Hangor Class Submarine | Updates & Discussion

[Waz]

and Germans + Europeans are importing them from China...

Yup haha.

 

[rafale]

I believe some European nations are already importing Chinese high speed trains...........what a time to be alive.........in the past when the French were leaders in Aerospace, Nuclear, high speed Railways (TGV).....and now China surpass them with equal quality but superior cost and delivery timelines.

 

[SkunkWorks]

The hot topic for criticism in Germany these days is the state railway company, Deutsche Bahn, which is probably the largest transport operator in the world, buying Chinese E-buses rather than buses from Daimler or Benz.

 

[Desprado123]

I did not know that our 8 current submarine are better than Indian 16 submarine according to Indian Tribune. There 10 Submarine are 1980s era old and said they are lacking current submarine tech. It also says that Pak will dominate in submarines once it receives its new 8 submarine from China.

 

[Bilal]

I did not know that our 8 current submarine are better than Indian 16 submarine according to Indian Tribune. There 10 Submarine are 1980s era old and said they are lacking current submarine tech. It also says that Pak will dominate in submarines once it receives its new 8 submarine from China.

Only 3 are better. Agosta 70s are very old. Things will change with Hangor.

P.S.: we have total of 5 subs. Don’t count the midgets in this role.

 

[东风夜放花千树]

I did not know that our 8 current submarine are better than Indian 16 submarine according to Indian Tribune. There 10 Submarine are 1980s era old and said they are lacking current submarine tech. It also says that Pak will dominate in submarines once it receives its new 8 submarine from China.

My friend, what I see is the more positive side. This means that Pakistan already has the capability to manufacture advanced submarines. Through collaborative projects, it has acquired technology and trained a large number of technical personnel, effectively enhancing the country's defense self-reliance.

Pakistan holds the decision-making power. Pakistan can choose Chinese equipment according to the needs of its military, or after independently completing construction, procure equipment from other countries. The choice lies in Pakistan's hands.

These collaborations strengthen Pakistan's war-sustaining capabilities, reduce procurement projects, and equip the Pakistani military with domestically produced weapons, which is beneficial for Pakistan's development.

 

[Watandar]

@Quwa is referenced in this site article about the Hangor, which they say is export version of Chinese Yuan-class SS.

Pakistan Navy Launches 4th Hangor-class Submarine "Ghazi" in China - Naval News

On December 17, 2025, the fourth Hangor-class submarine of the Pakistan Navy, named "GHAZI", was launched at Wuchang Shipbuilding Industry Group Company Ltd, Shuangliu Base at Wuhan, China.

www.navalnews.com

A better article is from Radio free europe. The Hangor class is being noticed around the world.

Pakistan Launches Fourth Hangor Submarine In China

Pakistan's Navy on December 17 launched its fourth Hangor-class submarine, the PNS Ghazi, at the Wuchang Shipbuilding Industry Group’s Shuangliu Base in Wuhan, marking the completion of construction for all four China-built boats in a landmark eight-submarine program.

www.rferl.org

 

[FuturePAF]

Should Pakistan go down the North Korean route, and build a small fleet of 3 modified Hangor with an elongated sail to house a few SLBMs? Fitted with a modest nuclear battery, if that program is still in development in China, it could allow the sub to patrol at a decent speed, in the north Arabian Sea, for a couple months per patrol. A continuous at sea second strike force.

The sail on the North Korea sub is tall enough to house 4 Pukguksong-3 SLBM (1900 km range). If Pakistan had such a capability, especially if it could MIRV 3 warheads, having each sub keep most of India in range from anywhere (and cover 12 specific high value independent targets) in the North Arabian Sea would be a TRUE game changer. Also, having a Pukguksong-3 class SLBM with its short length, could make it more survivable in a lang force dispersal strategy.

Pukguksong-3 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[puttputt]

Should Pakistan go down the North Korean route, and build a small fleet of 3 modified Hangor with an elongated sail to house a few SLBMs? Fitted with a modest nuclear battery, if that program is still in development in China, it could allow the sub to patrol at a decent speed, in the north Arabian Sea, for a couple months per patrol. A continuous at sea second strike force.

The sail on the North Korea sub is tall enough to house 4 Pukguksong-3 SLBM (1900 km range). If Pakistan had such a capability, especially if it could MIRV 3 warheads, having each sub keep most of India in range from anywhere (and cover 12 specific high value independent targets) in the North Arabian Sea would be a TRUE game changer. Also, having a Pukguksong-3 class SLBM with its short length, could make it more survivable in a lang force dispersal strategy.

Pukguksong-3 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

View attachment 167725

There are a few pathways available to the PN, but the chokepoint is the actual propulsion system itself.

PAEC isn't getting the funding it needs to develop the miniature reactor, and without that, we will not have an SSN/SSBN.

However, a retired PN admiral gave an interview on PTV and said that the PN may take a 'hybrid' approach in lieu of an SSN/SSBN. Basically, they could look at an enlarged SSP design capable of handling SLBMs (as you suggested above), and that's possible.

However, the consequences of that approach is that we're once again signalling to the world that our conventional platforms can be used as nuclear deployment systems.

One of the benefits of dedicated SSNs or SSBNs was that we could cleanly separate between conventional and strategic deterrence needs.

If the two get muddled, then our ability to acquire sensitive technology for conventional submarine development also becomes very limited.

 

[FuturePAF]

There are a few pathways available to the PN, but the chokepoint is the actual propulsion system itself.

PAEC isn't getting the funding it needs to develop the miniature reactor, and without that, we will not have an SSN/SSBN.

However, a retired PN admiral gave an interview on PTV and said that the PN may take a 'hybrid' approach in lieu of an SSN/SSBN. Basically, they could look at an enlarged SSP design capable of handling SLBMs (as you suggested above), and that's possible.

However, the consequences of that approach is that we're once again signalling to the world that our conventional platforms can be used as nuclear deployment systems.

One of the benefits of dedicated SSNs or SSBNs was that we could cleanly separate between conventional and strategic deterrence needs.

If the two get muddled, then our ability to acquire sensitive technology for conventional submarine development also becomes very limited.

Hopefully China is working on a micro reactor for its next generation SSK submarine and with two such reactors in each, at 20 MW a piece, it would enable perform matching the French Rubis class (40-45 mw); sustain top speeds of 25 knots. Creating a large enough hatch, would allow each reactor to be swapped out every 8-10 years when they run out of power.

3 of these as boomers and 3 as attack boats can give the PN a modest force, within budget.

With advancements in reactor and quieting technology, these subs would be as quiet as modern SSKs while having near full SSN performance.

China is going to need its SSKs to be this good, if not better, because the 3000 ton Japanese Soryu/Taigei is very quiet and can sprint at speeds exceeding 25 knots. So if China moves forward with the Type 41, building on the Type 039 family, Pakistan can buy a fleet of 6; 3 with VLS for cruise missiles and 3 for SLBMs. China’s expansion of the Huludao Submarine construction facilities may indicate not just a ramping up of Type 093B and 094 production as well as Type 095 and Type 096 production, but also the finishing out of with these nuclear battery subs, that begin their construction at Wuhan, in the new hall. Allowing China to field 3-4 SSN, 1 SSBN, and possibly 3-4 SSK a year easily, allowing them to retire older and uncompetitive designs faster and fielding more modern subs quicker. Just enough to meet 2035 and 2049 goals.

This would allow the PN to capitalize on the investment of building the Hangors in Pakistan and having the facilities to service the subs as often as needed.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Type 041 Mini Nuclear Submarine: Unlimited Endurance After a Single Load, Enhancing the Submarine Force’s Combat Power

On the occasion of the 75th anniversary of the founding of the People's Liberation Army Navy of China, the latest news circulating on the internet suggests that a new type of nuclear-powered submarine, equipped with a domestically produced mini nuclear reactor, has been launched by a certain...

www.china-arms.com

 

[Michael]

Should Pakistan go down the North Korean route, and build a small fleet of 3 modified Hangor with an elongated sail to house a few SLBMs? Fitted with a modest nuclear battery, if that program is still in development in China, it could allow the sub to patrol at a decent speed, in the north Arabian Sea, for a couple months per patrol. A continuous at sea second strike force.

The sail on the North Korea sub is tall enough to house 4 Pukguksong-3 SLBM (1900 km range). If Pakistan had such a capability, especially if it could MIRV 3 warheads, having each sub keep most of India in range from anywhere (and cover 12 specific high value independent targets) in the North Arabian Sea would be a TRUE game changer. Also, having a Pukguksong-3 class SLBM with its short length, could make it more survivable in a lang force dispersal strategy.

Pukguksong-3 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

View attachment 167725

Pakistan is completely different from North Korea and cannot emulate its path of military industrial development.

1. Internal Differences:
North Korea's military industry prioritizes self-reliance first, then focuses on improving technological capabilities.
Pakistan, on the other hand, prioritizes the advanced nature of its weapons first, and then attempts to achieve self-sufficiency. The order of these two processes is completely reversed.

2. External Differences:
The hypothetical enemies faced by the two countries are not in the same league. Pakistan faces India, a country whose fighting capabilities exist only in rhetoric. North Korea faces Japan and the United States (South Korea is not their primary target).
The international environments faced by the two countries are also completely different. Pakistan maintains open and friendly relations with most countries in the world. North Korea...... you know the rest. North Korea, holding military alliance treaties with two major military powers, has very strong backing.


I won't say anything else. That's all.

 

[FuturePAF]

Pakistan is completely different from North Korea and cannot emulate its path of military industrial development.

1. Internal Differences:
North Korea's military industry prioritizes self-reliance first, then focuses on improving technological capabilities.
Pakistan, on the other hand, prioritizes the advanced nature of its weapons first, and then attempts to achieve self-sufficiency. The order of these two processes is completely reversed.

2. External Differences:
The hypothetical enemies faced by the two countries are not in the same league. Pakistan faces India, a country whose fighting capabilities exist only in rhetoric. North Korea faces Japan and the United States (South Korea is not their primary target).
The international environments faced by the two countries are also completely different. Pakistan maintains open and friendly relations with most countries in the world. North Korea...... you know the rest. North Korea, holding military alliance treaties with two major military powers, has very strong backing.


I won't say anything else. That's all.

Thank you for your observations. On the internal differences I agree that Pakistan’s order is the opposite, but on your second point, while Pakistan has good relations with the world, the stability in the region is maintained via a balance at the conventional and unconventional levels through minimum credible deterrence. Speculating ahead on future needs are necessary to plan for the program you may need in a decade’s time.

Ultimately, on the submarine front, Pakistan’s options are via its partnership with China and what products China has developed for its own needs and is then ok with sharing. Hopefully it will only be a matter of a few more years before we have clarity on the status of the supposedly “Type 041” program.

Perhaps China may not be comfortable with sharing a SLBM equipped sub (for a while?), but would be more than willing to share a “Type 041” so the Pakistan navy can secure the SLOCs in the Northern Arabian Sea, in support of shared interests.

 

[Michael]

Thank you for your observations. On the internal differences I agree that Pakistan’s order is the opposite, but on your second point, while Pakistan has good relations with the world, the stability in the region is maintained via a balance at the conventional and unconventional levels through minimum credible deterrence. Speculating ahead on future needs are necessary to plan for the program you may need in a decade’s time.

Ultimately, on the submarine front, Pakistan’s options are via its partnership with China and what products China has developed for its own needs and is then ok with sharing. Hopefully it will only be a matter of a few more years before we have clarity on the status of the supposedly “Type 041” program.

Perhaps China may not be comfortable with sharing a SLBM equipped sub (for a while?), but would be more than willing to share a “Type 041” so the Pakistan navy can secure the SLOCs in the Northern Arabian Sea, in support of shared interests.

There are many cultural differences between China and Pakistan. We have completely different, even opposite, views on many issues.

But this is not the place to discuss these issues.

So, let's keep the discussion focused on the technical aspects.

 

[Hussain]

However, a retired PN admiral gave an interview on PTV and said that the PN may take a 'hybrid' approach in lieu of an SSN/SSBN. Basically, they could look at an enlarged SSP design capable of handling SLBMs (as you suggested above), and that's possible.

A 4 to 6 silo sub has been on PN's wish list for a long time. How close we are to it, only Allah knows, and after that @Waz

 

[Hussain]

I won't say anything else. That's all.

Dear,
A person's best critic, is always his own self.
My observation has been that any critique from you is always in good faith.
So please don't hold yourself back, feel free to air whatever comes to you.
We really appreciate your presence on this forum.

Regards