Pakistan's Submarine Procurement

[Jliu]

Jliu are you aware of any plans about Pakistan's procurement of a nuclear sub? I ask this because back in 2004 or 5( i'm not sure about the year) a defence analyst was quoted saying on Jeo tv that when the chinese president will visit Pakistan,president Musharraf will discuss the possibility for acquiring a nuclear sub as it is high on his agenda.

The short answer is that a SSN would simply be too taxing for Pakistan's naval budget if one was developed indigenously in terms of infrastructure, sunk R&D costs, operating costs and the like. In addition, TRADOC is simply not there and there are serious survivablity issues due to the PN only operating out of Karachi and maybe Gwadar in the future although even that is in range of a incremental-mod Brahmos LACM.

When Hu visited in 2005, he declined to give Pakistan a nuclear deal that Musharraf had asked for identical to the one Bush offered to the Indians. This effectively killled off any continuing PRC assistance with Pakistan's military nuclear applications.

He felt short of saying whether it will be a nuclear powered sub or a sub that can fire a nuclear tripped cruise missile. But no news so far. It might be for a reason because of the high secrecy that is involved with the Pakistani defense procurement system, one usually don't hear about anything at all.

He was referrring to the latter, ie. Babur integration onto the Agosta 90s.

What do you think is it possible specially after the fact that India is acquiring nuclear subs on lease and that will only shift more the already shifted (strategic) balance in India's favour.

The strategic numerical balance has always been in India's favour but due to the nuclear arms program and the subsequent 'Lost Decade' the qualitative balance has shifted to India too. Grave critical mistakes identified from a strategic perspective are:

-The nuclear program which is not consistent with the country's strategic aims of a 'peaceful neighbourhood' to guarantee developement of both social and economic infrastructure. Instead, the tactical doctrine of 'minimum deterrence' has been allowed to take precedence over eco/social development which has critically weakened the social fabric of the country. It has also diverted critical resources and continues to do so from Pakistan's conventional modernisation of which Pakistan is almost entirely export dependent for assets such as quality fighters, submarines and MBTs that would have given the Pakistani Armed Forces a qualitative edge over the Indians.

-The failure to establish close relations, especially defence related with Israel and the utterly provocative decision to send PAF assets to engage the IAF at a time when Israel was under grave danger-forcing the Israelis to close with India with positive spinoffs for India's own nuclear program as well as conventional build up opposite Pakistan.

Pakistan will now be forced to rely even more on non conventional arms to offset India's massive strategic advantages should it continue to adhere to the doctrine of 'minimum deterrence'. To conclude my answer to your question SLCM armed SSKs will comprise the strategic naval section of Pakistan's response.

 

[Jliu]

Jliu.
Being not savy about marine affairs,i want to ask you what do you think , realistically are PNs options.

If I were in the shoes of a PN Admiral I would assess four variables (in order of importance):

a)-my country's strategic aims/threats and my service's roles in it
b)-the possible threat matrix to my force and country.
c) my funding
d) tactical goals

a) Peaceful social/eco development and of international space. The PN plays a vital role as keeping the SLOCs (sea lanes of communications) free and open is vital for Pakistan both strategically (economic/social) and tactically (military). Given the current global environment with rampant global inflation/increase in food prices caused largely by cost push supply shocks leading to dangerously high imported inflation levels (ie.price of oil).

b) Pirates followed very distantly by the Indian Navy. A pirate attack on oil tankers around the Horn of Africa would send the price of oil through the roof and cause massive social/eco instability as people riot over the price of food giving the government the mother of all headaches. The PN+nation still faces a possible IN threat due to the propensity of the generals to indulge in fanciful Kashmir skirmishes that benefit no one due to the stalemate that results when one nuclear power takes on another.

c) Terrible. A major impediment to PN force levels because of falling defence budgets, inflation levels at record highs with no increases in funds, corruption and the Army and Air Force dividing the US aid between them.

d) Preventing IN blockade of Gwadar and Karachi as well as keeping SLOCs open in addition to warding off pirates.

Now after considering all factors in procurement and IN platforms, systems and strengths, it becomes readily apparent that the PN must aim for low cost, high tech asymmetrical capabilities that offset the massive qualitative & quantitative advantages the IN enjoys. In other words a networked system of platforms and sensors that denies the use of sea space to the IN ie. naval mines, FACs such as MTRP-33, SSKs and ASW frigates (FFs).

You have also mentioned that Agosta90s are a generation behind the best platforms.

Based on the criteria of acoustic sig and sensor fit the 90Bs are approx. three decades behind current upper tier designs, “generations” is a complicated way of looking at it. Industry makes this distinction from the design heritage of the boat. Eg the Agosta 90B is considered 2.5 generation as it is “descended” from the Agosta baseline and before that the Daphne class.

What you have to realise with this &#8220;generation&#8221; and &#8220;advanced/better&#8221; designations is that they are mostly marketing tactics and that all designs from the 1980&#8217;s onwards (90B included) are virtually silent at >5knts if handled correctly by a semi-decent crew. However the big fuss about survivability, endurance and speed is that at <5knts the older designs kick up more noise and thus if caught by systems based ASW then it is all over. Which is why there has been a move towards upper tier designs that minimise the chance of being detected in the first instance.

In the case of the PN it is imperative that it procures one of the three existing upper tier designs marketed for export (U214, Marlin, S80A) due to the technological adv it confers to offset superior IN TRADOC and tactics to match continued IN procurement of upper tier designs to avoid IN capability (quantitative & qualitative) dominance. In some ways the PN has been very fortunate in gaining a few years breathing space with India's politically motivated ban on the U214 back in 2004-5 when the Germans wouldn't pay the right amount of kickbacks to secure a deal and the acoustically inferior Scorpene 'won' simply because it offered greater weapons fit and was the only other candidate capable of AshM integration.

Would the french resurrect the Marlin offer? And would it be to PNs liking.

Yes, if the PN asked for it. DCN has been looking at vastly reduced SSK export sales due to their falling out with the Spanish who have designed their own Scorpene-evolution in the S80A and falling $US. I&#8217;m sure with DCN&#8217;s recent difficulties selling SSKs they wouldn&#8217;t have much of a problem offering the PN quite a decent package for 2-4 SSKs but not the corvettes/FFs in the same package given budgetary constraints. Even so the value of a median three boats could total US$1.5bn-quite a bargain but of course more with domestic kit assembly similar to the Agostas.

the second debate is the acquisition of a Nuclear sub by PN. My thoughts are that in the current environment , we should be relying on more deisel subs and a Nuc. Sub might be a waste of time and effort and money?
Thanks
Araz

You are absolutely correct. In a dated German Navy study it was found that they could procure approx. 11 U209s for the price of an SSN based on blueprints from either the French Rubis or UK Swiftsure design.

 

[Super Falcon]

web master is right german sub is far far ahead against the french subs russian subs slightly against the american subs but they have their costs

how much pak is going for i hope this time they are not going for 2 or 3

atleast 5 to 7 subs this is our chance to give our navy a power so it can dictet it terms with indian navy

 

[araz]

Jliu.
thank you for taking the time to educate me. If I may further impose on your time, what are the options for PN with regards to the surface fleet. Type 21s have clearly outlived their utility. I am aware of PNs request for OHPs. What are the medium and long term options for PN
Kindest regards
Araz

 

[Super Falcon]

why we are fighting here our navy already dicided to go for germans they know better than us

 

[Super Falcon]

The Canadian Maritime Force has purchased four Victoria (formerly Upholder) class diesel-electric submarines from the UK Royal Navy - HMCS Victoria (876), HMCS Windsor (877), HMCS Corner Brook (878) and HMCS Chicoutimi (879). The Victoria Class replace the decommissioned Oberon Class, the last of which was retired in July 2000. The first of class, HMCS Victoria, was commissioned in Halifax in December 2000 and the second, Windsor, in June 2003. Corner Brook was delivered in March 2003.

"The Victoria Class submarine has a single-skin hull constructed of NQ1 high-tensile steel."Work on the fourth vessel, HMCS Chicoutimi, was completed in September 2004. The vessel was handed over to the Canadian Navy at Faslane Naval Base in Scotland in October 2004. While sailing from the UK to Halifax, Canada, a serious electrical fire broke out on the vessel. The submarine was rescued by UK Royal Navy Type 23 frigate, HMS Montrose, which towed the stricken vessel to Faslane. One crew member died in the accident.

Chicoutimi was loaded on a Norwegian sealift vessel in January 2005, to be returned to Halifax for repairs. The Canadian Navy decided to keep all the Victoria submarines 'alongside' until the causes of the accident were fully investigated. A first Board of Inquiry report was submitted in December 2004 and a supplementary report in March 2005.

Safety improvements are being carried out to the vessels and, in May 2005, HMCS Victoria returned to sea. HMCS Windsor and Corner Brook remain in dock. In April 2006, it was been decided to defer repairs to HMCS Chicoutimi until 2010, when the vessel is planned to begin a two-year refit.

The UK's Upholder (Type 2400) class submarines were built by Vickers Shipbuilding and launched in the late 1980s and early 1990s. They were withdrawn from service in the British Royal Navy in 1994, following a defence review by the UK government. Canada purchased the submarines and a suite of trainers in 1998 and BAE Systems (formerly Vickers Shipbuilding) at Barrow in UK were contracted to refit the submarines. The submarines were then transferred to Halifax in Canada for commissioning.

One submarine, HMCS Victoria, operates in the Maritime Forces Pacific (MARPAC) fleet which has a base at Esquimalt near Victoria in British Columbia. Three submarines will operate within the Maritime Forces Atlantic (MARLANT) fleet based in Halifax base.

The submarines are a central component of each of the two high-readiness task groups, the Contingency Task Group which operates on 10 days' readiness for deployment and the National Task Group which operates on 60 days' readiness.

DESIGN

The submarine has a single-skin hull constructed of NQ1 high-tensile steel. The skin of the submarine is fitted with about 22,000 elastomeric acoustic tiles to reduce the submarine's acoustic signature. The hull is a classical teardrop shape design, 70.3m in length by 7.6m in width and with a depth of hull of 5.5m. The fin or main sail houses a five-man lockout chamber.

"Victoria Class submarines are a central component of two high-readiness task groups."The submarine's escape and rescue system has been extensively upgraded with additional stowage space for escape stores and an underwater telephone to meet the Canadian Maritime Force requirements. The hull displacement is 2,168t surfaced and 2,455t dived.

The submarine accommodates a crew of 48 including seven officers. There is room for an additional five mission crew, observers or training crew.

WEAPON SYSTEMS

Lockheed Martin Canada, Lockheed Martin Undersea Systems and Northstar Technical Inc (based in St John's, Newfoundland) upgraded and installed the submarine's Lockheed Martin Librascope Torpedo Fire Control System (TFCS) to meet the operational requirements of the Canadian Navy. Components from the fire control system of the Oberon submarines were removed and installed. A UHF DAMA satellite communications system has also been fitted.

The submarine has six 533mm (21in) bow torpedo tubes equipped with air pumped discharge systems. The Upholder Class sub-harpoon missile-firing and mine-laying capabilities have been removed. The torpedo room or weapons storage compartment houses racks for storing up to 18 Gould Mk 48 Mod 4 heavyweight torpedoes.

The torpedoes, operating at 40kt, are deployed against targets over a range of 50km. The torpedo range is 38km at speeds of up to 55kt. The torpedoes use active and passive homing to approach the designated target.

COUNTERMEASURES

The ship is fitted with two Submerged Signal Ejectors (SSE), small vertical discharge tubes which can launch either acoustic or bubble decoys.

The antenna of the passive Condor Systems Sea Search II Electronic Support Measures (ESM) unit is fitted to the CK35 mast. The Sperry Guardian Star intercept radar also provides ESM.

"The submarine has six 533mm bow torpedo tubes equipped with air pumped discharge systems."SENSORS

The Victoria Class submarine is equipped with the CK 35 search periscope and the CH 85 attack optronic periscope supplied by Thales (formerly Pilkington) Optronics. The CK35 search periscope incorporates a binocular optical system with an optical target ranging system. The CH85 attack periscope incorporates a monocular optical system and an infrared system. It is primarily used for surveillance and attacks on surface targets.

The submarine's long range sonars are the Thales Underwater Systems Type 2007 flank array sonar and the Thales Underwater Systems Type 2046 towed array sonar, both operating in passive mode and low frequency for long range detection and location. The Canadian Towed Array Sonar (CANTASS) has been integrated into the towed sonar suite.

The Thales Underwater Systems Type 2040 hull-mounted sonar installed in the bow is a passive search and intercept sonar operating at medium frequency for optimum medium-range performance.

NAVIGATION

The navigation suite includes a global positioning system, and a Kelvin Hughes Type 1007 and a Foruno portable navigation radar both operating within the I-band frequency range.

Northrop Grumman Sperry Marine was awarded a contract in February 2005 to provide the Mk 49 inertial navigation system, based on ring laser gyro technology. The systems will be installed in 2005 and 2006.

PROPULSION

The submarine is fitted with a diesel electric propulsion system driving a single shaft, based on two Paxman Valenta 16SZ diesel engines each rated at 2.7MW sustained power with two 2.8MW Alsthom alternators and an Alsthom motor rated at 4MW. The propulsion and power systems are controlled from the machinery control room.

"The submarine accommodates a crew of 48."For operation under ice, the Victoria Class submarines could be fitted with an air-independent power system. The installation of an air-independent propulsion system might be considered in a future refit or upgrade program.

PERFORMANCE

The surface speed is 12kt and the dived speed is 20kt. In snorting mode, travelling at low speed at periscope depth using an extendable air breathing system, the submarine can continue at up to 12kt. The range at an 8kt snorting speed is 8,000 miles. The submarine has a patrol endurance of 56 days.

The hull is rated to a diving depth over 200m.

why PN not going for this sub this is damn good man

 

[JK!]

why PN not going for this sub this is damn good man

why we are fighting here our navy already dicided to go for germans they know better than us

Well you've already answered your own question there and I'm guessing the Canadians got there first.

Furthermore Pakistan has the Agosta 90Bs which may be more capable or already carrying out such a role.

 

[Proud to be Pakistani]

JLIU,

Who are you ?


I was in the Navy and my Family Background is from Armed Forces!

Who are you!

 

[Proud to be Pakistani]

Mr. Clown!

Quoting You:
It's pretty clear the Scorpene trumps any Agosta variant in these so I don't buy your cheerleader cr_ap that endurance is a measure of anything because the AM-200 retrofitted Scorps the IN is buying can easily transit Pakistan's coastline about 57 times at that rate much less penetrate Karachi harbour. And I certainly don't have to explain to you of all people how I came by that calculation given our respective roles.


No indian Sub is Fitted with AIP yet but Agostas of PN are Fitted with AIP.


Only time will tell when they are fitted with AIP.... Even then they are comparable to Agostas in alll respects.

AIR INDEPENDENT PROPULSION

AGOSTAS OF PN ARE FITTED WITH AM2000 Standard that is: MESMA AIP SYSTEM!

A conventional diesel-electrical submarine sailing underwater is difficult to detect. However the need to come repeatedly to periscope depth to recharge the batteries using the diesel engine greatly increases vulnerability by:

Its aerial detectability, since the snorkel projecting from the water is detectable by radar
Its underwater detectability due to increase in radiated noise from the working diesels
The ratio between this time of greater vulnerability and the total operating time is known as the "indiscretion rate" and for all conventional modem submarines the indiscretion ratio ranges typically from 7&#37; to 10% on patrol at 4kt, and 20% to 30% in transit at about 8kt.

"To lessen the submarine's vulnerability, can be equipped with an air independent propulsion system."To lessen the submarine's vulnerability, the vessel can be equipped with an air independent propulsion system such as: the Stirling engine, the fuel cell, the closed circuit diesel and the Module d'Energie Sous-Marine Autonome (MESMA) system .

The MESMA anaerobic system, in which heat in the primary circuit is produced by burning ethanol with oxygen, can be easily installed either at the start of the submarine's construction or in a later modernisation to convert the CM-2000 to an AM-2000 build standard.

With the MESMA system the AM-2000 submarine can stay down in underwater patrol three times longer than the CM-2000. Its performance features remain the same in all other respects, except that the length increases to 70m and its submerged displacement to 1.870t (against the 61.7m and the 1,565t of the CM2000).


SHOWS HOW MUCH YOU KNOW!... Donot pretend to be a NAVY Analyst .... If you are... PM me who you are! Then we shall see what your Understanding and Level of Mentality is. Remains to be Seen but i can feel what lay behind the Words.......Only S H I T !

DCN is like home for me.... You know nothing but S H I T about Subs!

 

[Proud to be Pakistani]

As per DCN the Mesma's autonomy equal that of the U-214 boats that are equipped with fuel cells, and be easier to refuel.

Later, the Mesma system could be complemented by a fuell cell with a system producing hydrogen from gasoil, without any need to stock it on board. DCN will probably show a "fuel cell / hydrogen" kit at the next Euronaval fair. The expected result should be to double the performance of current AIP systems.

The influence of the Barracuda-class on the Marlin design emphasized in the dive controls, in the combat system which will resemble the SYCOBS used both aboard the "Le Terrible" SSBN and the new SSNs, and in the possibility to include optronic masts.

DCN goes the whole nine yards to show the gap between Marlin and the Scorpene and U Class Boats.

 

[Jliu]

JLIU,

Who are you ?

I was in the Navy and my Family Background is from Armed Forces!

Who are you!

That's Wonderful...

No indian Sub is Fitted with AIP yet but Agostas of PN are Fitted with AIP.

Only time will tell when they are fitted with AIP.... Even then they are comparable to Agostas in alll respects.

AIR INDEPENDENT PROPULSION

AGOSTAS OF PN ARE FITTED WITH AM2000 Standard that is: MESMA AIP SYSTEM!

A conventional diesel-electrical submarine sailing underwater is difficult to detect. However the need to come repeatedly to periscope depth to recharge the batteries using the diesel engine greatly increases vulnerability by:

Its aerial detectability, since the snorkel projecting from the water is detectable by radar
Its underwater detectability due to increase in radiated noise from the working diesels
The ratio between this time of greater vulnerability and the total operating time is known as the "indiscretion rate" and for all conventional modem submarines the indiscretion ratio ranges typically from 7% to 10% on patrol at 4kt, and 20% to 30% in transit at about 8kt.

"To lessen the submarine's vulnerability, can be equipped with an air independent propulsion system."To lessen the submarine's vulnerability, the vessel can be equipped with an air independent propulsion system such as: the Stirling engine, the fuel cell, the closed circuit diesel and the Module d'Energie Sous-Marine Autonome (MESMA) system .

The MESMA anaerobic system, in which heat in the primary circuit is produced by burning ethanol with oxygen, can be easily installed either at the start of the submarine's construction or in a later modernisation to convert the CM-2000 to an AM-2000 build standard.

With the MESMA system the AM-2000 submarine can stay down in underwater patrol three times longer than the CM-2000. Its performance features remain the same in all other respects, except that the length increases to 70m and its submerged displacement to 1.870t (against the 61.7m and the 1,565t of the CM2000).


SHOWS HOW MUCH YOU KNOW!... Donot pretend to be a NAVY Analyst .... If you are... PM me who you are! Then we shall see what your Understanding and Level of Mentality is. Remains to be Seen but i can feel what lay behind the Words.......Only S H I T !

DCN is like home for me.... You know nothing but S H I T about Subs!

Re: Your point about IN Project 75 SSKs not being retrofitted with MESMA. There are various OSINT sources explicitly confirming such a fit namely Defense Industry Daily to the contrary.

I won't bother replying to any more inferior quality posting from you and the readers of this forum can best decide from the quality of our posts whom exactly is the clown here.

 

[Jliu]

Jliu.
thank you for taking the time to educate me. If I may further impose on your time, what are the options for PN with regards to the surface fleet. Type 21s have clearly outlived their utility. I am aware of PNs request for OHPs. What are the medium and long term options for PN
Kindest regards
Araz

To gain an understanding of probable PN procurement plans in the med-long term one must look at the overall strategic picture, domestic budgetary factors and the threat matrix to name a few.

On the OHP 'deal' there are no indications yet the USN may phase out and release units-yet. Until that eventuality alternatives may be found in PLAN designs such as the 054A, Turkish MILGEM derivative? or more realistically, second hand FFs from interested parties (read: Marine Nationale looking to sell off used FFs as FREMM units reach IOC) as priorities are clearly not with the navy or the surface forces at this stage should you observe naval events of the past five years.

Long term options are fairly murky and unclear except to those in the halls of power in Islamabad and theirn allies in Paris. Naval procurement are increasingly being dictated by political concerns-Pakistan being no different.

Observe this interesting piece of news:

Tech-transfer-likely-to-delay-Scorpene-sub

The French aren't exactly known for restricting ToT on baseline designs for greater than three months. Perhaps an indication of an imminent PN deal with DCNS is in the works.

 

[Jliu]

As per DCN the Mesma's autonomy equal that of the U-214 boats that are equipped with fuel cells, and be easier to refuel.

Later, the Mesma system could be complemented by a fuell cell with a system producing hydrogen from gasoil, without any need to stock it on board. DCN will probably show a "fuel cell / hydrogen" kit at the next Euronaval fair. The expected result should be to double the performance of current AIP systems.

The influence of the Barracuda-class on the Marlin design emphasized in the dive controls, in the combat system which will resemble the SYCOBS used both aboard the "Le Terrible" SSBN and the new SSNs, and in the possibility to include optronic masts.

DCN goes the whole nine yards to show the gap between Marlin and the Scorpene and U Class Boats.

Pray tell me, from exactly what websites you blatantly copied the following information from in a gross copy/paste violation?

I also would be greatly interested to know from a "self styled" PN seaman when was it the Pakistani Military decided to adopt US spelling conventions?

If you don't take yourself seriously no one will.

 

[Proud to be Pakistani]

To gain an understanding of probable PN procurement plans in the med-long term one must look at the overall strategic picture, domestic budgetary factors and the threat matrix to name a few.

On the OHP 'deal' there are no indications yet the USN may phase out and release units-yet. Until that eventuality alternatives may be found in PLAN designs such as the 054A, Turkish MILGEM derivative? or more realistically, second hand FFs from interested parties (read: Marine Nationale looking to sell off used FFs as FREMM units reach IOC) as priorities are clearly not with the navy or the surface forces at this stage should you observe naval events of the past five years.

Long term options are fairly murky and unclear except to those in the halls of power in Islamabad and theirn allies in Paris. Naval procurement are increasingly being dictated by political concerns-Pakistan being no different.

Observe this interesting piece of news:

Tech-transfer-likely-to-delay-Scorpene-sub

The French aren't exactly known for restricting ToT on baseline designs for greater than three months. Perhaps an indication of an imminent PN deal with DCNS is in the works.

Have to Agree with you on this one!

 

[araz]

To gain an understanding of probable PN procurement plans in the med-long term one must look at the overall strategic picture, domestic budgetary factors and the threat matrix to name a few.

On the OHP 'deal' there are no indications yet the USN may phase out and release units-yet. Until that eventuality alternatives may be found in PLAN designs such as the 054A, Turkish MILGEM derivative? or more realistically, second hand FFs from interested parties (read: Marine Nationale looking to sell off used FFs as FREMM units reach IOC) as priorities are clearly not with the navy or the surface forces at this stage should you observe naval events of the past five years.

Long term options are fairly murky and unclear except to those in the halls of power in Islamabad and theirn allies in Paris. Naval procurement are increasingly being dictated by political concerns-Pakistan being no different.

Observe this interesting piece of news:

Tech-transfer-likely-to-delay-Scorpene-sub

The French aren't exactly known for restricting ToT on baseline designs for greater than three months. Perhaps an indication of an imminent PN deal with DCNS is in the works.

Jliu.
Thank you for your informative post. There was news that OHP might be freed up from SN stack by 2009. I guess we have to wait and see. I agree that at the moment there is a lot going on behind the scenes on cooperation with Turkey and theMilgem is one such project that has been highlighted.
on the Sub front, all indications so far tend to go in favour of U 214. I guess again, we may have to wait and see.
Regards
Araz