Can all 5 PN subs carry Babur SLCM?

[Safriz]

If not then why not?

 

[amardeep mishra]

Hi Shaheen Missile!
Theoretically it is possible however practically not so much. I will try to explain my reason. Kindly note, my observations are based on engineering realities and should not be taken as bashing.
Firstly, we must understand that a CM is basically a kind of UAV. It needs GPS defined way points over sea as both TERCOM and DASMC cant be effectively used over sea. It is because of this reason that CM needs a dedicated flight planner of it's own-- something similar to APM mission planner that UAV hobbyists and researchers are familiar with.

This lets us define a set of way points that the GNC system of CM is supposed to track. The mission planner is usually the part of larger combat management system of submarines. So, in a practical scenario a human operator feeds in the target and way point information into the mission planner of CM which is then copied to the onboard computer. Once it is done, the CM is ejected out of torpedo tube and it rushes up to the surface, once on the surface, it's turbofan gets deployed and GNC system takes over and steers the CM over way points defined earlier using suitable guidance scheme.
Now, lets pause here for a moment and try to consider theoretical aspect-- i.e how can CM be launched without interfacing the mission planner of the missile with larger combat management system of submarine? For that we would have to program the way points into the CM OBC outside of the torpedo tube thus slowing down the launch rate considerably. But here is a problem, and that is, in order to define way points, the operator must precisely know the "starting way point" and the "end point". The end point is known because that happens to be the target, however the starting way point is difficult to obtain especially when you're programming your CM outside of combat management system.
Even if lets say we could individually program the CMs, slide it into the tube, the firing mechanism of submarine should be able to flush it out of the tube without damaging the submarine or the missile.
It is precisely because of these two mentioned reasons that I believe firing a CM without properly interfacing the mission planner of CM with combat management system of submarine is nearly impossible. Look at the case of India, even after having bought the ToT of scorpene, and having built 6 at home and 6 more planned, French have not shared the source code of their combat management system, so in all likelihood, French wouldnt have shared the source code of their agosta-90 with Pakistan especially when Pakistani order was way smaller than India's financially.

 

[ziaulislam]

Hi Shaheen Missile!
Theoretically it is possible however practically not so much. I will try to explain my reason. Kindly note, my observations are based on engineering realities and should not be taken as bashing.
Firstly, we must understand that a CM is basically a kind of UAV. It needs GPS defined way points over sea as both TERCOM and DASMC cant be effectively used over sea. It is because of this reason that CM needs a dedicated flight planner of it's own-- something similar to APM mission planner that UAV hobbyists and researchers are familiar of.
View attachment 478035
This lets us define a set of way points that the GNC system of CM is supposed to track. The mission planner is usually the part of larger combat management system of submarines. So, in a practical scenario a human operator feeds in the target and way point information into the mission planner of CM which is then copied to the onboard computer. Once it is done, the CM is ejected out of torpedo tube and it rushes up to the surface, once on the surface, it's turbofan gets deployed and GNC system takes over and steers the CM over way points defined earlier using suitable guidance scheme.
Now, lets pause here for a moment and try to consider theoretical aspect-- i.e how can CM be launched without interfacing the mission planner of the missile with larger combat management system of submarine? For that we would have to program the way points into the CM OBC outside of the torpedo tube thus slowing down the launch rate considerably. But here is a problem, and that is, in order to define way points, the operator must precisely know the "starting way point" and the "end point". The end point is known because that happens to be the target, however the starting way point is difficult to obtain especially when you're programming your CM outside of combat management system.
Even if lets say we could individually program the CMs, slide it into the tube, the firing mechanism of submarine should be able to flush it out of the tube without damaging the submarine or the missile.
It is precisely because of these two mentioned reasons that I believe firing a CM without properly interfacing the mission planner of CM with combat management system of submarine is nearly impossible. Look at the case of India, even after having bought the ToT of scorpene, and having built 6 at home and 6 more planned, French have not shared the source code of their combat management system, so in all likelihood, French wouldnt have shared the source code of their agosta-90 with Pakistan especially when Pakistani order was way smaller than India's financially.

true, i doubt they can(but i am not sure)

but with upgrades with turkish combat system they will be..
1 is going through upgrade rest will be done soon..
8 new chinese subs while the 2 agosta 70s will be retired soon

 

[Trango Towers]

If not then why not?

That's like saying are you a PhD millionaire. If not why not

 

[Shabi1]

Hi Shaheen Missile!
Theoretically it is possible however practically not so much. I will try to explain my reason. Kindly note, my observations are based on engineering realities and should not be taken as bashing.
Firstly, we must understand that a CM is basically a kind of UAV. It needs GPS defined way points over sea as both TERCOM and DASMC cant be effectively used over sea. It is because of this reason that CM needs a dedicated flight planner of it's own-- something similar to APM mission planner that UAV hobbyists and researchers are familiar of.
View attachment 478035
This lets us define a set of way points that the GNC system of CM is supposed to track. The mission planner is usually the part of larger combat management system of submarines. So, in a practical scenario a human operator feeds in the target and way point information into the mission planner of CM which is then copied to the onboard computer. Once it is done, the CM is ejected out of torpedo tube and it rushes up to the surface, once on the surface, it's turbofan gets deployed and GNC system takes over and steers the CM over way points defined earlier using suitable guidance scheme.
Now, lets pause here for a moment and try to consider theoretical aspect-- i.e how can CM be launched without interfacing the mission planner of the missile with larger combat management system of submarine? For that we would have to program the way points into the CM OBC outside of the torpedo tube thus slowing down the launch rate considerably. But here is a problem, and that is, in order to define way points, the operator must precisely know the "starting way point" and the "end point". The end point is known because that happens to be the target, however the starting way point is difficult to obtain especially when you're programming your CM outside of combat management system.
Even if lets say we could individually program the CMs, slide it into the tube, the firing mechanism of submarine should be able to flush it out of the tube without damaging the submarine or the missile.
It is precisely because of these two mentioned reasons that I believe firing a CM without properly interfacing the mission planner of CM with combat management system of submarine is nearly impossible. Look at the case of India, even after having bought the ToT of scorpene, and having built 6 at home and 6 more planned, French have not shared the source code of their combat management system, so in all likelihood, French wouldnt have shared the source code of their agosta-90 with Pakistan especially when Pakistani order was way smaller than India's financially.

Harbah is the anti ship variant of the Babur, and by accounts it could be the standard anti ship missile for PN in the future. They could mount it's seeker on the sub launched Babur 3 land attack cruise missile which is already integrated on the Agosta 90B. The TOT Pakistan bought for the Agosta's is even more extensive as it also has full production and further sale rights. Further more the SUBTICs system (also on Scorpene and upgraded Agosta 70) on the Agosta 90s are getting replaced with a new combat management system from Turkey.

https://thediplomat.com/2018/04/pak...ar-capable-submarine-launched-cruise-missile/
https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/turkey-to-upgrade-pakistan-navy-attack-sub/
https://quwa.org/2017/11/22/pakistan-orders-sharpeye-radar-second-agosta-90b-submarine/

And to add to this Pakistan has access to Beidu satellite positioning and one of it's satellites is located just for Pakistan use.

If not then why not?

The Agosta 90Bs can since Babur 3 already test fired several times from them. No updates on Agosta 70s although they have upgraded combat management systems but they will be phased out really soon with the 8 Chinese subs on order which will all be capable of firing sub launched cruise missiles as well.

 

[amardeep mishra]

They could mount it's seeker on the sub launched Babur 3 land attack cruise missile which is already integrated on the Agosta 90B. The TOT Pakistan bought for the Agosta's is even more extensive as it also has full production and further sale rights.

Hi @Shabi1 There are certain fallacies in your argument-
1) Your argument is based on the "assumption" that babur-3 was in fact launched off agosta-90. This assumption unfortunately hasnt been proved yet.
2) I wonder, are you really that naive? You believe that French would hand over their source code to Pakistan when their order was financially much smaller than India's-- especially when they have not done the same to India in spite of a much bigger order. Now if you do some neutral and thorough analysis of ToT that Pakistan actually got and the contribution of Pakistani industries in the assembling of agosta in KSEW, you would realize that, the contribution is almost non existent. Now the reason why I am highlighting this is simply because, KSEW or PN cant modify the combat management system without the prior assistance of DCNS.
Even the Turks cant replace original combat management system of agosta with their own without certification and validation from the OEM. I dont know if the turkish CMS has passed the certification of OEM or not.
A case to note, is, germans actively helped Israelis in modifying the source code of the CMS of dolphins to interface it with Israeli cruise missiles.
Also kindly learn to cite credible articles, in the world of engineering, news articles written by unprofessionals-- those who are not actively working in research do not count as credible. So the Diplomat or even Quwa websites that you have attached are merely expression of their views.

PS- Also the picture I uploaded in my last comment was my own. I have implemented adaptive intelligent control on Erle brain. Lets just say I am pretty familiar with ardupilot and APM missionplanner.

 

[Maarkhoor]

@amardeep mishra
Dude if we can build and upgraded Babur Cruise missiles for various roles then why not we are not able to upgrade it's navigational system to fire from subs?
Don't forget we have ship launch version also means it can fly over sea to engage target over land and sea...both

So shove off your engineering logic where sun never shines and keep yourself in delusion.

 

[Basel]

Cow piss drinking is allowed but avoid discussion after the drinking and shove of delusional logic where sun never shines.

Don't worry I have reported his post, and members should be careful before sharing info in these type of discussions as enemy may be searching for info, let them be happy in their so called logic.

 

[khanmubashir]

Hi @Shabi1 There are certain fallacies in your argument-
1) Your argument is based on the "assumption" that babur-3 was in fact launched off agosta-90. This assumption unfortunately hasnt been proved yet.
2) I wonder, are you really that naive? You believe that French would hand over their source code to Pakistan when their order was financially much smaller than India's-- especially when they have not done the same to India in spite of a much bigger order. Now if you do some neutral and thorough analysis of ToT that Pakistan actually got and the contribution of Pakistani industries in the assembling of agosta in KSEW, you would realize that, the contribution is almost non existent. Now the reason why I am highlighting this is simply because, KSEW or PN cant modify the combat management system without the prior assistance of DCNS.
Even the Turks cant replace original combat management system of agosta with their own without certification and validation from the OEM. I dont know if the turkish CMS has passed the certification of OEM or not.
A case to note, is, germans actively helped Israelis in modifying the source code of the CMS of dolphins to interface it with Israeli cruise missiles.
Also kindly learn to cite credible articles, in the world of engineering, news articles written by unprofessionals-- those who are not actively working in research do not count as credible. So the Diplomat or even Quwa websites that you have attached are merely expression of their views.

PS- Also the picture I uploaded in my last comment was my own. I have implemented adaptive intelligent control on Erle brain. Lets just say I am pretty familiar with ardupilot and APM missionplanner.

All your assumptions r based upon that France didn't gave us source code of which u have no reference BTW Augusta us older model and usually older systems blueprints aren't guarded as well as the new ones
and we couldn't hack & modify Augusta source code our selves but as USA claims we developed Babar on crash landed tomahawk then we already hacked the systems of USA weaponry
FYI learning from FBI Apple iPhone saga Google it if the hardware is in your possession its just just matter of time to access its source code

 

[Dalit]

Hi @Shabi1 There are certain fallacies in your argument-
1) Your argument is based on the "assumption" that babur-3 was in fact launched off agosta-90. This assumption unfortunately hasnt been proved yet.
2) I wonder, are you really that naive? You believe that French would hand over their source code to Pakistan when their order was financially much smaller than India's-- especially when they have not done the same to India in spite of a much bigger order. Now if you do some neutral and thorough analysis of ToT that Pakistan actually got and the contribution of Pakistani industries in the assembling of agosta in KSEW, you would realize that, the contribution is almost non existent. Now the reason why I am highlighting this is simply because, KSEW or PN cant modify the combat management system without the prior assistance of DCNS.
Even the Turks cant replace original combat management system of agosta with their own without certification and validation from the OEM. I dont know if the turkish CMS has passed the certification of OEM or not.
A case to note, is, germans actively helped Israelis in modifying the source code of the CMS of dolphins to interface it with Israeli cruise missiles.
Also kindly learn to cite credible articles, in the world of engineering, news articles written by unprofessionals-- those who are not actively working in research do not count as credible. So the Diplomat or even Quwa websites that you have attached are merely expression of their views.

PS- Also the picture I uploaded in my last comment was my own. I have implemented adaptive intelligent control on Erle brain. Lets just say I am pretty familiar with ardupilot and APM missionplanner.

LOL look at this Indian acting like he is some sort of an insider and has all the answers on Pakistan related matters.

Dude, mind your own business. According to you people Indus also belongs to Hindustan LMAO

 

[ziaulislam]

Hi @Shabi1
Even the Turks cant replace original combat management system of agosta with their own without certfication and validation from the OEM. .

traditionally french have been lenient , this is by looking at how mirage rose upgrades were integrated with so many pakistani weapons (raad, Glide weapons, darter BVRs)

turkish update is complete revamp allowing turkish and pakistani weapons

to me its in consequential 8 chinese subs will be there by 2027 starting from 2021

 

[Shabi1]

Hi @Shabi1 There are certain fallacies in your argument-
1) Your argument is based on the "assumption" that babur-3 was in fact launched off agosta-90. This assumption unfortunately hasnt been proved yet.
2) I wonder, are you really that naive? You believe that French would hand over their source code to Pakistan when their order was financially much smaller than India's-- especially when they have not done the same to India in spite of a much bigger order. Now if you do some neutral and thorough analysis of ToT that Pakistan actually got and the contribution of Pakistani industries in the assembling of agosta in KSEW, you would realize that, the contribution is almost non existent. Now the reason why I am highlighting this is simply because, KSEW or PN cant modify the combat management system without the prior assistance of DCNS.
Even the Turks cant replace original combat management system of agosta with their own without certification and validation from the OEM. I dont know if the turkish CMS has passed the certification of OEM or not.
A case to note, is, germans actively helped Israelis in modifying the source code of the CMS of dolphins to interface it with Israeli cruise missiles.
Also kindly learn to cite credible articles, in the world of engineering, news articles written by unprofessionals-- those who are not actively working in research do not count as credible. So the Diplomat or even Quwa websites that you have attached are merely expression of their views.

PS- Also the picture I uploaded in my last comment was my own. I have implemented adaptive intelligent control on Erle brain. Lets just say I am pretty familiar with ardupilot and APM missionplanner.

Can you open the links I shared and read them first. Fired from Agosta and read about the Turkish upgrades. First submarine has even left for the upgrades and will take a year, it's a complete MLU and all three Agosta-90s will go through it one by one.

Pakistan's cruise missiles
Babur 1 = 700km/ land based
Babur 2 = 750km improved variant/ land based. Fired from multi launcher.
Babur 3 = 450km submarine launched land attack missile. Fired from Agosta.
Azb = Range unknown. Land based anti ship missile. Rumored to be improved localized YJ-62 to avoid export range restrictions. Fired from multi launcher.
Harbah = Ship based anti ship version of Babur. Range unknown (could be 700km). Test fired from PNS missile boat PNS Himmat and likely to be standard PN missile for future.
Raad 1 = Air launched cruise missile 350km. Mirage
Raad 2 = Air launched cruise missile improved variant range unknown. Mirage and JF-17

 

[Mrc]

Can you open the links I shared and read them first. Fired from Agosta and read about the Turkish upgrades. First submarine has even left for the upgrades and will take a year, it's a complete MLU and all three Agosta-90s will go through it one by one.

Pakistan's cruise missiles
Babur 1 = 700km/ land based
Babur 2 = 750km improved variant/ land based. Can also target ships from land.
Babur 3 = 450km submarine launched
Harbah = Ship based anti ship version of Babur. Range unknown (could be 700km).
Raad 1 = Air launched cruise missile 350km
Raad 2 = Air launched cruise missile improved variant range unknown

Azb land to sea coastal defense... range unknown... given size likely above 500 km

 

[Shabi1]

Azb land to sea coastal defense... range unknown... given size likely above 500 km

yes thank you will edit it and add

 

[KapitaanAli]

Can you open the links I shared and read them first. Fired from Agosta and read about the Turkish upgrades. First submarine has even left for the upgrades and will take a year, it's a complete MLU and all three Agosta-90s will go through it one by one.

Being fired from Agosta is an internet story. It's not claimed by Pak Navy.