Beating the Indian Navy without going broke

[Parthu]

Ah it's you again.

Pakistan does not have SSB.

Neither do we have SSN at the moment (one which we can use in war). I'm talking about the future.

Hell, Pakistan does not have any proper solid fuel ballistic missile, forget submarine launched ones.

All Shaheen series BMs (and Ababeel) are solid fueled. As of SLBM tech, it will come to Pakistan via the same route that their existing missile tech comes from: China via North Korea. The recently tested North Korean SLBM KN-11 aka Pukkuksong-1 traces its lineage to the old Chinese JL-1 SLBM. The SLBM which Pakistan will eventually operate will come from the same family.

North Korean will be using a much older submarine design as their SSB. But Pakistan will be getting the S-30, a variant of Type-032 from China as their SSB:

They are cruise missiles like Babur which is being planned to be mated in submarine.

You only need torpedo tubes to launch cruise missiles like Babur, Tomahawk or Nirbhay.

India already has SSN. Arihant class is a mix of SSBN and SSN. It was actually made as SSN but changed to SSBN in 1999 just make it appear less threatening. Arihant can carry ballistic missile as well as all equipment of SSN.

Arihant class is 6000tons which is nothing but SSN category. No SSBN would be as small as this. Also, 750km Sagarika missile is just a joke. WHat is the point of having such short ranged missile from submarine? How can India do a meaningful strike on slightly internal cities with it?

Sigh. This again.

• Arihant is not an SSN and never has been. You don't set out to built an SSN and then suddenly decide to drill 4 big holes in it and make it an SSBN.
• Arihant is approx 6,000T surfaced. When you submerge it, the displacement won't be that different from China's first SSBN Type-092 submerged.
• An SSBN is not less threatening than an SSN. In fact the opposite is true. SSN can hunt vessels at most. SSBN can annihilate cities.
• Torpedo tubes are carried by all types of submarines, including SSBNs. Having torpedo tubes or not does not make a sub an SSN.
• The 750km K-15 Sagarika is a technology demonstration missile derived from the land-based Shaurya to act as a testbed for SLBM techs. The definitive SLBM for Arihant-class is the 3500km K-4.

 

[vstol Jockey]

Not Delhi, but here is a picture of Pakistani flag on Kishangarh fort Rajistan.
View attachment 3168

This picture is of April-May 1965 when the Pak Army backed by US supplied Patton Tanks engaged lightly armed CRPF which was manning the border in Rajasthan and Kutch. Once the Indian Army took over the border, the mighty Pak Army beat a hasty retreat. This battle in Kutch and Rajasthan was a prelude to Operation Gibraltar and subsequent full fledged war of 1965.

 

[advaidhya]

All Shaheen series BMs (and Ababeel) are solid fueled. As of SLBM tech, it will come to Pakistan via the same route that their existing missile tech comes from: China via North Korea.

Pakista has Shaheen but it has never been properly tested and a test this year failed due to missile exploding mid way. China give ballistic missile technology to North Korea? Then why is North Korean missile failing at times? Just accept that North Korea has a high priority for military technology despite its lack of funds for other things. North Korea even has a semiconductor fabrication facility (older, 3 micrometer one) which Pakistan does not have!

The SLBM which Pakistan will eventually operate will come from the same family.

You know this already? Do you think missiles are sold like firecrackers?

You only need torpedo tubes to launch cruise missiles like Babur, Tomahawk or Nirbhay

Do you know the dimensions and sensor integration of Torpedo or cruise missile? Torpedoes are not as long as Nirbhay missiles and they use sonar, not radar guidance. You can't interchange the two.

Arihant is approx 6,000T surfaced. When you submerge it, the displacement won't be that different from China's first SSBN Type-092 submerged.

Aeihant is about 7500tons submerged which is similar to SSN. Let us not have fanciful thinking. Also, as I have told before, in 1999, the nuclear submarine was designated as SSBN just for policy sake The project had been ongoing much before and that was meant for SSN only. I can't believe that suddenly all the projects for SSN was changed overnight for a SSBN.

An SSBN is not less threatening than an SSN. In fact the opposite is true. SSN can hunt vessels at most. SSBN can annihilate cities

SSBN is a piece of shit. You could have several missiles hidden inside Chilika Lake, Vindhya moutains etc instead of SSBN. SSN does some real meaningful work which makes it more useful. SSBN is for retards.

 

[Guynextdoor]

Not Delhi, but here is a picture of Pakistani flag on Kishangarh fort Rajistan.
View attachment 3168

maybe if you didn't start the war and do such silly thing you could have avoided that crisis.

 

[Guynextdoor]

Pakista has Shaheen but it has never been properly tested and a test this year failed due to missile exploding mid way. China give ballistic missile technology to North Korea? Then why is North Korean missile failing at times? Just accept that North Korea has a high priority for military technology despite its lack of funds for other things. North Korea even has a semiconductor fabrication facility (older, 3 micrometer one) which Pakistan does not have!


You know this already? Do you think missiles are sold like firecrackers?


Do you know the dimensions and sensor integration of Torpedo or cruise missile? Torpedoes are not as long as Nirbhay missiles and they use sonar, not radar guidance. You can't interchange the two.

Aeihant is about 7500tons submerged which is similar to SSN. Let us not have fanciful thinking. Also, as I have told before, in 1999, the nuclear submarine was designated as SSBN just for policy sake The project had been ongoing much before and that was meant for SSN only. I can't believe that suddenly all the projects for SSN was changed overnight for a SSBN.

SSBN is a piece of shit. You could have several missiles hidden inside Chilika Lake, Vindhya moutains etc instead of SSBN. SSN does some real meaningful work which makes it more useful. SSBN is for retards.

ARihant and 2nd Sub being first of their kind are compact. The rest will be bigger. SSBN is a highly survivable platform. If you have long enough ranged missiles, you can park your SSBN in arctic/antarctic waters and still keep Pakistan/China in focus.

 

[advaidhya]

ARihant and 2nd Sub being first of their kind are compact. The rest will be bigger. SSBN is a highly survivable platform. If you have long enough ranged missiles, you can park your SSBN in arctic/antarctic waters and still keep Pakistan/China in focus.

SSBN also need food supply. They can't stay indefinitely under water. Also, with 750km sagarika, there is not much range either India can't even target an important city like Quetta with the sagarika missile from submarine

 

[Guynextdoor]

SSBN also need food supply. They can't stay indefinitely under water. Also, with 750km sagarika, there is not much range either India can't even target an important city like Quetta with the sagarika missile from submarine

Right now 750 KM is sufficient for a second strike. As the bigger ships rollout we will have bigger missiles. SSBN goes out at sea with several months of food and water on board- in the US it is usually about 3 months worth of supplies.

 

[Parthu]

Pakista has Shaheen but it has never been properly tested and a test this year failed due to missile exploding mid way.

I thought you said they didn't even have any solid fueled missiles. Why change goalposts?

China give ballistic missile technology to North Korea? Then why is North Korean missile failing at times?

So? Even Chinese missiles can fail at times as can Russian or American or Indian ones.

A cursory inspection of KN-11 is enough to point out a lineage to the JL-1.

The relationship here is more or less the same as how Pakistani missiles like Ghaznavi find lineage back to Chinese DF-11 aka M-11.

You know this already? Do you think missiles are sold like firecrackers?

Why're you worried? Relax and you will find out exactly what Pakistan gets eventually. I'm free to draw what inferences I will. No one is asking you to believe in them and if you choose to not believe, I don't care.

Do you know the dimensions and sensor integration of Torpedo or cruise missile?

As a matter of fact I do.

Torpedoes are not as long as Nirbhay missiles

Black Shark length: 6.3m
Nirbhay length: 6m

Black Shark diameter: 0.53m
Nirbhay diameter: 0.52m

You need to do better research.

and they use sonar, not radar guidance. You can't interchange the two.

Duh. Torpedos never leave the water. Cruise missiles are ejected out of the water immediately following launch and fly out to targets like a normal ground-launched cruise missile would.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Aeihant is about 7500tons submerged which is similar to SSN. Let us not have fanciful thinking. Also, as I have told before, in 1999, the nuclear submarine was designated as SSBN just for policy sake The project had been ongoing much before and that was meant for SSN only.

America's first SSBN: ~6800 T submerged (USS George Washington)
Russia's first SSBN: ~5600 T submerged (Hotel I class)
France's first SSBN: ~8000 T submerged (Redoubtable class)
Britain's first SSBN: ~8400 T submerged (Resolution class)
China's first SSBN: ~8000 T submerged (Type 092 Xia class)

India's first SSBN: ~7500-8000 T submerged (Arihant class)

I simply don't see what you find so hard to believe. I think you have failed to grasp certain facts and as a result are left drawing up imaginary numbers. Your reasoning and conclusions make zero sense.

I can't believe that suddenly all the projects for SSN was changed overnight for a SSBN.

You're right, I can't believe it too! Nobody can believe it!

SSBN is a piece of shit. You could have several missiles hidden inside Chilika Lake, Vindhya moutains etc instead of SSBN. SSN does some real meaningful work which makes it more useful. SSBN is for retards.

Don't worry I have a fairly good understanding by now of who is a retard.

 

[safriz]

I thought you said they didn't even have any solid fueled missiles. Why change goalposts?



So? Even Chinese missiles can fail at times as can Russian or American or Indian ones.

A cursory inspection of KN-11 is enough to point out a lineage to the JL-1.

The relationship here is more or less the same as how Pakistani missiles like Ghaznavi find lineage back to Chinese DF-11 aka M-11.

Why're you worried? Relax and you will find out exactly what Pakistan gets eventually. I'm free to draw what inferences I will. No one is asking you to believe in them and if you choose to not believe, I don't care.



As a matter of fact I do.



Black Shark length: 6.3m
Nirbhay length: 6m

Black Shark diameter: 0.53m
Nirbhay diameter: 0.52m

You need to do better research.



Duh. Torpedos never leave the water. Cruise missiles are ejected out of the water immediately following launch and fly out to targets like a normal ground-launched cruise missile would.

You have no idea what you're talking about.



America's first SSBN: ~6800 T submerged (USS George Washington)
Russia's first SSBN: ~5600 T submerged (Hotel I class)
France's first SSBN: ~8000 T submerged (Redoubtable class)
Britain's first SSBN: ~8400 T submerged (Resolution class)
China's first SSBN: ~8000 T submerged (Type 092 Xia class)

India's first SSBN: ~7500-8000 T submerged (Arihant class)

I simply don't see what you find so hard to believe. I think you have failed to grasp certain facts and as a result are left drawing up imaginary numbers. Your reasoning and conclusions make zero sense.



You're right, I can't believe it too! Nobody can believe it!



Don't worry I have a fairly good understanding by now of who is a retard.

When Soviet Union collapsed we bought many sensitive technologies and samples for reverse engineering from the black market which emerged soon after the collapse .
Soviet engineers and scientists also military men weren't being paid and were selling whatever they could grab for whatever price they could get.
Just to add to the list of contributing factors to our Missile program and certain other programs.

 

[Star Wars]

Actually from what I remember from the submarine incident. we had tracked and followed a group of Chinese naval ships heading to Pakistani port along(partly) with US starting from Malacca and surfaced in the end to show they were tracked the entire time...

 

[Kvasir]

• Arihant is not an SSN and never has been. You don't set out to built an SSN and then suddenly decide to drill 4 big holes in it and make it an SSBN.

Au contraire. Behold, a Skipjack class SSN-to-SSBN conversion:

USS George Washington, first SSBN of the USN, was laid down as USS Scorpion, a Skipjack class SSN. During the conversion she was elongated with a 130ft missile compartment.

USS Scorpion was later constructed in her own right before being lost at sea with all hands.

Russia's Hotel class were converted November class submarines, with an elongated sail.

Likewise with Zulu, Russia's first ballistic missile submarines.

It's not inconceivable that Arihant could have been a converted SSN hull, it's just not likely either.

 

[Kvasir]

India already has SSN. Arihant class is a mix of SSBN and SSN. It was actually made as SSN but changed to SSBN in 1999 just make it appear less threatening. Arihant can carry ballistic missile as well as all equipment of SSN.

Here's the reason I find this line of thought to be inaccurate; Arihant has the distinguishing feature of an SSBN - it's missile hump. If it was an SSN that someone decided to put missiles on it simply wouldn't have those design features, they'd have to be deliberately added either as a purposeful inclusion during the design phase or as part of a radical conversion.

This is a feature you don't find on SSN designs and is one that has to be builtin when designing the submarine, or added during a radical conversion such as with the George Washington-class:

SSN hulls, even those used as the basis for an SSB-class submarine just don't have that, as seen here with the Skipjack-class that the George Washington-class was based on, like they were literally Skipjack hulls. You can see how radical the conversion was and that the George Washington-class took on its distinctive "hump" when the missile compartment was added, but that also elongated the submarine by 130ft.

Now here's another tidbit that further proves that point. Arihant is based on the Kilo-class design, though sometimes erroneously stated to be Akula in origins. It's 30% larger then a base Kilo. You'll notice the Kilo is fairly streamlined.

Kilo is a conventionally designed SSK. Arihant though has it's hump missile compartment seemingly as a builtin feature, not as an add-on during a Kilo conversion, but as a ground-up inclusion. This tells me that from the start the intent wasn't to build a "Super Kilo" that's nuclear powered (that's stupid when India could use the superior Akula as an SSN blueprint), but a nuclear powered ballistic missile submarine based on a hull design India is familiar with, using it as a blueprint, but not as a conversion a la George Washington, Hotel or Zulu.

Put simply; to me INS Arihant was a purpose built SSBN.

 

[Shajida Khan]

Here's the reason I find this line of thought to be inaccurate; Arihant has the distinguishing feature of an SSBN - it's missile hump.

This is a feature you don't find on SSN designs and is one that has to be builtin when designing the submarine, or added during a radical conversion such as with the George Washington-class:

SSN hulls, even those used as the basis for an SSB-class submarine just don't have that, as seen here with the Skipjack-class that the George Washington-class was based on, like they were literally Skipjack hulls. You can see how radical the conversion was and that the George Washington-class took on its distinctive "hump" when the missile compartment was added, but that also elongated the submarine by 130ft.

Now here's another tidbit that further proves that point. Arihant is based on the Kilo-class design, though sometimes erroneously stated to be Akula in origins. It's 30% larger then a base Kilo. You'll notice the Kilo is fairly streamlined.

Kilo is a conventionally designed SSK. Arihant though has it's hump missile compartment seemingly as a builtin feature, not as an add-on during a Kilo conversion, but as a ground-up inclusion. This tells me that from the start the intent wasn't to build a "Super Kilo" that's nuclear powered, but a nuclear powered ballistic missile submarine based on a hull design India is familiar with, using it as a blueprint, but not as a conversion a la George Washington, Hotel or Zulu.

Put simply; to me INS Arihant was a purpose built SSBN.

Its not just that, SSBN are supposed to prowl quietly and not chase other vessels. Their speed is constant. Meaning SSN will need more powerful reactor than SSBN.

 

[randomradio]

Why would that be so? Why do you want India to get hit first? What difference does it make between 1st and second strike? WHy should India choose second strike? This is not a new war after all. War has been going on for long time and there is no need to show restraint unnecesarily

You misunderstand. The objective is first strike. But India won't do a first strike unilaterally. India will have to be forced into making a first strike.

Arihant class is 6000tons which is nothing but SSN category. No SSBN would be as small as this. Also, 750km Sagarika missile is just a joke. WHat is the point of having such short ranged missile from submarine? How can India do a meaningful strike on slightly internal cities with it?

SSN reactors are different from SSBN reactors because SSNs require higher performance.

Sagarika's range is much greater than 750Km.

 

[randomradio]

1. S-400 is not exactly a BMD. We have PDV and AAD for that role. S400's main role is to take out an enemy airplane or cruise missile.
2. India may also buy THAAD or NASAM to defend high value targets against Ballistic missiles.

We have no need for THAAD when we have our own program.

And NASAM is a QRSAM, not BMD.

 

[safriz]

Here's the reason I find this line of thought to be inaccurate; Arihant has the distinguishing feature of an SSBN - it's missile hump. If it was an SSN that someone decided to put missiles on it simply wouldn't have those design features, they'd have to be deliberately added either as a purposeful inclusion during the design phase or as part of a radical conversion.

This is a feature you don't find on SSN designs and is one that has to be builtin when designing the submarine, or added during a radical conversion such as with the George Washington-class:

SSN hulls, even those used as the basis for an SSB-class submarine just don't have that, as seen here with the Skipjack-class that the George Washington-class was based on, like they were literally Skipjack hulls. You can see how radical the conversion was and that the George Washington-class took on its distinctive "hump" when the missile compartment was added, but that also elongated the submarine by 130ft.

Now here's another tidbit that further proves that point. Arihant is based on the Kilo-class design, though sometimes erroneously stated to be Akula in origins. It's 30% larger then a base Kilo. You'll notice the Kilo is fairly streamlined.

Kilo is a conventionally designed SSK. Arihant though has it's hump missile compartment seemingly as a builtin feature, not as an add-on during a Kilo conversion, but as a ground-up inclusion. This tells me that from the start the intent wasn't to build a "Super Kilo" that's nuclear powered (that's stupid when India could use the superior Akula as an SSN blueprint), but a nuclear powered ballistic missile submarine based on a hull design India is familiar with, using it as a blueprint, but not as a conversion a la George Washington, Hotel or Zulu.

Put simply; to me INS Arihant was a purpose built SSBN.

Is there another picture of INS Arihant apart from this one?
Something is not right about this only Picture of INS Arihant . This pic is the only one being floated on internet as far as i am aware.
But this does not look like a new submarine. Look at the submarine skin distorted and caved in between frames all over.
This happens to surface ships and submarines after extended use. The hull comes under constant compression and de compression and shows signs of expanding and retracting . Those dimples all over the alleged pic of INS Arihant can only form after the sub has been used for 2-3 years or more. But isn't INS Arihant brand new in this pic?

 

[randomradio]

I have never seen that image. Are there more available?

 

[advaidhya]

Here's the reason I find this line of thought to be inaccurate; Arihant has the distinguishing feature of an SSBN - it's missile hump. If it was an SSN that someone decided to put missiles on it simply wouldn't have those design features, they'd have to be deliberately added either as a purposeful inclusion during the design phase or as part of a radical conversion.

This is a feature you don't find on SSN designs and is one that has to be builtin when designing the submarine, or added during a radical conversion such as with the George Washington-class:

SSN hulls, even those used as the basis for an SSB-class submarine just don't have that, as seen here with the Skipjack-class that the George Washington-class was based on, like they were literally Skipjack hulls. You can see how radical the conversion was and that the George Washington-class took on its distinctive "hump" when the missile compartment was added, but that also elongated the submarine by 130ft.

Now here's another tidbit that further proves that point. Arihant is based on the Kilo-class design, though sometimes erroneously stated to be Akula in origins. It's 30% larger then a base Kilo. You'll notice the Kilo is fairly streamlined.

Kilo is a conventionally designed SSK. Arihant though has it's hump missile compartment seemingly as a builtin feature, not as an add-on during a Kilo conversion, but as a ground-up inclusion. This tells me that from the start the intent wasn't to build a "Super Kilo" that's nuclear powered (that's stupid when India could use the superior Akula as an SSN blueprint), but a nuclear powered ballistic missile submarine based on a hull design India is familiar with, using it as a blueprint, but not as a conversion a la George Washington, Hotel or Zulu.

Put simply; to me INS Arihant was a purpose built SSBN.

Is there any difference between SSBN and SSN in doing an attack role? Can SSBN which is small in size like Arihant be used for attack SSN roles too?

PS: I am saying that Arihant was meant to be SSN since 1970s but in the last minute changed to be SSBN before design began. Also, the short range of missile in it makes me suspect that Arihant is a SSBN with SSN capability.

You misunderstand. The objective is first strike. But India won't do a first strike unilaterally. India will have to be forced into making a first strike.



SSN reactors are different from SSBN reactors because SSNs require higher performance.

Sagarika's range is much greater than 750Km.

No matter what, Sagarika has limited range, less than 2000km which is too small for a SSBN. SSBN missiles are normally ICBM. Making a SRBM or MRBM is really suspicious. It has to be at least IRBM with 3500km range for strikes.

 

[randomradio]

Is there another picture of INS Arihant apart from this one?
Something is not right about this only Picture of INS Arihant . This pic is the only one being floated on internet as far as i am aware.
But this does not look like a new submarine. Look at the submarine skin distorted and caved in between frames all over.
This happens to surface ships and submarines after extended use. The hull comes under constant compression and de compression and shows signs of expanding and retracting . Those dimples all over the alleged pic of INS Arihant can only form after the sub has been used for 2-3 years or more. But isn't INS Arihant brand new in this pic?

There are three images of the Arihant in her post. The first, second and last. Which one are you referring to?

 

[randomradio]

No matter what, Sagarika has limited range, less than 2000km which is too small for a SSBN. SSBN missiles are normally ICBM. Making a SRBM or MRBM is really suspicious. It has to be at least IRBM with 3500km range for strikes.

You make missiles based on geography and requirements, not based on a dick-measuring contest.

The Sagarika can hit targets of interest from the Bay of Bengal, and is difficult to intercept due to its high speed flat trajectory, so it is what we need.