unlucky that we got caught and get a bad rep for it.

Which is precisely why you need me at the helm; I will make Pakistan great again!