Pakistan successfully tests Babur 2 Cruise Missile.

[The Accountant]

For starters, one does not necessarily require an operation submarine to conduct an underwater launch. India, for example, tested its launch silo's for SLBMs using a pontoon submerged more than 30 metres deep in the sea. Testing could in principle also have involve a friendly navy's submarine (if the test was conducted 'out of area'). So, you can see that there are some steps/assumptions between an underwater launch test as a given and the conclusion that current PN boats have Babur. The earlier discussion, from which you took that old quote, was about the question whether currenntly operational PN boats (submarines) have a functional Babur capability. And the apparent answer was: no. Do not confuse testing with operational deployment. There's a lot in between.

But does it make sense to test a weapon and disclose it when we do not have ability to use it atleast for half a decade at minimum ? Furthermore, why agosta cannot fire babur ? Is this due to dimensions or some restrictions ?

 

[Mrc]

This missile was being tested since 2006... when one of tests were picked up by US navy and they mistook it for harpoon being modified for land attack and requested an inspection of harpoons which was agreed and allowed....

This is a mature weapon but I don't know which sub is firing it....

 

[Safriz]

This missile was being tested since 2006... when one of tests were picked up by US navy and they mistook it for harpoon being modified for land attack and requested an inspection of harpoons which was agreed and allowed....

This is a mature weapon but I don't know which sub is firing it....

and still they destroyed the suspected P-3C orions, the exact same serial numbers which were inspected and e cleared.

 

[Penguin]

But does it make sense to test a weapon and disclose it when we do not have ability to use it atleast for half a decade at minimum ? Furthermore, why agosta cannot fire babur ? Is this due to dimensions or some restrictions ?

Any SSK with 533mm tubes can in principle fire eg Harpoon or Exocet from underwater. But that doesn't mean any and all SSKs are fitted for these missile i.e. have an operational capability.

 

[niaz]

and still they destroyed the suspected P-3C orions, the exact same serial numbers which were inspected and e cleared.

Hon Sir,

With due respect, do I understand that you mean to say that the Americans who supplied PC-3 Orions in the first place arranged with Taliban to destroy 3 of these planes in the May 2011 attack on Mehran Naval Base?

Pak Navy’s current fleet of PC-3’s is 7. Does it ever make one wonder as to why would the US subsequently replace two of the PC-3 lost in the attack? All the PC-3's have the same capability, why single one out?
Is it possible that this particular aircraft was destroyed because it happened to be parked at Mehran base at the time of the attack?


“Pakistan’s P-3 Orion Maritime Aircraft – and their Harpoons”

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/pakistans-p-3-orions-05972/

“US to replace two P3C Orion aircraft”

https://www.dawn.com/news/637216

Most people including the Taliban consider it as revenge attack in response to the killing of OBL.

“Taliban spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan claimed responsibility for the attack, and called it a revenge of the killing of Osama bin Laden.”

https://tribune.com.pk/story/174808/pns-mehran-attack-vulnerable-embarrassed-and-targeted/

However in a free country one is free to believe whatever one wishes. I would simply call it a flight of fancy.

 

[The Accountant]

Hon Sir,

With due respect, do I understand that you mean to say that the Americans who supplied PC-3 Orions in the first place arranged with Taliban to destroy 3 of these planes in the May 2011 attack on Mehran Naval Base?

Pak Navy’s current fleet of PC-3’s is 7. Does it ever make one wonder as to why would the US subsequently replace two of the PC-3 lost in the attack? All the PC-3's have the same capability, why single one out?
Is it possible that this particular aircraft was destroyed because it happened to be parked at Mehran base at the time of the attack?


“Pakistan’s P-3 Orion Maritime Aircraft – and their Harpoons”

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/pakistans-p-3-orions-05972/

“US to replace two P3C Orion aircraft”

https://www.dawn.com/news/637216

Most people including the Taliban consider it as revenge attack in response to the killing of OBL.

“Taliban spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan claimed responsibility for the attack, and called it a revenge of the killing of Osama bin Laden.”

https://tribune.com.pk/story/174808/pns-mehran-attack-vulnerable-embarrassed-and-targeted/

However in a free country one is free to believe whatever one wishes. I would simply call it a flight of fancy.

Agreed that Americans involvement in this case does not seems to be reality but apparently but what about indian involvement ... revenge could be done against fighter aircrafts which were real threat to TTP but these P3C Orions for them were like other transport aircrafts ... why would they plan to do such an aircraft ?

 

[niaz]

Agreed that Americans involvement in this case does not seems to be reality but apparently but what about indian involvement ... revenge could be done against fighter aircrafts which were real threat to TTP but these P3C Orions for them were like other transport aircrafts ... why would they plan to do such an aircraft ?

Indian involvement is very plausible. Additionally target selection / choice of where & when to attack would depend upon where the access was relatively easy. Apparently Mehran base was a softer target compared to a fighter base such as Mauripur.

 

[The Accountant]

Indian involvement is very plausible. Additionally target selection / choice of where & when to attack would depend upon where the access was relatively easy. Apparently Mehran base was a softer target compared to a fighter base such as Mauripur.

But still motives are always first thing to count in at the start of investigation ... these are not random attacks but clear thought strategy which is exactly matching with indian plans ... for example on Sirilankan team is one big example... it gave no advantage to TTP infact it created negativity in the masses against them on the other hand destroying Pakistani circket was an steps towards isolation of Pakistan ...

Funding of TTP by indians is a well established fact. I am strong advocate that TTP is our internal problem and its we who failed to provide a just balance system of education, justice and equality to the mases which resulted in gap capitalized by these terrorists organization but i am also strong propogator of the fact that India and Israel (indirectly) are very much behind these ...

 

[The Deterrent]

But does it make sense to test a weapon and disclose it when we do not have ability to use it atleast for half a decade at minimum ? Furthermore, why agosta cannot fire babur ? Is this due to dimensions or some restrictions ?

Agosta-90Bs can and will fire Babur-III SLCM when its ready for induction. You don't put a test weapon on a submarine for trials. As the press release stated, a mobile underwater platform was used.

This missile was being tested since 2006... when one of tests were picked up by US navy and they mistook it for harpoon being modified for land attack and requested an inspection of harpoons which was agreed and allowed....

This is a mature weapon but I don't know which sub is firing it....

True that the first tries were attempted around 2007, but the approach was abandoned.
The event you mention happened in 2008-9, not 2006. And that event had nothing to do with Babur.

 

[The Accountant]

Sir thanks for the updates ... i was also not convinced from Penguin's deduction as it is totally senseless to disclose a weapon which cannot be deployed in near future
.. infact why would i will try to develop such a weapon which cannot be fired ...

Agosta-90Bs can and will fire Babur-III SLCM when its ready for induction. You don't put a test weapon on a submarine for trials. As the press release stated, a mobile underwater platform was used.

True that the first tries were attempted around 2007, but the approach was abandoned.
The event you mention happened in 2008-9, not 2006. And that event had nothing to do with Babur.

 

[The Deterrent]

Sir thanks for the updates ... i was also not convinced from Penguin's deduction as it is totally senseless to disclose a weapon which cannot be deployed in near future
.. infact why would i will try to develop such a weapon which cannot be fired ...

I don't think it was @Penguin 's opinion, he was quoting somebody else.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Nice to have Babur ready for deployment from any platform such a versatile Missile

 

[Penguin]

Sir thanks for the updates ... i was also not convinced from Penguin's deduction as it is totally senseless to disclose a weapon which cannot be deployed in near future
.. infact why would i will try to develop such a weapon which cannot be fired ...

Kindly quote where I have stated that. It is not my fault you do not understand what I have been saying.

Agosta-90Bs can and will fire Babur-III SLCM when its ready for induction. You don't put a test weapon on a submarine for trials. As the press release stated, a mobile underwater platform was used.

Agosta 90B is known to be able to fire antiship missiles.
Is there any hard evidence to support the contention that it has actually been fitted for and given Babur?

As I have indicated before ANY SSK can in principle fire such a weapon, provided it fits the tubes and provided the sub has actually been equipped for firing it (i.e. modifications to CMS and fire control systems)

If anyone fails to comprehend my posts, please ask me to clarify for you.

 

[MULUBJA]

Congrats to Pakistani members.

 

[The Accountant]

Irrelevant, esp. when you take my (old) post oout of context.

Post 187, Dec 14, 2016
Oscar said:
The current subs arent meant to fire the Babur at all. Whiskey class launch systems were studied but were found to be thoroughly impractical(for the purpose) and very very noisy.
Penguin answered
Thank you. That's a very clear answer as to the status of SLCM in the PN.

For starters, one does not necessarily require an operation submarine to conduct an underwater launch. India, for example, tested its launch silo's for SLBMs using a pontoon submerged more than 30 metres deep in the sea. Testing could in principle also have involve a friendly navy's submarine (if the test was conducted 'out of area'). So, you can see that there are some steps/assumptions between an underwater launch test as a given and the conclusion that current PN boats have Babur. The earlier discussion, from which you took that old quote, was about the question whether currenntly operational PN boats (submarines) have a functional Babur capability. And the apparent answer was: no. Do not confuse testing with operational deployment. There's a lot in between.

From both of above post my understanding is tou are advocating that agosta do not have the capability to fire babur however, i am not convinced that Pakistan will disclose a missile without having the capability to fire it ...

If my understanding of your post is incorrect kindly let me know ...