Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby arun » 23 Sep 2008 09:00

MESMA equipped Agosta 90 B commissioning on Sept 26th :

Another Agosta submarine ready

asbchakri
BRFite
Posts: 250
Joined: 14 Sep 2007 11:20
Location: Chennai
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby asbchakri » 23 Sep 2008 10:03

arun wrote:MESMA equipped Agosta 90 B commissioning on Sept 26th :

Another Agosta submarine ready


“It is a major breakthrough in our capabilities of defence production and today Pakistan is among one of the few countries capable of constructing submarines indigenously,” Commodore Naser Shah said.

Construction of indigenous submarine continued despite some hitches following the Sheraton Karachi bombing in which some French engineers working on the project were killed.


"indigenous" :shock: . What have they constructed "indigenously", the Green Paint :mrgreen:. hope they are not going to paint the whole submarine Green :rotfl:

On Serious things,

The commissioning of SM Hamza was termed a historical moment because it has a special feature of air independent propulsion system which increases the diving autonomy of conventional submarines.


How will this sub fare againt our Scorpene which i do not think has this system. Is there any plans on our part to update the Scorpene with AIP.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20187
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Philip » 23 Sep 2008 14:10

New challenge to IN sub fleet from Pak.

News that Pak's future subs will be German designs 214s,being acquired by Turkey and built under licence.Turkey will also tie up with Pak for manufacture of the same.I had proposed earlier that the IN should modernise our 4 German U-209s with the latest German sub technology,perhaps even getting another 4,apart from continuing with the Scorpenes.The German AIP fuel cell technology could be acquired for our U-209s and also a potential usage on Russian Amurs,which also have a Russian fuel cell AIP system.Had we done this,we would've stymied ,or at least had access to all the main conventional sub technologies (western) that might end up in the Pak navy's subs.Pak is unlikely to select the French Scorpene/Scorpene+ sub because of India's acquisition of Scorpene's ,which will also in their later units have the same MESMA AIP technology.

Pak is also acquiring Turkish corvettes designs,the PNS Zarrar last Nov.
Yonca-Onuk and ASELSAN have also paired up and are in the process of designing a mini-weapons systems for the MRTP 33. It will include 4 SSM (preferably Harpoon missiles), Data Links, Short-Range air-defence missiles (ASELSAN BORA), NAVRAD, E/O Sensor, ESM, Stabilised Naval Gun System etc.

DCNS (Armaris) from France and Navantia S.A. from Spain were the other competitors in the Turkish tender, announced in December 2006. The AIP 214 submarines to be acquired are in the inventories of very few countries, Gönül said, adding that those submarines stay at sea for more than 50 days, a multifold increase of the duration Turkish submarines in inventory can currently stay submerged.

The submarines will also have the capability to navigate under the sea for around 18 to 20,000 kilometers, he said. According to Gönül, guarantees that Turkey received on several technical issues, including the engineering work, played a significant role in the selection of the German company.

HDW/MFI pledged to bring the technology and infrastructure for the first vertical production of the submarines at the Gölcük shipyard.

If a contract is signed with the German company for the joint production of the AIP 214 submarines, cooperation on the production of the same type of submarines with Pakistan will also become possible, Gönül said, while answering questions.

PS:Details of Pak's new Agosta 0oB AIP.
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detay ... &bolum=102

Submarine Hamza to be commissioned on Sept 26
KARACHI, Sept 22 (APP): Pakistan Navy will commission the second Agosta 90B submarine “Hamza” on September 26. This was stated at a briefing arranged for the mediamen here on Monday.

It was pointed out that Hamza has been indigenously constructed at the Submarine Construction Department of Pakistan Navy Dockyard here.

This is the third submarine of the Agosta 90B contract which was signed in September 1994 with the DCN France.

Under this contract, the first submarine was constructed at DCNS Cherbourg and handed over to Pakistan Navy in December 1999 as PNS Khalid.

The second submarine PNS Saad was built at Submarine Construction Department at PN Dockyard Karachi and was commissioned in December 2003.

The General Manager Submarine, Commodore Hassan Nasir Shah, said that Hamza is nine metre longer than the earlier two submarines-Khalid and Saad.

It has a special feature of Air Independent Propulsion System (MESMA) which increases the diving capability of the conventional submarines.

Commodore Shah said this is the first submarine in the world equipped with MESMA and its trial has been conducted very successfully.

It was pointed out that today Pakistan is among one of the few countries capable of constructing submarines indigenously.

Commodore Shah said although ours is a small Navy numerically yet qualitatively we are fully capable of defending our territorial waters.

He further stated that this Hamza submarine is a step in that very direction.

Commander Shah also said this Submarine has proved to be very cost- effective and that the expenditure on the transfer of technology was in a way recovered by constructing it here indigenously.

This investment, he added, will keep benefitting us in the next several decades.

Commander Shah said in the submarines to be constructed in future we would be able to save precious foreign exchange.

He stated that for the next three submarines negotiations are going on with the DCN France and with a German firm.

Commander Shah said probably the next submarines would be built with German collaboration.

namit k
BRFite
Posts: 139
Joined: 10 Jul 2008 21:58
Location: Diamant-Land

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby namit k » 23 Sep 2008 20:49

whats the causes of increased defence relations between puki and turks, is it in response to israel or sincerely turkey is turning greener.?
the type of technology turk offer to puk in covettes is comparable to some new INS.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9968
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby sum » 23 Sep 2008 21:39

Importantly, where is the Paki navy getting the moolah from to pay for all the goodies?

I was under the impression that Unkil bankrolls Pak only his own products are bought..

namit k
BRFite
Posts: 139
Joined: 10 Jul 2008 21:58
Location: Diamant-Land

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby namit k » 23 Sep 2008 21:56

sum wrote:Importantly, where is the Paki navy getting the moolah from to pay for all the goodies?

I was under the impression that Unkil bankrolls Pak only his own products are bought..

zakat from paki-arbi beggars , bush senior(senior cia member) and
chinese flu in subcontinent

sam_kamath
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 57
Joined: 23 Sep 2008 22:53

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby sam_kamath » 24 Sep 2008 03:29

The Operational Moto of the Paki Army has always been

"Ends Justify the Means"

Mark Schwartzbard
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 29 Aug 2008 17:28

Re: Indian Naval Discussion

Postby Mark Schwartzbard » 24 Sep 2008 15:12

Philip wrote:New challenge to IN sub fleet from Pak.

News that Pak's future subs will be German designs 214s,being acquired by Turkey and built under licence.Turkey will also tie up with Pak for manufacture of the same.I had proposed earlier that the IN should modernise our 4 German U-209s with the latest German sub technology,perhaps even getting another 4,apart from continuing with the Scorpenes.The German AIP fuel cell technology could be acquired for our U-209s and also a potential usage on Russian Amurs,which also have a Russian fuel cell AIP system.Had we done this,we would've stymied ,or at least had access to all the main conventional sub technologies (western) that might end up in the Pak navy's subs.Pak is unlikely to select the French Scorpene/Scorpene+ sub because of India's acquisition of Scorpene's ,which will also in their later units have the same MESMA AIP technology.

Pak is also acquiring Turkish corvettes designs,the PNS Zarrar last Nov.
Yonca-Onuk and ASELSAN have also paired up and are in the process of designing a mini-weapons systems for the MRTP 33. It will include 4 SSM (preferably Harpoon missiles), Data Links, Short-Range air-defence missiles (ASELSAN BORA), NAVRAD, E/O Sensor, ESM, Stabilised Naval Gun System etc.

DCNS (Armaris) from France and Navantia S.A. from Spain were the other competitors in the Turkish tender, announced in December 2006. The AIP 214 submarines to be acquired are in the inventories of very few countries, Gönül said, adding that those submarines stay at sea for more than 50 days, a multifold increase of the duration Turkish submarines in inventory can currently stay submerged.

The submarines will also have the capability to navigate under the sea for around 18 to 20,000 kilometers, he said. According to Gönül, guarantees that Turkey received on several technical issues, including the engineering work, played a significant role in the selection of the German company.

HDW/MFI pledged to bring the technology and infrastructure for the first vertical production of the submarines at the Gölcük shipyard.

If a contract is signed with the German company for the joint production of the AIP 214 submarines, cooperation on the production of the same type of submarines with Pakistan will also become possible, Gönül said, while answering questions.

PS:Details of Pak's new Agosta 0oB AIP.
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detay ... &bolum=102

Submarine Hamza to be commissioned on Sept 26
KARACHI, Sept 22 (APP): Pakistan Navy will commission the second Agosta 90B submarine “Hamza” on September 26. This was stated at a briefing arranged for the mediamen here on Monday.

It was pointed out that Hamza has been indigenously constructed at the Submarine Construction Department of Pakistan Navy Dockyard here.

This is the third submarine of the Agosta 90B contract which was signed in September 1994 with the DCN France.

Under this contract, the first submarine was constructed at DCNS Cherbourg and handed over to Pakistan Navy in December 1999 as PNS Khalid.

The second submarine PNS Saad was built at Submarine Construction Department at PN Dockyard Karachi and was commissioned in December 2003.

The General Manager Submarine, Commodore Hassan Nasir Shah, said that Hamza is nine metre longer than the earlier two submarines-Khalid and Saad.

It has a special feature of Air Independent Propulsion System (MESMA) which increases the diving capability of the conventional submarines.

Commodore Shah said this is the first submarine in the world equipped with MESMA and its trial has been conducted very successfully.

It was pointed out that today Pakistan is among one of the few countries capable of constructing submarines indigenously.

Commodore Shah said although ours is a small Navy numerically yet qualitatively we are fully capable of defending our territorial waters.

He further stated that this Hamza submarine is a step in that very direction.

Commander Shah also said this Submarine has proved to be very cost- effective and that the expenditure on the transfer of technology was in a way recovered by constructing it here indigenously.

This investment, he added, will keep benefitting us in the next several decades.

Commander Shah said in the submarines to be constructed in future we would be able to save precious foreign exchange.

He stated that for the next three submarines negotiations are going on with the DCN France and with a German firm.

Commander Shah said probably the next submarines would be built with German collaboration.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I suppose you understand what fuel these submarines (U-214) use to power and the extra effort that goes in refuelling them. During war situations you can imagine the logistics. It's better if they simply send them to China and hide them in the chinese underground sub sites so that they can keep them safe.

namit k
BRFite
Posts: 139
Joined: 10 Jul 2008 21:58
Location: Diamant-Land

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby namit k » 24 Sep 2008 17:27

sam_kamath wrote:The Operational Moto of the Paki Army has always been

"Ends Justify the Means"

thats why they send their citizens,sometimes as human bombs for someone else task,this is their wahabi motto to earn money.. :evil:

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9968
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby sum » 24 Sep 2008 19:41

I suppose you understand what fuel these submarines (U-214) use to power and the extra effort that goes in refuelling them. During war situations you can imagine the logistics.

Isnt that why the IN was initially reluctant (and hence rejected it for the U-209s) for the MESMA thingie when it was offered eons back since they were concerned about the storage/volatility of few of the components of the system,esp shore based storage?

Mark Schwartzbard
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 29 Aug 2008 17:28

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Mark Schwartzbard » 24 Sep 2008 21:02

sum wrote:
I suppose you understand what fuel these submarines (U-214) use to power and the extra effort that goes in refuelling them. During war situations you can imagine the logistics.

Isnt that why the IN was initially reluctant (and hence rejected it for the U-209s) for the MESMA thingie when it was offered eons back since they were concerned about the storage/volatility of few of the components of the system,esp shore based storage?


Nope the U-209 were selected for different reasons, U-214 were still in the pipeline ( design board, which is a scaled down version of the Germans U-212 ) and hence not available.

U-214 the new generation is something that India should have considered with the diesel-electric combo instead of the scorpene ( although a good platform ). But I would not put scorpene in the best 3 diesel electric submarines out there.

Anything comming from HDW would make more sense, at least to me.

Sontu
BRFite
Posts: 103
Joined: 06 Aug 2008 19:32

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Sontu » 24 Sep 2008 22:52

Iam wrote:
sum wrote:
I suppose you understand what fuel these submarines (U-214) use to power and the extra effort that goes in refuelling them. During war situations you can imagine the logistics.

Isnt that why the IN was initially reluctant (and hence rejected it for the U-209s) for the MESMA thingie when it was offered eons back since they were concerned about the storage/volatility of few of the components of the system,esp shore based storage?


Nope the U-209 were selected for different reasons, U-214 were still in the pipeline ( design board, which is a scaled down version of the Germans U-212 ) and hence not available.

U-214 the new generation is something that India should have considered with the diesel-electric combo instead of the scorpene ( although a good platform ). But I would not put scorpene in the best 3 diesel electric submarines out there.

Anything comming from HDW would make more sense, at least to me.


>But I would not put scorpene in the best 3 diesel electric submarines out there.
>Anything comming from HDW would make more sense, at least to me.

Please clarify why do you think so (above two lines )?

When India was looking at Scorpane and HDW Subs...before zeroing in to Scorpane, I remeber that German Fuel cell tech was not matured by then...if i remeber correct that the German AIP tech(fuel cell) had some issues of overheating also some thing related with handling too.

Regards,

Sontu
BRFite
Posts: 103
Joined: 06 Aug 2008 19:32

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Sontu » 25 Sep 2008 00:19

Iam wrote
>U-214 the new generation is something that India should have considered with the diesel-electric combo instead of the >scorpene ( although a good platform ). But I would not put scorpene in the best 3 diesel electric submarines out there.
>Anything comming from HDW would make more sense, at least to me.

Comparison between Scorpene MESMA AIP and U214 Fuel Cell AIP.

http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showt ... 529&page=4
with thanks to Mr. ZEWORK

First the Scorpene is feet with Diesel MESMA. The Scorpene have approximately the same autonomy than the 214 (in the paper, we will discuss about it later) and a greater autonomy than the U212 (and by far).

Diesel MESMA operates with pure oxygen and diesel (the same that the diesel engine).
Fuel Cell (FC) operates with pure oxygen and pure hydrogen.

MESMA is very easy to refuel, in all bases you have diesel fuel and it’s just necessary to have a truck to fill the submarine with oxygen.
FC AIP needs oxygen (like MESMA) but also pure Hydrogen. To refuel the submarine you need to have some quay equipment (to fill the hydride, you must provide some cold energhy, the reaction is exothermic) so the submarine can’t refuel in all bases he have just 1 base (this reduce the operational interest of the submarine)
The hydrogen must have a very very high purity 99, 9999 % (even in France this quality is difficult to find), if you don’t use this quality you will damage the hydrides (poisoning) and decrease the hydrogen capacity. Such amount of hydrogen is very difficult to provisioned an is very expensive (here we speak of many trucks)

To make this refuelling, it takes at least 2 days for the hydrogen and several hours for the oxygen (you can’t refuel in the same time hydrogen and oxygen).
For MESMA AIP, you need only several hours (5 to 7).

MESMA technologies is known since 50 years on the French nuclear submarine and all the intervention can be made on the quay and require little maintenance and it can be made by everyone. Life duration of such technology is several thousand of hours.
FC technology is very new, life duration of the fuel cell is very limited (1000 h so 4 patrols, the fuel cell run with pure oxygen, this is very bad for the life duration). This technology means that the countries who buy such a system are totally dependant of the constructor. So all the 1000 h the price of the fuel cell replacement will be several hundred of thousand dollars.

To embark 2 tons of hydrogen, it’s necessary to have at least 100 tons of hydrides (so you can remove all the lest of the submarine….Ohh what?? Greek submarine is too heavy of at least 100 tons???? It’s very strange).
This implies that the boat can not be re-equilibrated in function to his mission and operational requirement; you can’t modify the architecture of the submarine during his life duration.

To desorbs hydrogen from a metal alloy, you must provide some thermal energy (the reaction is endothermic). So the process is very slow, you cannot make what you want with the AIP. The fuel cell provides hot water to warm the hydride so the system run in closed cycle. When the hydride is almost empty, it’s very difficult to maintain the pressure necessary to feed the fuel cell, at this moment, the power of the system is reduced and you can’t run at maximum power (don’t be following….)

MESMA power is regulated with the flowrate of diesel, you just have classical pump. You can run at maximum power from the first to the last hours.

Regards,

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20187
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Philip » 25 Sep 2008 12:25

The two AIP technologies have been discussed in ample measure,pros and cons,in the international media.MESMA is easier to handle,however,the first German AIPs in service have had some exceptional performance,especially in quieting and endurance and range underwater,superior to non-AIP diesel subs.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.as ... 008_pg7_50
Agosta 90B submarine to be induct into naval fleet on 26th
By Jamil Khan

KARACHI: The Pakistan Navy has finally completed the indigenous construction of the second Agosta 90B class submarine ‘Hamza’ at Submarine Construction Department at PN Dockyard in Karachi. The submarine would be inducted to the fleet on September 26.

This was stated by Commodore Syed Hassan Nasir Shah along with Commander Submarine Shah Sohail Mehmood while briefing journalists at the PN Dockyard on Monday. He said this was the third submarine of the Agosta 90B contract that was signed in September 1994 with DCNI (Directions des Constructions Navales International), France. “The one billion dollar contract has been completed with the construction of Hamza submarine, which was the third after PNS/M Khalid and PNS/M Saad along with the transfer of technology and other components of the contract,” he said.

During the media briefing, the commodore mentioned that the latest induction to the Pakistan Navy fleet is one of the latest submarine having around 82 sub-system and special feature of MESMA Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) system to increasing the capability of submarine diving duration, tactical advantages, and other major features. “Hamza is one of the most advanced version of Agosta design and now become the first submarine in the Arabian Sea with an AIP system,” he mentioned.


http://www.dawn.com/2008/09/23/top11.htm
Another Agosta submarine ready
By Our Reporter

KARACHI, Sept 22: SM Hamza, the second indigenously built Agosta 90B submarine, will be commissioned in the Pakistan Navy on Sept 26, giving a qualitative boost to its capability to defend the country’s maritime boundaries.

This was stated by Commodore Hassan Naser Shah, general manager of the submarine construction project, and Commodore Shah Masood at a background briefing at the PN Dockyard on Monday.

The commissioning of SM Hamza was termed a historical moment because it has a special feature of air independent propulsion system which increases the diving autonomy of conventional submarines.

“It is a major breakthrough in our capabilities of defence production and today Pakistan is among one of the few countries capable of constructing submarines indigenously,” Commodore Naser Shah said.

The special feature of SM Hamza is MESMA air independent propulsion (AIP) system which increases the diving duration as compared to conventional submarines.

The AIP system has liquid oxygen and ethanol to produce electricity which is used to charge the submarine’s batteries.

SM Hamza, being commissioned after successful completion of all harbour and sea trials, will become the first submarine in the Arabian Sea with the AIP system.

This is the third submarine of Agosta 90B contract which was signed with DCNI of France in Sept 1994.

Under the contract, first Agosta 90B, PNS Khalid, was built in France and handed over to the Pakistan Navy in Dec 1999.

The second submarine PNS Saad was built at the submarine construction department at the PN Dockyard and it was commissioned in 2003.

Construction of indigenous submarine continued despite some hitches following the Sheraton Karachi bombing in which some French engineers working on the project were killed.

Hamza is the most advanced version of Agosta design. Its outer hull is light structure fabricated at the PN Dockyard in parts and mounted on the inner pressure hull.The pressure hull section was fabricated and outfitted by the PN Dockyard in collaboration with the Karachi Shipyard.

Mark Schwartzbard
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 29 Aug 2008 17:28

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Mark Schwartzbard » 25 Sep 2008 15:33

[quote="Sontu"]Iam wrote
>U-214 the new generation is something that India should have considered with the diesel-electric combo instead of the >scorpene ( although a good platform ). But I would not put scorpene in the best 3 diesel electric submarines out there.
>Anything comming from HDW would make more sense, at least to me.

Comparison between Scorpene MESMA AIP and U214 Fuel Cell AIP.
quote]

I am not comparing the just the AIP systems, but your point has been taken, Please bear with me since what information I provide on this thread may require some investigation on your part.

German submarine design is well documented to have better signature acoustic management ( quiet, to put in laymans terms, something which is beyond the scope of this thread to discuss in detail and cannot provide in a public forum) like I said would need your own investigation/judgement on how the acoustic and submarines are designed. Not something that the French are best. ( don't get me wrong here, the french are capable ). Hence the need for Indian Defence department ( or some Indian Govt agency, do not knwo the name ) to approach the Australians to incorporate acoustic signature management solutions. ( not sure if that went through though, something you may have knowledge about ?). French have some way to catch up in those areas. Some HDW engineers do interact with French firms on consultations but that's something which is not in the open forum.

rahulg
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 5
Joined: 15 May 2008 14:12

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby rahulg » 25 Sep 2008 18:23

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babur_missile

Just go through the inventory of Pukes missiles. Some retard must have updated the inventory listings.

Have 12000+ Babur's :rotfl: :rotfl:

asbchakri
BRFite
Posts: 250
Joined: 14 Sep 2007 11:20
Location: Chennai
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby asbchakri » 25 Sep 2008 18:35

rahulg wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babur_missile

Just go through the inventory of Pukes missiles. Some retard must have updated the inventory listings.

Have 12000+ Babur's :rotfl: :rotfl:


Well it also says they have not less tah 1000+ missiles of all kinds Ballastic, Cruise etc... :rotfl: :rotfl:
No wonder we are so scared of them :eek: :twisted: :mrgreen:

Hatf-VI - 2000
Hatf-VA-1000+
:rotfl:

nevin
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 23
Joined: 27 Nov 2005 21:08
Location: innsbruck

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby nevin » 25 Sep 2008 19:30

n suddenly the inventory of the whole abdalis, abduls, ghaznavis, shaheen etx is "zero" according to the wiki now... :twisted: :wink:

Anshul
BRFite
Posts: 133
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 12:53
Location: Potala Palace,Lhasa

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Anshul » 25 Sep 2008 20:25

Are these Baburs "Cock Brand" ? Otherwise the Porkees would need to put them out in the sun to dry :mrgreen:

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2571
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Katare » 25 Sep 2008 21:00

HDW sub was evaluated and rejected by IN because it can't fire missiles.

Sontu
BRFite
Posts: 103
Joined: 06 Aug 2008 19:32

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Sontu » 26 Sep 2008 01:05

Iam wrote:
Sontu wrote:Iam wrote
>U-214 the new generation is something that India should have considered with the diesel-electric combo instead of the >scorpene ( although a good platform ). But I would not put scorpene in the best 3 diesel electric submarines out there.
>Anything comming from HDW would make more sense, at least to me.

German submarine design is well documented to have better signature acoustic management ( quiet, to put in laymans terms ...) .


Iam,
Above contradicts the fact what i came to know about EXCESSIVE NOISE AND OTHER ISSUES LIKE OVERHEATING OF THE AIP FUEL CELLS ETC. faced by and Greek and Korean navies with thier U-214 (Downgraded export version of U-212),but I have not heard anything like that from Scorpene users like Chillian and Malayesian navies.Seems Greeks even did not pay the money for the first 214 Sub.

Iam wrote:Hence the need for Indian Defence department ( or some Indian Govt agency, do not knwo the name ) to approach the Australians to incorporate acoustic signature management solutions.


I am not aware about kind of interaction DOD or DRDO may had with Australians on Aquastic Signature Management solutions...Australians may have developed a special kind of Anechoic tile,but you can read the ground fact about the huge problem faced by Australians for their latest COLLINS class submarines is doumented in WIKI as follows...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collins_class_submarine

says....The McIntosh-Prescott report covered the initial shortcomings of the Collins-class subs, shortcomings so severe that the submarines were not considered fit for combat duty:

The essential and the visible problem with the Collins Class submarines is that they cannot perform at the levels required for military operations. The underlying cause is a myriad of design deficiencies and consequential operational limitations relating to the platform and combat system.

The report went on to note that the vessels were noisy and thus vulnerable to attack, piping problems posed a serious hazard, their engines broke down regularly, a badly shaped hull and fin made too much disturbance when they moved at speed under water, the view from the periscope was blurry, the communications system was outdated, and the propellers were likely to crack.

The computer systems were similarly plagued, and there was concern that they could never be made fully operational.[4] The McIntosh-Prescott went on to state that the billion-dollar combat system developed for the Collins class submarine did not work and should be scrapped. The Navy finally replaced the combat system for all six boats in 2005, by purchasing an off-the-shelf and tested computer system from the General Dynamics/Raytheon collaboration.

The diesel engines were initially unreliable and noisy, negative characteristics in a weapon system that relies upon stealth. With help from the United States Navy, these problems were solved.

honestly I would not expect this kind of issues with Aussy latest Sub if they really are good enough in the acoustic signature management solutions as you stated....need really good data to support your point.

Regards,

Sontu
BRFite
Posts: 103
Joined: 06 Aug 2008 19:32

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Sontu » 26 Sep 2008 01:31

Katare wrote:HDW sub was evaluated and rejected by IN because it can't fire missiles.


Katare,
Since India had already bought 4 nos of Type 209/1500 class HDW Sub whose next export version is Type 214 with AIP(Downgraded export version of Type 212 ,which I think India was never offerd because of High tech hull material technology).I think IN needed latest tech sub which Scorpene was providing ...like stealthy and latest mounting and anti vibration technologies etc.

Secondly HDW's T-214's AIP's handling is quite risky and takes longer time to refill than MESMA ,also this might have been one of the reasons why Scorpene was selected.

Please note that HDW's Type 214 can fire Sub Harpoon missle...

Regards,

Mark Schwartzbard
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 29 Aug 2008 17:28

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Mark Schwartzbard » 26 Sep 2008 16:20

Sontu wrote:Iam,
Above contradicts the fact what i came to know about EXCESSIVE NOISE AND OTHER ISSUES LIKE OVERHEATING OF THE AIP FUEL CELLS ETC. faced by and Greek and Korean navies with thier U-214 (Downgraded export version of U-212),but I have not heard anything like that from Scorpene users like Chillian and Malayesian navies.Seems Greeks even did not pay the money for the first 214 Sub.

Iam wrote:Hence the need for Indian Defence department ( or some Indian Govt agency, do not knwo the name ) to approach the Australians to incorporate acoustic signature management solutions.


I am not aware about kind of interaction DOD or DRDO may had with Australians on Aquastic Signature Management solutions...Australians may have developed a special kind of Anechoic tile,but you can read the ground fact about the huge problem faced by Australians for their latest COLLINS class submarines is doumented in WIKI as follows...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collins_class_submarine


Re: Greek, Korean Story
If I may advise, please do not refer to the news media ( or even wiki ) as a source of information ( just my thought ) as they do nto provide the ground realities. The whole issues stem with Greeks and Koreans is that submarine design, development and production, philosophy ( if I may put it that way) requires a whole lot of expertise that cannot be absorbed easily. ( which even the Indian govt is now realising in the press about MRCA, and Indian industry not being able to absorb all the offset/technologies ). Remember that German engineering technologies can get quite complex ( see the WW11 issues with German Tanks and sophistication ). It's not just spending the money and setting up infra, production quality control etc but the whole German philosophy of weapons design, manufacturing, use etc.. that the companies involved ( manufacturing ) and navies have to absorb. Hence many countries do not swap from one philosophy to another easily for various reasons. ( eg. Russsias believed in numbers and not quality during the WW11, and have not incorporated some of the technologies in their Tanks which western philosophy dictates as essential ). Not sure why IN went that way after U-209, the follow on should have been the U-2XX.

In case of Greek and Korean, how many new generation design subs have these countries manufactured or for that matter even been involved with design and manufacturing ( not assembling components ). Not blaming either countries, now that those issue which you mentioned have been ironed out, if you were following that story with certain interest ).

Let's bring this discussion in an hypothetical scenerio. Given that US-India relations are going in the direction, let's say if US would like to assemble/build the F-35 in India. What will be the issues that the Indian industry would face if lockheed would like to subcontract ( locally manufacture ) the components from Indian companies? Now if you look from that prism you will see what I mean.

Re. Australian Collins issue
Please research from which countries these subs were purchased and the reasons why they ended up with that quality subs in the first place. ( The Northern hemisphere europeans almost duped the Aussies ) These subs were almost being written ( bath tubs) off by Ausi govt after they reviewed that the subs were not fit for patrols ( leave alone navy use ) , when some bright spark ( australian company which works with some American company design ( cannot name for official reasons ) thought of re-enginnerring the whole sub, and now they have some decent collins in the navy although they were complete write off when bought.

Mark Schwartzbard
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 29 Aug 2008 17:28

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Mark Schwartzbard » 26 Sep 2008 17:01

Sontu wrote:
honestly I would not expect this kind of issues with Aussy latest Sub if they really are good enough in the acoustic signature management solutions as you stated....need really good data to support your point.

Regards,


You may have to research for yourself as all such interactions/dealings go un-noticed ( not for public consumption, and why should they ever be ) with the media, and hence people like us do not get to read them from our official sources.

There are many such interactions which cannot come forth readily in public forums and may require some investigation on your part if it serves your interest with govt agencies/departments to get the information.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2571
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Katare » 26 Sep 2008 21:31

Sontu wrote:
Katare wrote:HDW sub was evaluated and rejected by IN because it can't fire missiles.


Katare,
Since India had already bought 4 nos of Type 209/1500 class HDW Sub whose next export version is Type 214 with AIP(Downgraded export version of Type 212 ,which I think India was never offerd because of High tech hull material technology).I think IN needed latest tech sub which Scorpene was providing ...like stealthy and latest mounting and anti vibration technologies etc.

Secondly HDW's T-214's AIP's handling is quite risky and takes longer time to refill than MESMA ,also this might have been one of the reasons why Scorpene was selected.

Please note that HDW's Type 214 can fire Sub Harpoon missle...

Regards,


Agree, but I gave you the reason why HDW was rejected (quote from Admiral Arun Prakash), you are giving me the reasons why Scorpene was selected. The question of HDW didn't offer something doesn't even arise since HDW was not even in the competition, they were rejected out right because IN GSQR mandated a sub which can fire missiles.

Exact same parameter would apply this time too regardless of the technological sophistication of HDW subs. They simply don't meet IN's fundamental operational requirements.

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1159
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby rkhanna » 27 Sep 2008 20:27

After the First Paki Type 59 upgrade failed (Ask the Sri Lankans) a further upgrade to the Al-Zarar" was shown in a recent Pak Parade


OLD UPGRADE

Image




NEW UPGRADE KIT

Image

vavinash
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 27 Sep 2008 22:06

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby vavinash » 28 Sep 2008 02:18

Wiki mentions srilanka is looking to buy 25 of these junks? Any truth in the report? Why can't India provide upgraded T-55's (Project gulmohar) to srilanka, burma and afghanistan?

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1159
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby rkhanna » 28 Sep 2008 03:15

Wiki mentions srilanka is looking to buy 25 of these junks? Any truth in the report? Why can't India provide upgraded T-55's (Project gulmohar) to srilanka, burma and afghanistan?


Actually that is old news. The SriLankans got 25 and send them back 3 months later due to
"unsatisfactory" performances. The Pakistanis then rushed them about 6 AlKhalids (from their own stock) as a face saving measure. I think there is now going to be a follow on order for 40 Tanks in total.


On a side note India's foreign Policy in South Asia has been disturbingly lax. The Chinese and Pakistanis are arming every one of our bordering countries and there is nothing we are doing but holding a "higher moral ground". Pakistani Pilots are flying SAF jets , training thier MechInfantry crews and selling them every type of Small Arm System under the sun. (Doing the Same to Bangladesh) and the Chinese ofcourse are doing the Same (or will be) to Nepal and Bangladesh and Burma. The only real influence we have over is Bhutan..lol

vavinash
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 27 Sep 2008 22:06

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby vavinash » 28 Sep 2008 03:34

So SL army has Alkhalids?Any link about PAF pilots are flying SLAF jets.

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1159
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby rkhanna » 28 Sep 2008 04:25

^^^ read it sometime back ..this is the best i could come up with..

Iran funding Lankan arms purchases from Pakistan & China

http://rupeenews.com/2008/09/15/iran-fu ... tan-china/

5. In the meanwhile, the SLAF, with the help of Pakistani and Ukrainian pilots, has stepped up its efforts for a decapitation strike to kill Prabakaran. A monitoring station to locate the hide-out of Prabakaran has been set up at an unidentified location in the Eastern Province with the help of Pakistan’s Directorate of Military Intelligence (DGMI) to identify the location of Prabakaran’s hide-out.


Reliable Tamil sources also say that about 12 to 15 members of the Pakistani Armed Forces, including four or five from the Pakistan Air Force, are stationed in Colombo to guide the Sri Lankan security forces in their counter-insurgency operations. The Pakistan Air Force officers have reportedly been guiding the SLAF officers in effectively carrying out air-mounted operations against the LTTE. They have also been reportedly involved in drawing up plans for a decapitation strike from the air, with bunker-buster bombs, to kill Prabakaran.The reported posting of Air Vice-Marshal Shehzad Chaudhry, who had handled in the past air-mounted operations against the Baloch freedom-fighters, is expected to further step up the Pakistani involvement in the use of air strikes to subdue the LTTE and intimidate the Tamil population.”

Extract from my article dated 18-8-06 titled RETIRED PAF OFFICER TO ASSIST IN ANTI-LTTE OPERATIONS at http://www.saag.org/papers20/paper1916.html



Slowly but surely we are getting outplayed in this game and all you can do is smile and wave.. Even Iran is getting into the Act.

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1159
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby rkhanna » 28 Sep 2008 06:11

From KANWA

Pakistan is in the process of purchasing A-100 multi-rocket launch systems from China. According to a Pakistani military industry source,the contract was signed last year with the arms export company, China Precision Machinery Import-Export Corporation.

The initial procurement is a battalion-level system primarily for testing purposes. According to the needs of the Pakistani military, additional imports are also likely.

This is the first time for China to export the A-100 MLRS to a foreign country. South Asian military industry analysts believe that Pakistan’s procurement of the A-100 is in response to India’s acquisition of the Russian Smerch, or Tornado, MLRS. Both the Smerch and the A-100 are 300-mm calibre rocket launch systems.


From SinoDef


SPECIFICATIONS

Rocket calibre: 300mm
Rocket length: 7,300mm
Rocket weight: 840kg
Warhead: 235kg, ~500 submunitions
Firing range: 40~100km
Reloading time: 20 minutes
Launch vehicle road speed: 60km/h
Launch vehicle travelling range: 650km



Image

vavinash
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 27 Sep 2008 22:06

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby vavinash » 28 Sep 2008 07:36

Aah the chinese copy of smerch. Good think DRDO is going for longer range pinaka. Would be a clever move if the older BM-21 grads somehow ended up in the hands of BLA or TTP.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2571
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Katare » 28 Sep 2008 22:08


vavinash
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 27 Sep 2008 22:06

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby vavinash » 28 Sep 2008 22:50

I hope the stupid IA and IAF instead of buying apaches puts more time and effort on the LCH.

Mahendra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4407
Joined: 11 Aug 2007 17:20
Location: Chronicling Bakistan's Tryst with Dysentery

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Mahendra » 28 Sep 2008 23:41

^^^

I hope you learn to respect the armed forces who are defending your musharaff from multipronged threats, please dont blame the entire force for the folly of few who are even otherwise burdened by overbearing politicians smelling moolah. The next time you assosiate the word "stupid" with IAF IN or IA, I hope adminullahs trace your IP back to the muree madrassa you might be typing away merrily from

vavinash
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 27 Sep 2008 22:06

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby vavinash » 29 Sep 2008 00:19

They can trace my musharaf to cosy unkil land but doesn't change the fact that buying Ah-64D is basically subsidizing Ah-1's for the pigs. I hope HAl flies the LCH fast so both IA and IAF can settle on it.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby shiv » 29 Sep 2008 20:02

vavinash wrote:I hope the stupid IA and IAF instead of buying apaches puts more time and effort on the LCH.



Watch your language buddy. The internet is a big place and i you need to post here you have to have some control over what you post.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16420
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby NRao » 29 Sep 2008 20:28

U.S. May Modernize Pakistani Attack Helos


Posted by Robert Wall at 9/29/2008 3:17 AM CDT

The Pentagon doesn’t seem to be holding a grudge against the Pakistani military for taking shots at U.S. helicopters.

While the two countries are sparring over what side of the Pakistani-Afghan border those encounters may have taken place, back in Washington, a foreign military sales package to upgrade Pakistani AH-1F Cobras has made its way to Congress.

The deal would cover all eight of Pakistan's AH-1Fs and could have a price tag of up to $115 million. Pakistan also operates AH-1S helos.

Covered under the FMS agreement would be spare and repair parts, some technical documentation, system integration and warranties. The package would also include maintenance of the attack rotorcraft.

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency’s includes a general rational for any sale when it submits the FMS package to Congress. But in light of recent events, the boilerplate statement does seem a bit odd: “This proposed sale will contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of a friendly country that has been and continues to be an important force for economic progress in South Asia and a partner in the Global War on Terrorism,” DSCA says.

In fairness, though, in this case DSCA is giving a bit more than its standard explanation of why the sale should go forward. It adds that “the Cobra helicopters are a very important part of Pakistan’s ongoing efforts to defeat the Taliban and Al Qaeda in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and the Northwest Frontier Province. The Pakistan Army uses the Cobras to conduct and support counterinsurgency and counter terrorism operations.”

MukulMohanty
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 65
Joined: 07 Jul 2008 16:00

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby MukulMohanty » 29 Sep 2008 20:43

To be brutally fair, they need the helos for the 'war on terror'. At least its better justifiable than F-16's. 8 AF-1's wont change the existing situation. Pakistan is terribly short on helicopters and they need them.

Its a small price we have to pay.

uddu
BRFite
Posts: 1848
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby uddu » 29 Sep 2008 21:46

MukulMohanty wrote:To be brutally fair, they need the helos for the 'war on terror'. At least its better justifiable than F-16's. 8 AF-1's wont change the existing situation. Pakistan is terribly short on helicopters and they need them.

Its a small price we have to pay.


War on terror. What war on terror for Pakistan. There is no justification for arming Islamic republic of Pakistan. Everything will be used against India.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 36 guests