What if, while on a mission, the engine driving such a platform runs into a electrical/mechanical trouble in the middle of the ocean, who will fix it?
SMASH SLBM Testing - Nov 2025
- Thread starter Blain2
- Start date
What if, while on a mission, the engine driving such a platform runs into a electrical/mechanical trouble in the middle of the ocean, who will fix it?
kimjongun
Registered Member
Developing its longer range variants presumably land based would be very helpful in striking indian navys oil depos in rajhistan and southern india .....
Chinese analysts are reviewing that what would have been the course of the war if the japanese would have attacked USNs oil storgae depos instead of the pacific fleet in ww2...what our naval planner should focus is how to deteriorate indian war fighting capabilities and to make them struggle in logistics...
Chinese analysts are reviewing that what would have been the course of the war if the japanese would have attacked USNs oil storgae depos instead of the pacific fleet in ww2...what our naval planner should focus is how to deteriorate indian war fighting capabilities and to make them struggle in logistics...
what if a bomb drops on your head right now
the same goes for anything, hence the redundancy of systems
Then why haven't these unmanned platforms been built when unmanned aircrafts exist already?
Liquidator
Trusted Member
What if, while on a mission, the engine driving such a platform runs into a electrical/mechanical trouble in the middle of the ocean, who will fix it?
I think overall we need to start innovating. The Islamic world hasn't done anything in centuries.
We were one of the first do develop a torpedo...look at what we have become.
13th century precursor to torpedo
China today:
- innovation in drone, hypersonics, bespoke war machines for Taiwan...too much to mention
Russia
- poseidon nuclear unmanned submarine, nuclear powered cruise missiles, the oreshnik
India
- air launched torpedo.....a fantastic concept.
USA
- You won't know until it hits you....they don't need to brag.
Ukraine
- trucks with drones taking out a bomber fleet. Amazing.
Nothing from us other than stagnation and infighting. Even on this forum, up until recently we had members claiming Iran is a bigger threat to the Islamic world than Israel....
Anyway....the SMASH is a good start. An India centric start....but we need to position ourselves in such a way whereby it is the Indians who have to "think about" how to mitigate OUR THREAT...currently most of what we do is responding to their threat theatre.
i dont know about this...
Indians tend to claim they can drop torps in Pak eez now...
without ISR in Pak EEZ...how they manage to do this i dont know?
of course, unless their goal/objective is to just target any ship, civillian or mil, which i guess would work
Yes I know that USVs are in experimental phase currently all around. US is even reportedly experimenting with LUSVs.
What I was pointing out was that such surface vehicles/platforms have more practical vulnerabilities than an aeriel vehicle. For example, with your bomb analogy, haha, well it's a valid point but if a mechanical/electrical engine malfunction happens in the air there's not much a human pilot can do - so UAVs and Manned Aircraft are equitable on principles of redundancy.
The same is however not true for surface vehicles whether on land or at sea. Where not only there are more environmental vulnerabilities but also the applicability of a human input to avoid loss in case of malfunction. The engine example was just the very basic one to begin with and for surface vehicles the systems redundancy hasn't yet superceded human input
Yasser76
Elite Member
I'm not against any kind of innovation, lol, what part of my response has led members to believe that?
I'm just asking about a basic challenge to the innovation suggested and not dismissing it as rubbish.
Princeps
Registered Member
If the situation permits and it has a flight deck, you could fly in engineers. Otherwise you'd have to tow it. Of course there are pros and cons, but USVs have a lot of potential for us.What if, while on a mission, the engine driving such a platform runs into a electrical/mechanical trouble in the middle of the ocean, who will fix it?
Yeah that we can. However, I'm pointing out something else here i.e. suppose this unmanned platforms is out at sea and experiences a malfunction, a manned platform can potentially fix the malfunction on the go - for an unmanned platforms that's not the case and is as good as considered lost (sunk by the enemy).
This challenge is different for aeriel vehicle, as already mentioned, in air such a malfunction can't be fixed by a pilot so the risk of manned/unmanned vehicle is the same, and not only the same but unmanned vehicle has the slight advantage of keeping the human alive.
Yes, not saying USVs are rubbish, I'm in favor of USVs but there's a limit to their role currently. They can come in handy for swarm, saturation, and even kamikaze attacks. However, if the idea is to use them as the main kill weapon then currently that is not feasible because of the practical environmental vulnerabilities to such surface systems.
Liquidator
Trusted Member
Michael
VIP Member
I must remind some Pakistani friends:
The SMASH missile has just undergone testing; this does not mean it is about to enter mass production.
Testing a weapon system indicates that we have mastered the relevant technology. However, this is a long way from production and deployment by the military, and the project could even be abandoned.
In terms of missile technology itself, Pakistan is still far behind the missiles it can directly purchase from other countries. There are significant gaps in economic efficiency, production capacity, and combat effectiveness. Developing missiles independently is very necessary for Pakistan, but actually putting these missiles into production and use is another matter entirely. The significance of independently researching these things lies in:
1. "Plan B." When we are unable to import more advanced missiles from other countries (due to political or economic factors, etc.), these missiles will come into play.
2. Technological accumulation. Continuously evolving our own missile technology provides a technological foundation for ultimately achieving a new generation of weapons.
Recently, China unveiled the "YKJ-1000 hypersonic missile," which costs a little over $100,000 per unit and has a range exceeding 1000 km. It is a product developed by a private company and is almost certainly exportable. Given this significant competitive advantage, do you think the SMASH missile needs to be mass-produced?
If we look back at the weapon code series of China or other countries, we will find many blank numbers. For example, J-9, J-12, J-13, etc. These projects did exist at one time. The Y-10 project was even completed. These projects were ultimately terminated. They served as technological foundations for new generation projects.
I congratulate Pakistan on the successful testing of the SMASH missile. But I should also remind my Pakistani friends to return to reality.
Users who are viewing this thread
Pakistan Defence Latest
Country Watch Latest
Latest Posts
-
-
-
UK Racism against Muslims and Brown people: Why are blacks in the UK given a free pass by white english racists? (20 Viewers)
- Latest: KingQamaR
-
-
