Depends Red Arrow!! What the target is, not all Ships have CIWS, and not all CIWS systems are as good as the top leading Brands. So I guess the Exorcists are still a threat to Auxiliary and older configured Ships. Not all CIWS systems are effective and not all have a hundred percent kill rate.
Does Pakistan have Missile Subs?
- Thread starter ultrafang
- Start date
layered defense ? there is no layered defence at sea dude. most u can do is to send a anti-sub helo ahead to dip in sonars. agosta 90B is one of the most silent sub on the planet. exocet's 50km range is sufficiant enough.
older agosta 70's were able to fire the longer range harpoon. the newer agosta 90's can fire the shorter range SM-39.
bottom line is. they r both well proven missiles in combat. russian missiles r not.
older agosta 70's were able to fire the longer range harpoon. the newer agosta 90's can fire the shorter range SM-39.
bottom line is. they r both well proven missiles in combat. russian missiles r not.
The question is how they manage to verify their target. It´s easy to fire a SSM on a single bearing (BOL), but you should know if it´s the right one you shoot. To use the max. range of a SSM you are forced to use TPT, exept you have a excellent acoustic database. Does Pakistan practise TPT with their subs?
Dude i was not talking about how to kill Agostha,I was talking about how to kill Exocet.
Ships need Layered Defence to sucessfully defend from a Cruise Missile.
Don't make conclusions like that.
Egyptian SS-N-2 Styx of range 80km sank israeli destroyer.
Indian SS-N-2 Styx Sank a Pakistan Destroyer,Trawler and Merchant Ship.
http://www.vectorsite.net/twbomba.html
Becoz of Russian Anti-Shipping Missiles deployed in 1960's/1970's,West understood the Potential of a Cruise Missile.
Isreal though got shocked took revenge later in 1973 when they fooled all Styx Missiles fired by Egypt Missile Boats and also counter attacked them.
It is sufficient enough but the risk of attacking it from so close range will threaten the attacker too. Short range surely will have tactical disadvantages.
That is why latest version of Exocet MM40 Block 3 is of range 180km with excellent Guidance,Coastal Attack and ECM immunity.
Last edited:
yasin_khan
New Member
Re: Dose Pakistan have Missile Subs?
Yes, the Pakistan Navys Agusta 90B known as Al-Khalid is capable of launching all types of heavyweight wire guided torpedoes and fire-and-forget SM 39 Exocet missiles which together cover an action area out to 40 km.The Pakistan Navy's primary role is to guard the country's territorial waters and oversee enforcement of jurisdiction over nearly 240,000 square miles of waters constituting Pakistan's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). The navy is also tasked with protection of Pakistan's SLOCs, its 960km long coastline and its ports, especially the port of Karachi.
Yes, the Pakistan Navys Agusta 90B known as Al-Khalid is capable of launching all types of heavyweight wire guided torpedoes and fire-and-forget SM 39 Exocet missiles which together cover an action area out to 40 km.The Pakistan Navy's primary role is to guard the country's territorial waters and oversee enforcement of jurisdiction over nearly 240,000 square miles of waters constituting Pakistan's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). The navy is also tasked with protection of Pakistan's SLOCs, its 960km long coastline and its ports, especially the port of Karachi.
Upgrading to To Block 3 would not be a problem but it would require Induction Investment training plus upgrades Contracts negotiations etc.ajay_ijn said:
Minor Upgrades to the Fire Control systems and Mechanism assuming its all back compatible with the Last Block.
the Problem is not that its short-range, infact your implying that PNs Tactical Capability would be compromised if they don't have Longer range Exorcist. Well it doesn't work out like that when you look at it form a military planners view. He/She would see this limitation as an acceptable Compromise (since they chose the Missile) and would substitute it with other assets. you forget that there are surface Ships that have EW capability annd offensive weaponry with other Auxiliary support assets Airborne, seaboard , other Subs etc. and a heck allot of Solid Doctrine that comes in to Play when wars happen. By purely surfing Internet Sites for Specs on weapon systems you can't begin to realize the complexities and the other related issues involved in warfare. there are Specialist in the Navy who deal with Warfare and are Brilliant ones too, for me Engineering is enough.
Musashi_kenshin
Well-Known Member
In a nutshell I don't think Pakistan does, simply because they would want to have that as political leverage over the Indians. Not that they would do that, with the current rapproachment going on. Armed forces are usually a visible deterant more than anything.
The Chinese government is happy to tell its neighbours what kinds of weapons it has - even though they hide their actual total military budget.
The Chinese government is happy to tell its neighbours what kinds of weapons it has - even though they hide their actual total military budget.
conclusions r based on facts. u want to compare how many ships have harpoons and exocets sunk ?? do some research on that. all SSN2 has sunk r just 2 .. duh.. btw in 71 war. indian navy fired a total of 4 ssn2's.. 1 missed. 1 barely damaged a merchant ship.. 1 did.. last one missed and hit a oil tank on the port..
we r talking about pakistani agosta's against indian ships.. not US carrier battle groups.. so SM39 exocet against IN is quite a match if not better. 50km is enough for that purpose.
we r talking about pakistani agosta's against indian ships.. not US carrier battle groups.. so SM39 exocet against IN is quite a match if not better. 50km is enough for that purpose.
thats exactly the purpose PN's 90B wud serve. patrolling the deep ocean. sinking any target of opportunity or trailing any IN warship/carrier while PN surface feelt and orion's keep IN ships/subs off of ports.
that was the main point of spending a billion bucks on 3 agostas. a sealthy platform quite cabale of operating in a stand alone env for longer period.
that was the main point of spending a billion bucks on 3 agostas. a sealthy platform quite cabale of operating in a stand alone env for longer period.
I believe the Augusta is stealthy and add the Arabian Sea Noise factor and you have a perfect Sub atmosphere. The Sub can approach a IN Vessel without being detected unless there is a piece of the puzzle I’m missing. If IN is in PakTerritory then it cannot have airborne Recon assets and would have to rely on traditional Sensors. And I doubt IN will be able to Hold a layered defense around its Flag ship unless all Pak navy assets have been neutralized. the Pak Sub fleet would rage havoc over the Indian Navy vessels.
Now lets say the P3 c Are in the Air guarding Pak Territory, you would have Surface ships that would maintain a direct link with them but the Sub can passively pick up Messages and maintain there stealth (need help on this point, i don't know how subs maintain contact with airborne Recon assets or do the messages get routed to them). Subs primary goal is to Remain stealthy Enter the target zone complete the task and return, preferably undetected. Pak navy while guarding Economic zones would not require longer-range Exorcists since the Augusta would never have penetration problems. The Accuracy of the Missile is not in question since its such a short distance and the CIWS would have little time to react.
Now lets say the P3 c Are in the Air guarding Pak Territory, you would have Surface ships that would maintain a direct link with them but the Sub can passively pick up Messages and maintain there stealth (need help on this point, i don't know how subs maintain contact with airborne Recon assets or do the messages get routed to them). Subs primary goal is to Remain stealthy Enter the target zone complete the task and return, preferably undetected. Pak navy while guarding Economic zones would not require longer-range Exorcists since the Augusta would never have penetration problems. The Accuracy of the Missile is not in question since its such a short distance and the CIWS would have little time to react.
Last edited:
U Better do some research on that and provide me with a Source.
I gave the source in my previous post.
http://www.vectorsite.net/twbomba.html
For ur kind info Indian Navy Missile Boats fired a total of 11 Missiles Sinking the Pakistan Destroyer KHAIBAR,Damaging destroyer PNS Shahjahan,Sinking the Minesweeper PNS Muhafiz and also the Merchant Ship Venus Challenger.
http://orbat.com/site/cimh/navy/kills(1971)-2.pdf
They did not miss but they were planned for strike on Oil Tanks.
http://www.vectorsite.net/twbomba.html
http://www.vectorsite.net/twbomba.html
Yes it is, hence why India is keen to get the Scorpene. Although for the life of me I cannot understand why both India and Pakistan (and for that matter China) continue to buy French equipment.Amal said:Is These AGOSTA 90B CLASS ATTACK SUBMARINE a threat to Indian Navy
No disrespect (and I have a great deal of commercial respect that the French have managed to play the "great game" successfully), but they have seen all 3 countries coming from miles away.
i think its all about Availablity, Rather then the Cpability. they all seem to target teh Odd one out of the Bunch the Most likely one that would cave inn on demnand ie not Withhold Spares when really needed.gf0012-aust said:
GF, i know you work with the Notion that the Best tank killer is a Tank its self Vis-versa the Best Sub killer is a Sub. But when we talk about Subs in the Arabian Ocean or for that Matter any ocean. we can't just accept the fact that the Scorpion would be capable of taking out an Augusta in its home territory while being manned with a type Experienced battle hardened Crew. i believe the tech level remains the Same but and its all down to the Intelligence Doctrines and personnel training and to a certain extent Logistics. if the IN can exceed the PN in these area while in possession of the Scorpion then yes the Notion "Sub is the Best sub killer" holds!
You seem to forget that I do work primarily in an acoustic warfare environment - so I do know that the Scorpene is the more effective sub - I'm well aware of the technology that's gone into the modified Agostas as I've worked with that French company (and if you have any contacts in the Pakistani Navy you will know that it's not DCN). That info alone will comfirm that I know whats going on.adsH said:
So you are challenging the premise that the top 3 submarine powers and the 3 greatest technicians and submariners of the 20th-21st century have persistently indicated (USN with Rickover - Russians with Lebedko - Royal Navy with Woodward) all of whom have persistently said (and it is current doctrine within all the major modern navies) that the best sub killer is another sub? Thats an aggregate total of nearly 350 years of combat exposure and experience - not some theorists attempt at defining a new warfighting paradigm.
man for man, sub for sub, a new Scorpene is a hell of a lot different in capability to a modified Agosta 90 - even with the french signature mods. It's a later vessel, has more integrated silencing technologies, is not a hybrid - and is actually able to converted to a nuke using technology available on platforms such as the Rubens. She's not the best of the contemporary conventionals, but she's a half generation ahead in technology terms.
India has been learning, training and co-operating on sub development with the russians for over 40 years, they've had German input and they've trained on a variety of platforms - including nukes. Assuming that there is a training edge between Pakistani submariners and Indian submariners is a pretty cavalier statement - and I'd be loathe to base any qualitative tactical analysis on something so tenuous when other data doesn't necessarily support it.
Subwarfare is a very very different beast.
Last edited:
according to the latest reports now that the hdw has been cleared of bribery charges and is willing to cooperate with indian navy the scorpene deal is likely to be put on hold and the hdw sub would also be evaluated.though i think the hdw214 is the best sub and the indian navy should select it ,it will delay the indian navy submarine project several years something which the indian navy can do without.:coffee
I’m well aware of what you do, that’s why i addressed you with what I thought was the Status Quo. Obviously you would always have an edge over me since you happen to be in the Field and have gained seniority while I’m still at a Younger stage of my Career.gf0012-aust said:
I may be "Some Theorist" attempting to define what he believes inn bearing in mind i have not been out in the Field. Yet!!!. But isn't that how you Began at first.
Secondly I was not defining a new "War fighting paradigms" i was merely trying to bring across to the rest here of what i believe was the most relevant requirement for the sea condition in the Arabian Sea. Since you seem to be implying that i am challenging the War fighting theories of the leaders in the Field, then i should just let you know, that i'm not an expert in "the deadly Art of Mariner warfare" but newer tactics have to be developed, stealth is foremost important and i can see why you would imply acoustics as a primary lethality Multiplier. But I see other aspects of the Subs as there sensor system and the integration of the Tactical Information systems and the Tactical Data link such as our Link 16 as a primary tool in War fighting. You need to have the information, the relevant information the right kind the right kind of resources to analyse evaluate and ready to use in real time. While sharing it simultaneously to effectively conduct warfare. So you see Technology is Vital and I believe is one of the most important aspects of the any warfare doctrine. Welcome to the information Age.
By Building subs and building a cooperation spanning 4 decades doesn't qualify a party with the necessary skills required to being a better more suited Marine Warfare personnel (those are technical issues). It’s all down to the Training. Where you got it from and what was on offer while you were enrolled on to it. Personal experience and ((RN)CPD’s) would be the key here. You can't just pick up statements like they have a larger experience with German and Russian vessels and imply that they would perform exceedingly well on the scorpion straight away. (Throw whatever you’ve got at me!!) Depends on the type of training type of crew doctrines and shake down time. That PN can easily bring down to a minimum since they have similar vessels in service. I specifically stated "type specific" for the PN since they have operated the type before. And traditionally Pak Navy Sub Arm has the strongest one since it was created. The reason why I stated Intelligence was important too in the Arabian sea since Pak navy will operate the P-3 c which would provide a decent recon (Every thing I said was specific to this Example I was not challenging that the “Holly grail†beliefs were not relevant anymore.).
Indeed it is.
The 214 is by far a more superior platform to the Scorpene.aaaditya said: