Pakistan's new Chinese submarines will likely carry nuclear-capable CJ-10K LACMs

[Gryphon]

to fire this missile sub has to go near Indian coast it will increase the chances of detection by P8i, also we can't target main cities like New Delhi,btw what is the yield of Babur's warhead??

Range will be increased (say upto 1500 km) as the SLCM matures.

Note that the ability to fire nuclear-capable cruise missiles from conventional submarines is (partial) 2nd strike capability. The assured 2nd strike capability lies with nuclear-powered submarines.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

In a brief report published by the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad, a Pakistani-government-funded think tank, more details of Pakistan's new Chinese submarines have been disclosed. The report also assesses Pakistan's pursuit of developing nuclear submarine and desire to acquire ASW capability.


Excerpts:

To counter Indian naval buildup, Pakistan agreed to purchase eight new submarines
from China in March 2015, which will be equipped with a Stirling-cycle Air-independent propulsion (AIP)
system and will be able to carry up to three nuclear warhead-carrying CJ-10K land attack cruise missiles
(LACMs) each.


It has been assessed that Pakistan’s nuclear submarine is likely to be based on the Qing
Class Chinese SSK (diesel-electric submarine). Highly advanced electric propulsion system of Qing Class
Chinese SSK will enable Pakistan to replace diesel engine power generation with a nuclear power plant.

There's not much to respond with or add except that we don't really know much about Pakistan's submarine program. The most we can do is make educated guesses based on the facts.

These facts include:

1. Today, China is only offering the S20 series of conventional submarines. Sure, there are sub-variants, such as the S-26T, but none of us can assuredly say there are other families available for sale, especially those based on one-off test bed platforms such as the Qing-class.

2. We know that Pakistan intends to build a sea-based deterrence. How that is implemented is up in the air, but we can all generally agree that the most accessible option is to equip the forthcoming Chinese submarines with nuclear-tipped SLCMs. The simplest method to deploy these SLCMs would be through the torpedo tubes.

3. We know the Pakistan Navy wants AIP on its submarines, but the type of AIP is not known. We can again make educated guesses. For example, Stirling AIP (i.e. the mainstay of Chinese AIP propulsion today) is not suitable for Pakistan's warm water environment. The forward-looking solution would be to adopt a fuel-cell based AIP. Sadly, we don't know to what extent China has made progress in this department, and we can only speculate from this point. For example, one could argue that Pakistan may pursue fuel-cell AIP from Italy, who knows!? This is guesswork.

4. Regarding nuclear propulsion. From our informal network, we know that this was something put into the development pipeline, but is quite a long way from being a factor. Our armed forces have way too many other issues in need of support at the moment - e.g. JF-17 Block-III, next-gen fighter, attack helicopter, tanks, surface warships, conventional submarines, etc, etc - to really take an SSN or SSBN seriously, especially when we can bring the strategic element via a nuke-tipped SLCM.

Also ... I would appreciate getting a citation!

From the above report:

In 2014-2015, Pakistan signed an agreement with a German firm “Rheinland Air Service (RAS)” to upgrade two Pakistan Navy-regional air transport (ATR-72s) into maritime patrol aircraft (MPA) with anti-submarine warfare (ASW) capabilities. According to the Ministry of Defence Production, these ATR- 72s will be ready for Pakistan by 2017-2018. Furthermore, it is possible that a third ATR-72 will ultimately be sent for conversion, especially since the platform is considered a key part of the Navy’s Aviation Vision 2030 plan.

From my earlier article:

In 2014-2015, Pakistan contracted a German firm – Rheinland Air Service (RAS) – to convert two Pakistan Navy ATR-72s into maritime patrol aircraft (MPA) with anti-submarine warfare (ASW) capabilities. As per the Ministry of Defence Production (MoDP)’s most recent publication, these ATR-72s will be delivered to Pakistan by 2017-2018. It is possible that this third ATR-72 will eventually be sent for conversion, especially since the platform is considered a key part of the Navy’s Aviation Vision 2030 plan.

http://quwa.org/2016/08/31/pakistan-navy-takes-delivery-third-atr-72/

 

[alimobin memon]

it has 2 tubes for torpedo while others have 5 to 6 isnt that gonna be a problem in case of defense against multiple submarines also that I think it also incorporates chinese nuclear submarine features like launching not just cruise missiles but also ballistic missile as well as launch sams just like latest russian submarines have aa defense support ?

 

[Penguin]

Looks like Soryu Class Sub to me

You may well be right ;-)

Except Soryu has an X-plane rudder. So it is likely the preceeding Oyashio class.

http://pena-abad.blogspot.nl/2012/07/navy-eyeing-off-new-japanese-submarines.html

Soryu

Oyashio

That tells us something about the reliability of images....

This is all good.. but no one really knows about the design or caabilities of the S-26 and S-30 that Pakistan is getting.. So the Above ae but speculations.. one thing is for sure.. Pakistan will get nuclear submarines and its nuclear triad..

My guess would be that, since this is an export designation and considering F22P, F25T, C28A, the numbers 20, 26 and 30 could well refer to size/displacement (standard, surfaced).

Upto 500 km (with nuclear warhead). For conventional one, it will be 20-40 % more.

Range will be improved in later versions.

"More advanced versions of the Babur are under development. Later versions are planned to have a range of 1000 km and be capable of being launched from Pakistan Navy submarines such as the Agosta 90B Khalid class."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babur_(cruise_missile)

Suggests sublaunch may not yet be operational.

to fire this missile sub has to go near Indian coast it will increase the chances of detection by P8i, also we can't target main cities like New Delhi,btw what is the yield of Babur's warhead??

"An internal fuel capacity of almost 34 tonnes, gives the P-8A an unrefuelled range of over 4000 nautical miles (7,500 km) or the ability to remain on station conducting low level Anti Submarine Warfare (ASW) missions for over four hours at a range of more than 1,200 nautical miles (2,200 km) from base. The P-8A is also air-to-air refuelable from the boom of tanker aircraft such as the KC-30A, pushing its endurance out to over 20 hours – making it possible to patrol Australia’s isolated Southern Ocean territories."
http://www.airforce.gov.au/Boeing-P8-A-Poseidon/?RAAF-Z4PUOpGXH/eLtWmc6qxYl9xYycb+rKng

The range of P8i is such that one would have to have a missile range of well over 1200km to avoid its patrols. If that is possible at all, considering aerial refuelling. Then again, for a conventionally powered sub, the chances of NOT being detected may actually be better closer to the coast ....

3. We know the Pakistan Navy wants AIP on its submarines, but the type of AIP is not known. We can again make educated guesses. For example, Stirling AIP (i.e. the mainstay of Chinese AIP propulsion today) is not suitable for Pakistan's warm water environment. The forward-looking solution would be to adopt a fuel-cell based AIP. Sadly, we don't know to what extent China has made progress in this department, and we can only speculate from this point. For example, one could argue that Pakistan may pursue fuel-cell AIP from Italy, who knows!? This is guesswork.

Fully agree on AIP issue. Not sure to what extent Sterling wouldn't be suitable for Pakistan's warm water environment, particularly if staying at depth in the main thermocline rather than the mized upper layer.

In 1996, the Swedish navy commissioned three Gotland-class submarines. On the surface, these boats are propelled by marine diesel engines. However, when submerged, they use a Stirling-driven generator developed by Swedish shipbuilder Kockums to recharge batteries and provide electrical power for propulsion. A supply of liquid oxygen is carried to support burning of diesel fuel to power the engine. Stirling engines are also fitted to the Swedish Södermanland-class submarines, the Archer-class submarines in service in Singapore and, license-built by Kawasaki Heavy Industries for the Japanese Sōryū-class submarines. In a submarine application, the Stirling engine offers the advantage of being exceptionally quiet when running.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_engine

The larger the difference between the hot and cold sections of a Stirling the more the efficiency rises. The heat sink is typically the environment the engine operates in, the ambient temperature. In the case of medium to high power engines, a radiator is required to transfer the heat from the engine to the ambient air. Marine engines have the advantage of using the cool ambient sea, lake or river water which is typically cooler than ambient air. In the case of combined heat and power systems, the engine's cooling water is used directly or indirectly for heating purposes raising efficiency.
Alternatively, heat may be supplied at ambient temperature and the heat sink maintained at a lower temperature by such means as cryogenic fluid (see Liquid nitrogen economy) or iced water.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_engine

This is all good.. but no one really knows about the design or caabilities of the S-26 and S-30 that Pakistan is getting.. So the Above ae but speculations.. one thing is for sure.. Pakistan will get nuclear submarines and its nuclear triad..

No, it is not speculaton but logic applied to given information. It is not even unspeculative that PN is getting S-26 and S-30. For all we know it is getting S-20. The points made were in relation to the inconcruity between getting 3 CJ-10 missiles in a Type 032 sub > that simply doesn't make sense. The only way in which that number makes sense, is if these are carried as part of the normal warload (18 torps for a Kilo e.g.) and tube launched. In which case the use of Type 032 is totally unnecessary. IF CJ-10 will be delivered/used at all. (but it is much the same for Babur, which I don't think is much smaller, maybe just a tad less long)

Nuclear submarine > this is a term to indicate nuclear powered submarine (SSN, SSBN, SSGN)

Otherwise is simply a conventionally powered submarine. ANY conventional submarine can in principle carry submarine launched cruise missiles, ANY of which of sufficient size can in principle be armed with a nuclear warhead. That does not make a nuclear submarine. (SSK, SSBK, SSGK or, in the case of Type 032 SSBGK)

 

[The Deterrent]

wont the larger two [s30] be fitted with a reactor?
what the different between the s26 and the s30? or is it just size/endurance?

No, the nuclear submarine project will be indigenous, taking design and manufacturing cues from local production of these Chinese subs.

It is probably a difference of size and endurance. No drastic improvements should be expected in S-30. Most probably, S-30s will carry more payload and have longer patrolling times to act as exclusive nuclear deterrents.

3. There is actually no need to. Beyond the propulsion systems we are self sufficient in guidance and airframe.

We are working on propulsion too, around 1000km will give PN reasonable stand-off distance.

 

[Blue Marlin]

No, the nuclear submarine project will be indigenous, taking design and manufacturing cues from local production of these Chinese subs.

It is probably a difference of size and endurance. No drastic improvements should be expected in S-30. Most probably, S-30s will carry more payload and have longer patrolling times to act as exclusive nuclear deterrents.

We are working on propulsion too, around 1000km will give PN reasonable stand-off distance.

so id expect a nuclear sub to be built by the early 2030's then.

so the s30 would be focused on indias eastern ports near the bay of bengal so id class these as offensive subs whilst the other 6 would be the deterrent. as for the range i would have imagined the babur is unofficially a >=1000km missile.
i still dont understand why it has drop down intake scoop as opposed to a sloped. that would increase space and reduce complexity a theres less moving parts. heck even the raad

 

[The Deterrent]

so id expect a nuclear sub to be built by the early 2030's then.

so the s30 would be focused on indias eastern ports near the bay of bengal so id class these as offensive subs whilst the other 6 would be the deterrent. as for the range i would have imagined the babur is unofficially a >=1000km missile.
i still dont understand why it has drop down intake scoop as opposed to a sloped. that would increase space and reduce complexity a theres less moving parts. heck even the raad

I would say late 2020s, but given the slow pace and our relative inexperience, it might get delayed to early 2030s.

The design is still evolving, ultimately we will upgrade the system to be as close as Tomahawk Block 4 as possible (minus the range).

 

[IceCold]

The design is still evolving, ultimately we will upgrade the system to be as close as Tomahawk Block 4 as possible (minus the range).

Why minus the range? Tomohawk is a 2000km range missile which should be an idle range for a cruise missile of this category. Is it because we lack in technical stuff or on purpose?

 

[Penguin]

You may well be right ;-)
Except Soryu has an X-plane rudder. So it is likely the preceeding Oyashio class.

On second looks, it does seem to be Soryu (with X planes)

 

[The Deterrent]

Why minus the range? Tomohawk is a 2000km range missile which should be an idle range for a cruise missile of this category. Is it because we lack in technical stuff or on purpose?

2500km actually. No, its not on purpose. We don't have (and can't make) that kind of an efficient turbofan engine. The only improvement we can do right now is to squeeze as much as fuel space as we can inside the body.

 

[IceCold]

2500km actually. No, its not on purpose. We don't have (and can't make) that kind of an efficient turbofan engine. The only improvement we can do right now is to squeeze as much as fuel space as we can inside the body.

What about CJ10? I know China cannot export missiles because of the MTCR regulations but Pakistan getting access to such a missile and than starting on from there can lead to a better missile than what we already have. What do you think?

 

[The Deterrent]

What about CJ10? I know China cannot export missiles because of the MTCR regulations but Pakistan getting access to such a missile and than starting on from there can lead to a better missile than what we already have. What do you think?

Anything out of the MTCR regulations is strictly off-limits for Pakistan. Pakistan can't even have the engine of CJ-10.

 

[Gryphon]

@Penguin

Since Babur benefited from the reverse-engineering of US Navy's Tomahawk , developing a submarine launched variant would not be much difficult.

On page 4 (post #55) , see the ISPR press release I posted. It indicates a 2nd Strike Capability already exists with Pakistan Navy which makes me assume SLCM Babur is operational.

Anything out of the MTCR regulations is strictly off-limits for Pakistan. Pakistan can't even have the engine of CJ-10.

The Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR ) is a multilateral export control regime . It is an informal and voluntary partnership among 35 countries to prevent the proliferation of missile and
unmanned aerial vehicle technology capable of carrying above 500 kg payload for more than 300 km.




1) What is the payload of CJ-10K (Submarine launched variant)?
2) If it is 500 kg or more, can't an export version (with reduced payload) be exported to Pakistan ?
3) In 2004 China applied to join the MTCR, but members did not offer China membership because of concerns about China's export control standards.

Is there any source which says China again applied for MTCR membership?

 

[The SC]

You may well be right ;-)

Except Soryu has an X-plane rudder. So it is likely the preceeding Oyashio class.

http://pena-abad.blogspot.nl/2012/07/navy-eyeing-off-new-japanese-submarines.html

Soryu

Oyashio

That tells us something about the reliability of images....


My guess would be that, since this is an export designation and considering F22P, F25T, C28A, the numbers 20, 26 and 30 could well refer to size/displacement (standard, surfaced).


"More advanced versions of the Babur are under development. Later versions are planned to have a range of 1000 km and be capable of being launched from Pakistan Navy submarines such as the Agosta 90B Khalid class."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babur_(cruise_missile)

Suggests sublaunch may not yet be operational.


"An internal fuel capacity of almost 34 tonnes, gives the P-8A an unrefuelled range of over 4000 nautical miles (7,500 km) or the ability to remain on station conducting low level Anti Submarine Warfare (ASW) missions for over four hours at a range of more than 1,200 nautical miles (2,200 km) from base. The P-8A is also air-to-air refuelable from the boom of tanker aircraft such as the KC-30A, pushing its endurance out to over 20 hours – making it possible to patrol Australia’s isolated Southern Ocean territories."
http://www.airforce.gov.au/Boeing-P8-A-Poseidon/?RAAF-Z4PUOpGXH/eLtWmc6qxYl9xYycb+rKng

The range of P8i is such that one would have to have a missile range of well over 1200km to avoid its patrols. If that is possible at all, considering aerial refuelling. Then again, for a conventionally powered sub, the chances of NOT being detected may actually be better closer to the coast ....


Fully agree on AIP issue. Not sure to what extent Sterling wouldn't be suitable for Pakistan's warm water environment, particularly if staying at depth in the main thermocline rather than the mized upper layer.

In 1996, the Swedish navy commissioned three Gotland-class submarines. On the surface, these boats are propelled by marine diesel engines. However, when submerged, they use a Stirling-driven generator developed by Swedish shipbuilder Kockums to recharge batteries and provide electrical power for propulsion. A supply of liquid oxygen is carried to support burning of diesel fuel to power the engine. Stirling engines are also fitted to the Swedish Södermanland-class submarines, the Archer-class submarines in service in Singapore and, license-built by Kawasaki Heavy Industries for the Japanese Sōryū-class submarines. In a submarine application, the Stirling engine offers the advantage of being exceptionally quiet when running.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_engine

The larger the difference between the hot and cold sections of a Stirling the more the efficiency rises. The heat sink is typically the environment the engine operates in, the ambient temperature. In the case of medium to high power engines, a radiator is required to transfer the heat from the engine to the ambient air. Marine engines have the advantage of using the cool ambient sea, lake or river water which is typically cooler than ambient air. In the case of combined heat and power systems, the engine's cooling water is used directly or indirectly for heating purposes raising efficiency.
Alternatively, heat may be supplied at ambient temperature and the heat sink maintained at a lower temperature by such means as cryogenic fluid (see Liquid nitrogen economy) or iced water.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_engine


No, it is not speculaton but logic applied to given information. It is not even unspeculative that PN is getting S-26 and S-30. For all we know it is getting S-20. The points made were in relation to the inconcruity between getting 3 CJ-10 missiles in a Type 032 sub > that simply doesn't make sense. The only way in which that number makes sense, is if these are carried as part of the normal warload (18 torps for a Kilo e.g.) and tube launched. In which case the use of Type 032 is totally unnecessary. IF CJ-10 will be delivered/used at all. (but it is much the same for Babur, which I don't think is much smaller, maybe just a tad less long)

Nuclear submarine > this is a term to indicate nuclear powered submarine (SSN, SSBN, SSGN)

Otherwise is simply a conventionally powered submarine. ANY conventional submarine can in principle carry submarine launched cruise missiles, ANY of which of sufficient size can in principle be armed with a nuclear warhead. That does not make a nuclear submarine. (SSK, SSBK, SSGK or, in the case of Type 032 SSBGK)

Some Chinese submarines use he X plane rudders too:
I am talking obviously about nuclear propulsion not coventional that can carry nuclear tipped cruise missiles , both will be in PAK navy..
The article is talking about 3x3 CJ-10s or 3 CJ-10 with 3 warheads each that makes it 9 warheads either way.. It might be made in Pakistan version of CJ-10 with a different name..

 

[Penguin]

@Penguin

Since Babur benefited from the reverse-engineering of US Navy's Tomahawk , developing a submarine launched variant would not be much difficult.

On page 4 (post #55) , see the ISPR press release I posted. It indicates a 2nd Strike Capability already exists with Pakistan Navy which makes me assume SLCM Babur is operational.

I didn't say reverse engineering a Tomahawk was difficult. Then again, getting your hands on a crashlanded ALCM doesn't automatically mean you get access to ways to launch these from below the watersurface. Not even when you are an established used of submarine launched Exocet and Harpoon anti-ship missiles.

Anyway, my point wasn't about the difficulty, it was about the prioritization in Babur missile development. I believe development of the missile's functioning, reliability, range and payload topped the list, with ground and air versions receiving priority. I'm sure PN can strap a launcher onto a surface ship or use e.g. P-3 as long range platform to launch a cruise missile (P-3 has a range of 4,400 km, or 2,490 km with three hours on-station at 1,500 feet, as compared to 1,200km for a Mirage III/V in hi-lo-hi profile, with payload two 400 kg bomb and max external fuel). Maybe I've missed something but from what I read about operational histories, it does not apparently involve test-launching Babur from sub-surface platforms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babur_(cruise_missile)#Operational_history
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatf-VIII_(Ra'ad)#Operational_history

"Since 2001, the Navy has been seeking to enhance its strategic strike and precision capability by developing naval variants of the Babur land attack cruise missile (LACM). The Babur LACM has a range of 700 km and is capable of using both conventional and nuclear warheads. Future developments of LACM include capability of being launched from submarines, surface combatants and aircraft."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_Navy#Submarines_of_the_Pakistan_Navy

Please enlighten me if you have a reliable, trustworthy and preferably official source that shows otherwise.

Some Chinese submarines use he X plane rudders too:
I am talking obviously about nuclear propulsion not coventional that can carry nuclear tipped cruise missiles , both will be in PAK navy..
The article is talking about 3x3 CJ-10s or 3 CJ-10 with 3 warheads each that makes it 9 warheads either way.. It might be made in Pakistan version of CJ-10 with a different name..

Which Chinese submarines use an X-plane rudder installation? Certainly not any of the current nuclear powered ones (Types 091 through 096), nor any of the current conventional ones that I'm aware of (Types 032, 035, 039, 039A, 041). Or even it's Russian Kilo's.

What the article in post #1 says (and I have also looked report op the original at source!) :

"To counter Indian naval buildup, Pakistan agreed to purchase eight new submarines from China in March 2015, which will be equipped with a Stirling-cycle Air-independent propulsion (AIP) system and will be able to carry up to three nuclear warhead-carrying CJ-10K land attack cruise missiles (LACMs) each

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/pakistan...ar-capable-cj-10k-lacms.458468/#ixzz4OkRwzaxZ
https://defence.pk/threads/pakistan...ar-capable-cj-10k-lacms.458468/#ixzz4OkRwzaxZ
8 subs, each with a Sterling AIP and up to 3 CJ-10K, each fitted with a nuclear warhead.
Not the absense of the word "warheads" [plural]

Sources on CJ-10 speak of it having a single 400-500 kg (1,100 lb) warhead, conventional or nuclear.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CJ-10_(missile)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hongniao