1st HANGOR Class Submarine of Pakistan Navy has been launched at Shuangliu

[Zarvan]

China sold DF-3A to Saudi Arabia slightly before it made political commitment to observe the Missile Technology Control Regime's (MTCR) guidelines, which prohibits the export of missile systems exceeding 300km range as well as dual-use items used in making such missiles. In any case, the MTCR is an informal regime, meaning its non-binding. More importantly, China, Saudi Arabia, and even Pakistan are not members to the MTCR. The Hague Code of Conduct Against Ballistic Missile Proliferation, which supplements the MTCR, is politically binding but, again, China is not a signatory to it. In short, China was and remains unbound by international law or regime on ballistic missile proliferation.

Main point is be strong. The so called international laws are a joke and applies only to poor and week

 

[FuturePAF]

how many heavy torpedoes and SLCMs can be stored in Hangor ?
how much is the range of babur SLCM ? and, any Vertical launch tubes ?

Probably around 24, if going by similar load outs for SSKs of this size.

 

[SABRE]

Main point is be strong. The so called international laws are a joke and applies only to poor and week

My friend, main point is facts vs. hearsay. You have confessed in one of your previous posts that you learned of the alleged nuke-sub negotiations between Pakistan and China from members of this forum and the ones from previous forum, which would lead everyone to conclude that what ever you are stating is mere hearsay. Save for one member, who does a very good research work, I take everything said here by anyone with a pinch of salt. I will, however, not jump to the conclusion that whatever you have said is entirely wrong. There may be [or not] some validity to what you have said. In fact, I'll personally not rule out that there have been discussions between China and Pakistan on this matter. The problem is the way you present your arguments makes it all sound 'outrageous.' Your assertions about Chinese exports of DF-3A to Saudi Arabia to make some sort of a point is also not helping your case since it overlooks a lot of political realities of the time when the transaction took place. China of today is not the same China it was in the 1980s. Finally, I am a structural realist myself, which by default means that I see limited potential in international laws, but I do not reject them altogether. They are less intended for rule of law and more for creating rules of engagement. Bypassing them is very likely to invite ire if not punishment but that is enough to deter even some of the powerful states.

My brotherly advice to you is, say whatever you want but weigh your words. It will generate healthy discussion, for your own benefit, and that of the others.

 

[NGAD IS THE BEST]

Mr. many senior members of this forum and also recently closed previous forum who are not here know this. I also came to know from here. Plus, few other places. Nuclear Submarines were offered. But technology of China nuclear submarines when we started talking for Subs was not where it's today and even today it's far away from western or even Russian ones. Plus, economic concerns were there. If you have money China won't have any issue selling your nuclear submarines. Dude, they sold Ballistic Missiles of more than 2000 KM Range including one with 4000 KM Range to Saudi Arabia. In all international laws you can't see ballistic missiles specially of this range, still they did. In international area laws don't matter, mainly for the powerful. Those law only exist to blackmail the week. You come out of your delusion. Make your economy better be read to spend it on Navy as far as Russia and China are concern if you have money you would get the weapons you want.

When please give the backup of your claim

 

[maverick]

Probably around 24, if going by similar load outs for SSKs of this size.

thats massive… essentially 10 to 12 targets can be taken out with a silo of launches

 

[FuturePAF]

thats massive… essentially 10 to 12 targets can be taken out with a silo of launches

You have to take into account the potential failure rate and improved enemy defenses, but at least 6 could be taken out with six torpedo tubes and if the crew is fast in reloading.

 

[Zarvan]

My friend, main point is facts vs. hearsay. You have confessed in one of your previous posts that you learned of the alleged nuke-sub negotiations between Pakistan and China from members of this forum and the ones from previous forum, which would lead everyone to conclude that what ever you are stating is mere hearsay. Save for one member, who does a very good research work, I take everything said here by anyone with a pinch of salt. I will, however, not jump to the conclusion that whatever you have said is entirely wrong. There may be [or not] some validity to what you have said. In fact, I'll personally not rule out that there have been discussions between China and Pakistan on this matter. The problem is the way you present your arguments makes it all sound 'outrageous.' Your assertions about Chinese exports of DF-3A to Saudi Arabia to make some sort of a point is also not helping your case since it overlooks a lot of political realities of the time when the transaction took place. China of today is not the same China it was in the 1980s. Finally, I am a structural realist myself, which by default means that I see limited potential in international laws, but I do not reject them altogether. They are less intended for rule of law and more for creating rules of engagement. Bypassing them is very likely to invite ire if not punishment but that is enough to deter even some of the powerful states.

My brotherly advice to you is, say whatever you want but weigh your words. It will generate healthy discussion, for your own benefit, and that of the others.

It started from this forum now I know from few other places as well which I can't mention. All senior mods who are also well connected knows this. Also, even if we have money right now China's technology of nuclear submarines is still not at that level. For example Russia's latest Yasen class Sub has 8 VLS and each of those VLS carries 4 cruise missile each. That makes 32 cruise missiles. Chinese Type 93B has 18 VLS but they all carry one cruise missile only. So even if we get economically strong right now until China can offer us a nuclear Sub which has only 10 VLS but can carry 4 to 5 cruise missiles in each VLS. It's useless to go for them. Better option will be getting Subs from South Korea. Those AIP and VLS equipped submarines which they are making. China offered us nuclear submarines long ago. All senior people of this forum know it.

 

[Muji.Iqbal]

India is not little, you idi***.they're 7 time larger than Pakistan.

Hey In'diot, we Pakistanis are entitled to our opinion.

 

[Quwa]

Reportedly 8 subs deal was whopping 5 Billion USD. Do you think this much money is laying around for next purchase ? Or you were suggesting that instead of these 8 we should have bought 2 nuclear? These 8 submarines will benefit lot more than 2 nuclear subs for Pakistan's threat environment.

Expecting Pakistan to buy nuclear subs is just wishful thinking. Previous Pakistan's submarine purchase was more than 20 years ago (Agosta-90bs). See the pattern, It will be atleast decades before Pakistan goes for next mega submarine purchase. Cherish whatever you are getting. With such constrained budget these 8 subs are already a great deal and will add lot of power & capability.

Nuclear subs are for the major powers OR for the nations where their area of operation is global or at very long distances. Those nation's have their adversaries at long distances, like US- Russia, US-China, China-India, China-Aus, etc. Pakistan isn' t going to challenge any far off nation ever. Its entirely focused towards India which is its immediate neighbor.

Another benefit of nuclear sub (other than range) is that it do not have to surface for air (recharging batteries). The AIP technology improves this at a great deal. Those subs can be even more quiet than nuclear ones.

Lastly, SSN (a nuclear attack submarine) could be an option at a very later date, depends upon economic revival. But SSBN (nuclear powered with nuclear capable BM sub) is not going to be an option for Pakistan (that's my opinion). Pakistan will have to be drastically changed in order to get something like that. Such weapons are for truly independent states / global powers which can make their own policy. States which have guts enough to stand for their sovereignty and not attack own govt for others appeasement, States which do not fear for sanctions, States which are independent economically. No one is allowing Pakistan to carry its nukes and roam around the world. Global order isn't extra bothered about Pakistani nukes because we have ensured them that these nukes are for india specific. The SPD ex-DG himself said in US one of conferences that Pakistan will not increase range of its strategic BMs more than what they are. He was giving a clear message that don't worry, our nukes are for India only.

Just a quick point...the $4-5 billion USD figure of the Hangor deal was reported by the Financial Times, but was unverified. It doesn't line up with the $300-400 m per boat Thailand had agreed to pay. Hence, while the PN deal could be valued at $4-5 billon USD, I don't think it was limited to just the 8 Hangor SSPs; rather, it probably included the 4 Type 054A/Ps as well as possibly PNS Behr Masah and PNS Rizwan too.

 

[CynicalPakistaniCritic]

Yes Ababeel can carry 8 MIRV. Question is do we have Nuclear warheads this small in size. Ababeel can carry either 3 or 5 or 8 depending on the mission.

Ababeel can't carry 8 stop making things up bro, you are ruining the minds of newcomers

 

[Zarvan]

Ababeel can't carry 8 stop making things up bro, you are ruining the minds of newcomers

It can but warhead will have to be really small in size for that. So mostly it would be used to carry 5 I think. But I am pretty sure we would see more MIRV Ballistic Missiles also.

 

[NGAD IS THE BEST]

It can but warhead will have to be really small in size for that. So mostly it would be used to carry 5 I think. But I am pretty sure we would see more MIRV Ballistic Missiles also.

It can't you're speculating baseless

 

[CynicalPakistaniCritic]

It can but warhead will have to be really small in size for that. So mostly it would be used to carry 5 I think. But I am pretty sure we would see more MIRV Ballistic Missiles also.

It will carry 3.

 

[Awwad]

Just a quick point...the $4-5 billion USD figure of the Hangor deal was reported by the Financial Times, but was unverified. It doesn't line up with the $300-400 m per boat Thailand had agreed to pay. Hence, while the PN deal could be valued at $4-5 billon USD, I don't think it was limited to just the 8 Hangor SSPs; rather, it probably included the 4 Type 054A/Ps as well as possibly PNS Behr Masah and PNS Rizwan too.

Possible. OR if deal was 4-5 billion USD, and we assume the lower range then its possibly can be for submarines only. As 8 subs would cost about 3 billions USD and rest 1 billion USD for ToT. I think Thai's aren't doing any ToT. We saw PN paid nearly double the amount with ToT included in agosta's deal too.

 

[Quwa]

Possible. OR if deal was 4-5 billion USD, and we assume the lower range then its possibly can be for submarines only. As 8 subs would cost about 3 billions USD and rest 1 billion USD for ToT. I think Thai's aren't doing any ToT. We saw PN paid nearly double the amount with ToT included in agosta's deal too.

The tech transfer wouldn't cost $1 billion. China isn't transferring industrial capacity (like forging steel, diesel engine tech, etc) to Pakistan. The manufacturing at KSEW is being done through kits supplied by China. So, tech transfer is more about ensuring KSEW has the right tooling and facilities to support the program, nothing else.

The next PN submarine program - i.e., SWATS - could cost more per boat than the Hangor. Like the PN MILGEM program, the SWATS will involve a follow-on original project (i.e., submarine for replacing the PN's Agosta 90Bs). Now this project will involve serious transfer-of-technology so that the PN can use its choice of steel, propulsion, and other inputs.