Pakistan's Nuclear Submarine Development | News and Discussions

[samr23]

unlike DRDO we are always ahead of schedule

drdo has very less role in indian nuclear sub, the design is done by drdo. The reactor and tthe hull is built by L&T. Rest is done by shipyards. But i dont think Pakistan is even trying to build one. India took 17 yrs to master nucleat propulsion. Pakistan will take centuris.

 

[xyxmt]

Building a nuclear sub for paksitan is preactically impossible. Dont be crazy. This country cant manufacture 1st gen nuclear reactor. Leave minuatirising to the level of a boomer. They only have one shipyard and no shipbuilding design centre. They have never indegeniously designed and manufactured their own ship. They dont have capacity to build sub grade steel. This country wont make a boomer in next 40 yrs. Forget it Pakistanis, lets discuss something more imp.

come on man you just dropped my morale to -10
I almost got convinced that we might get it in 50 to 8 years and then you with you sound reasoning and knowledge of Pakistani industrial capabilities totally shattered my confidence. But the way you expertly broke down our steel manufacturing scam was mind blowing.

chal hindi movies pe baat kertey hain, kon se nye movie daikhey tu ne, main to aaj tuk aik bhi nehe daikhy

 

[samr23]

Pakistan has first strike, they should be happy with that.

come on man you just dropped my morale to -10
I almost got convinced that we might get it in 50 to 8 years and then you with you sound reasoning and knowledge of Pakistani industrial capabilities totally shattered my confidence. But the way you expertly broke down our steel manufacturing scam was mind blowing.

chal hindi movies pe baat kertey hain, kon se nye movie daikhey tu ne, main to aaj tuk aik bhi nehe daikhy

I think ur being sarcastic.
Well to build a nuclear sub, pakistan needs help from china, alone its practically impossible.

 

[Lazarus1177]

Pakistan has first strike, they should be happy with that.




I think ur being sarcastic.
Well to build a nuclear sub, pakistan needs help from china, alone its practically impossible.

In the 90s,we modified our F-16s to carry nuclear munitions ourselves.A submarine is not impossible.Yes,in terms of revenue,we will need China's help.

 

[Skull and Bones]

In the 90s,we modified our F-16s to carry nuclear munitions ourselves.A submarine is not impossible.Yes,in terms of revenue,we will need China's help.

Making gravity nuclear bombs isn't hard for any nation, US did that in 1945. And please care to learn the difference between a nuclear bomb and a nuclear reactor.

Nuclear bomb me taar (wire) ghusane se bizli (electricity) nahi milti.

 

[ajtr]

Nuclear bomb me taar (wire) ghusane se bizli (electricity) nahi milti.

 

[notorious_eagle]

Freedom of Navigation and UNCLOS is for high seas,not territorial water. IN can and most likely will impose a naval blockade on Pakistan.

Thats a very vague statement, please expand on the military aspects of it. The UNCLOS relates to both territorial waters and high seas.

All international vessels are warned of entering Pakistani Territorial waters by India in case of a blockade. If they chose to ignore that, they do so at own risk - risk of being bombed intentionally or unintentionally in case of plausible deniability if India wants to go that far.

So you are telling me, if a Chinese or an American vessel decides to enter Pakistan's territorial waters it will be bombed by IN ships. Nice fan fiction, who is captaining the IN vessel, Sunny Deol.

Pakistan is not an exporter of any kind of good that is deemed globally invaluable - like Oil. So no country will force India to remove blockade as no country will have major import issues because of lack of Pakistani exports.
In this case, some countries may suffer due to lack of a market in Pakistan(ie Pakistan's imports), which is not even considered remotely as important as national imports.

Indeed, but you are thinking from an economic point of view and not political. For argument sake lets say the Chinese or the Saudis decide to show their solidarity and decide to send vessels loaded with relief goods. Is the IN going to board on the incoming vessels and declare the goods contraband? I have a hard time believing this is a likely scenario.

Also, unlike the Straits of Hormuz, blockading Pakistan does not even affect the international sea routes as the sea lane is well away from Pakistan, so international oil shipments will not suffer to other countries.

The entire world and the Western World have stood for the principles of freedom of navigation. The US went to war against Germany because this right was violated. Its impossible that the Western World will abandon this principle as it will set a very bad precedent for the entire world. The Chinese will get the excuse to do the same to Vietnam or Philippines to solve the South China Sea problem.

Lastly, to enforce a blockade, no ship needs to be present to board and seize contraband. If a blockade is what IN has in mind for Pakistan, all the existing ports of Pakistan along its entire coastline will be bombed either by missiles, or by planes. For any kind of major imports like Oil, you will need those major terminals.
Imports of small items is still possible without these ports, but these items are not like Oil or ammo which would need proper facilities. Assuming that even if Pakistan is able to smuggle ammo and Oil, it cannot do so on a major scale, which again would be detected by IN and bombed again, this time most likely along with the offending ship.

Indeed Pakistan's coastal assets will be in danger of getting bombed by the air or the sea. But for IN vessels to effectively engage and launch their missiles, they will need to expose themselves to counter battery by Harpoon II, C802-803 missiles. IN cannot effectively engage and destroy Pakistan's coastal assets without taking attrition. Any targeting of civilian infrastructure will open the possibility of Pakistan targeting Indian civilian assets from stand off range, it sure will be bloody. PN has followed the right strategy by focusing on asymmetric threat instead of matching IN bullet for bullet. She will get slaughtered out in the open sea against IN but it has smartly built up her defences to make a blockade a very expensive venture for the IN.

 

[Abingdonboy]

^^ expensive but doable. War is bloody business no side will be under the illusion they are going to come off intact.

 

[manofwar]

So you are telling me, if a Chinese or an American vessel decides to enter Pakistan's territorial waters it will be bombed by IN ships. Nice fan fiction, who is captaining the IN vessel, Sunny Deol.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...e-quite-soon-defence-ex-14.html#ixzz24kiLTEyj

It depends on the level of communication IN has with the ship in question........
A blockade means not allowing any ship to pass through. Very little possibility that a civilian ship will attempt to intrude in a blockade, without a naval guard. And since a naval guard would mean effectively mean an offence in Indian imposed blockade, it would lead to declaration of an unnecessary war.

The entire world and the Western World have stood for the principles of freedom of navigation. The US went to war against Germany because this right was violated. Its impossible that the Western World will abandon this principle as it will set a very bad precedent for the entire world. The Chinese will get the excuse to do the same to Vietnam or Philippines to solve the South China Sea problem.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...e-quite-soon-defence-ex-14.html#ixzz24kjQmg1m

Don't refer World War 1........... The german U boats bombed American supply ships that were civilian in nature and that's what caused this-

German U-boats attempted to cut the supply lines between North America and Britain.[56] The nature of submarine warfare meant that attacks often came without warning, giving the crews of the merchant ships little hope of survival.[56][57] The United States launched a protest, and Germany changed its rules of engagement. After the sinking of the passenger ship RMS Lusitania in 1915, Germany promised not to target passenger liners, while Britain armed its merchant ships, placing them beyond the protection of the "cruiser rules" which demanded warning and placing crews in "a place of safety" (a standard which lifeboats did not meet).[58] Finally, in early 1917 Germany adopted a policy of unrestricted submarine warfare, realising the Americans would eventually enter the war.[56][59] Germany sought to strangle Allied sea lanes before the U.S. could transport a large army overseas, but could maintain only five long-range U-boats on station, to limited effect.[56]

Also unlike India Pakistan , unless China is at war with these nations, it does not have the right nor any presentable reason to blockade them........

 

[Contrarian]

Thats a very vague statement, please expand on the military aspects of it. The UNCLOS relates to both territorial waters and high seas.



So you are telling me, if a Chinese or an American vessel decides to enter Pakistan's territorial waters it will be bombed by IN ships. Nice fan fiction, who is captaining the IN vessel, Sunny Deol.

No, no Chinese or American ship will decide to enter Pakistani waters. Lets assume that they try to - Where do you think they will unload the goods? No Pakistani port worth its name will remain intact.

As a matter of fact, they can either be boarded or warning shots fired. Pakistani coastline fortunately is not very big.

Indeed, but you are thinking from an economic point of view and not political. For argument sake lets say the Chinese or the Saudis decide to show their solidarity and decide to send vessels loaded with relief goods. Is the IN going to board on the incoming vessels and declare the goods contraband? I have a hard time believing this is a likely scenario.

Yes, hard time or not mate. It depends on how acute GoI & IN want to enforce the blockade. If GoI wants to be lienient, most likely the ships carrying relief material will contact or be contacted by IN, they will declare their intent and ask for safe passage, IN will board and check the material and let it go or not - depending again on what GoI wants.

The entire world and the Western World have stood for the principles of freedom of navigation. The US went to war against Germany because this right was violated. Its impossible that the Western World will abandon this principle as it will set a very bad precedent for the entire world. The Chinese will get the excuse to do the same to Vietnam or Philippines to solve the South China Sea problem.

You are very wrong here. Freedom of navigation on high seas. Every country apart from Pakistan will have freedom to navigate on high seas, no shipments of any kind of any nature apart from those entering or leaving Pakistan will be stopped. This is in no way whatsoever violating the principle of freedom of seas.

Territorial water is the same as territorial land. The only time US or any other western nation capable of stopping IN will intervene is if India stops the global shipping lanes. Some nations which are allied to Pakistan may or maynot make noises in diplomatic fora, they are purely for consolation purposes and make no difference to the war effort.

The problem with the Chinese example is that in their case the country's maritime zones are not demarcated and are contested. In this case, in a declared Indo-Pak war, with all maritime boundaries clearly marked, its no issue. I dont understand how you are confusing the two.

Let me make this clear: No country will stop India as long as global shipping routes are not disturbed.

Indeed Pakistan's coastal assets will be in danger of getting bombed by the air or the sea. But for IN vessels to effectively engage and launch their missiles, they will need to expose themselves to counter battery by Harpoon II, C802-803 missiles. IN cannot effectively engage and destroy Pakistan's coastal assets without taking attrition. Any targeting of civilian infrastructure will open the possibility of Pakistan targeting Indian civilian assets from stand off range, it sure will be bloody. PN has followed the right strategy by focusing on asymmetric threat instead of matching IN bullet for bullet. She will get slaughtered out in the open sea against IN but it has smartly built up her defences to make a blockade a very expensive venture for the IN.

Mate, India has done this before - attacked and rendered non functional Karachi port. India will attack any infrastructure of Pakistan that it deems can be useful in running the Pakistani war effort.

Lastly, to be really honest coastal batteries of harpoon or any other kind of AshM are not very effective at all. You forget two mistakes. The missiles that India has in service far outranges these missiles. These will be stand off strikes. There will hardly be any kind of attrition in these type of strikes. Attacks on Pakistani ship landing facilities can be done from ranges that Pakistani AshM's cannot reach. It hardly matters after that - the blockade is achieved.

Secondly, lets assume, that somehow, IN for some reason has to come within the range of such missiles. You would know that almost every major combatant of IN is equipped with Barak 1 SAM systems with a 10km range. IN has tested Barak with every in service AShM barring the BrahMos and has found a success rate of over 99%.

The next important thing is that in a few years, every major combatant will also be equipped with LRSAM's(70kms range) - Barak 8, which are expected to get into service 2015 onwards. This would be for fleet defence.

After this, if the IN does deem it necessary to send high value combatants, most likely they will have fleet air cover provided by the Navy's own fighters from a Carrier located further off.

Lastly, even if Pakistan is successful in destroying a few ships - it is acceptable. Its a war. IN is expected to accomplish the tasks assigned to them even with losses. It will not be much in anycase. You really have to get an idea of how far ahead technologically IN is wrt any of South Asian neighbours.

 

[Tshering22]

It is very important to understand that a nuke sub is not something someone sees as a "surprise". This isn't a birthday cake we're talking about; we're talking about a high-tech lethal machinery that takes years of strong marine engineering foundation, good external support and years of marine building capability.

Although Pakistan has always come up with alternatives quickly via Chinese, to make something like this would take quite sometime. It isn't easy.

 

[Ticker]

It is very important to understand that a nuke sub is not something someone sees as a "surprise". This isn't a birthday cake we're talking about; we're talking about a high-tech lethal machinery that takes years of strong marine engineering foundation, good external support and years of marine building capability.

Although Pakistan has always come up with alternatives quickly via Chinese, to make something like this would take quite sometime. It isn't easy.

When you hire a nuclear sub twice from the Russians and then Russians built much of the Arihant, including its nuclear reactor, it is Kosher, but when Pakistan may seek Chinese help, it flusters you.

I think we'd be able to get our own nuclear submarine earlier than the indians and would be able to load it with assured second strike nuclear weapons.

India would still be looking at Arihant as a technology demonstrator, when we would have almost three such machines operating in the IOR.

Go and enjoy a swim in the Himalayas @Tshering(catch)22. You won't be able to change the realities with your so-called hi-tech un-knowledgeable comments.

No, no Chinese or American ship will decide to enter Pakistani waters. Lets assume that they try to - Where do you think they will unload the goods? No Pakistani port worth its name will remain intact.

As a matter of fact, they can either be boarded or warning shots fired. Pakistani coastline fortunately is not very big.



Yes, hard time or not mate. It depends on how acute GoI & IN want to enforce the blockade. If GoI wants to be lienient, most likely the ships carrying relief material will contact or be contacted by IN, they will declare their intent and ask for safe passage, IN will board and check the material and let it go or not - depending again on what GoI wants.


You are very wrong here. Freedom of navigation on high seas. Every country apart from Pakistan will have freedom to navigate on high seas, no shipments of any kind of any nature apart from those entering or leaving Pakistan will be stopped. This is in no way whatsoever violating the principle of freedom of seas.

Territorial water is the same as territorial land. The only time US or any other western nation capable of stopping IN will intervene is if India stops the global shipping lanes. Some nations which are allied to Pakistan may or maynot make noises in diplomatic fora, they are purely for consolation purposes and make no difference to the war effort.

The problem with the Chinese example is that in their case the country's maritime zones are not demarcated and are contested. In this case, in a declared Indo-Pak war, with all maritime boundaries clearly marked, its no issue. I dont understand how you are confusing the two.

Let me make this clear: No country will stop India as long as global shipping routes are not disturbed. Period.



Mate, India has done this before - attacked and rendered non functional Karachi port. India will attack any infrastructure of Pakistan that it deems can be useful in running the Pakistani war effort.

Lastly, to be really honest coastal batteries of harpoon or any other kind of AshM are not very effective at all. You forget two mistakes. The missiles that India has in service far outranges these missiles. These will be stand off strikes. There will hardly be any kind of attrition in these type of strikes. Attacks on Pakistani ship landing facilities can be done from ranges that Pakistani AshM's cannot reach. It hardly matters after that - the blockade is achieved.

Secondly, lets assume, that somehow, IN for some reason has to come within the range of such missiles. You would know that almost every major combatant of IN is equipped with Barak 1 SAM systems with a 10km range. IN has tested Barak with every in service AShM barring the BrahMos and has found a success rate of over 99%.

The next important thing is that in a few years, every major combatant will also be equipped with LRSAM's(70kms range) - Barak 8, which are expected to get into service 2015 onwards. This would be for fleet defence.

After this, if the IN does deem it necessary to send high value combatants, most likely they will have fleet air cover provided by the Navy's own fighters from a Carrier located further off.

Lastly, even if Pakistan is successful in destroying a few ships - it is acceptable. Its a war. IN is expected to accomplish the tasks assigned to them even with losses. It will not be much in anycase. You really have to get an idea of how far advanced IN is wrt any of South Asian neighbours.

Sir, no offense meant please, but in response to very appropriate @notorious_eagle comments, your response is rather rhetorical in nature.

 

[Contrarian]

When you hire a nuclear sub twice from the Russians and then Russians built much of the Arihant, including its nuclear reactor, it is Kosher, but when Pakistan may seek Chinese help, it flusters you.

I think we'd be able to get our own nuclear submarine earlier than the indians and would be able to load it with assured second strike nuclear weapons.

India would still be looking at Arihant as a technology demonstrator, when we would have almost three such machines operating in the IOR.

I will not comment on whether Pakistan can come up with a boomer or not.

I will tell you however that Russians have not built the Arihant. It was built entirely in India using Indian materials right down to the screws.

This initself was a huge challenge because prior to building arihant, India had to learn and develop metallurgy for it. The steels, lead, etc used in this were just not present in India when GoI started this project and was one of the biggest technological challenges to overcome.
Infact hull of this submarine was built by an Indian private company - L&T - under govt. funding ofcourse.

The reactor was also built in India. The original design was Russian. That design was however dated, so India had to improvise it. For the longest time, scientists were unable to miniaturize the reactor.

Sir, no offense meant please, but in response to very appropriate @notorious_eagle comments, your response is rather rhetorical in nature.

apologies for that. It was not my intention.

 

[Ticker]

I will not comment on whether Pakistan can come up with a boomer or not.

I will tell you however that Russians have not built the Arihant. It was built entirely in India using Indian materials right down to the screws.

This initself was a huge challenge because prior to building arihant, India had to learn and develop metallurgy for it. The steels, lead, etc used in this were just not present in India when GoI started this project and was one of the biggest technological challenges to overcome.
Infact hull of this submarine was built by an Indian private company - L&T - under govt. funding ofcourse.

The reactor was also built in India. The original design was Russian. That design was however dated, so India had to improvise it. For the longest time, scientists were unable to miniaturize the reactor.



apologies for that. It was not my intention.

Sir, I have strong reason to believe otherwise. Met a Russian once who was involved in this project. However, the Russian may have been boasting.

 

[Skull and Bones]

Sir, I have strong reason to believe otherwise. Met a Russian once who was involved in this project. However, the Russian may have been boasting.

I met a martian once, who was bragging about selling blueprints of super stealthy J-20. However it might me boasting.