Graphic of India and Pakistan's underwater nuclear deterrent

[CriticalThought]

Hi dear @The Deterrent
First of all I cant upload that book using "upload a file" option that shows here. There are issues in what you have suggested above,Let me explain you some complexities-
1) TERCOM and DSMAC data are very huge you cant just feed the all the TERCOM/DSMAC data for entire india onto the cruise missile prior to putting it in torpedo tubes.

2)Secondly the designer of mission profile selects the path of cruise missile based on "data they have"!-this is very important.

3)Extrapolating point #2,lets say I wish to launch my babur/nirbhay then I must know the precise location of my own launch platform and the missile when it is launched. Because #2 is heavily contingent upon where I am at the moment.

4)Once I get to know where I am,I then go ahead and define way points starting from launch point .This as I said again is based on "altitude profile that I have"--or basically TERCOM/DSMAC data that I get from either ISRO/or chinese satellites(in case of pakistan).

5)Once a set of way points are selected missile uses these to perform any of these actions-
(a) Lateral control of missile-- this amounts to finding exact bank angle that would satisfy the way point criteria
(b) Terrain following or
(c) Barometric hold/Altitude Hold autopilot

So in light of point #2,3, and 4, you must define the way points etc in the submarine and not at dockyard when missiles are being stored!

Except if the point of launch is also pre-decided.

 

[amardeep mishra]

Except if the point of launch is also pre-decided

This implies that missile wasn't fired from a submarine but from a pontoon(if at all Pakistan did fire it).

 

[CriticalThought]

This implies that missile wasn't fired from a submarine but from a pontoon(if at all Pakistan did fire it).

All it implies is that we are constantly working to improve Babur so it becomes a force to reckon with.

 

[amardeep mishra]

All it implies is that we are constantly working to improve Babur so it becomes a force to reckon with.

I don't think I ever denied that.read my comments again.
Thanks

 

[The Deterrent]

Hi dear @The Deterrent

1) TERCOM and DSMAC data are very huge you cant just feed the all the TERCOM/DSMAC data for entire india onto the cruise missile prior to putting it in torpedo tubes.

That's why I referred to mission-specific files.

2)Secondly the designer of mission profile selects the path of cruise missile based on "data they have"!-this is very important.

3)Extrapolating point #2,lets say I wish to launch my babur/nirbhay then I must know the precise location of my own launch platform and the missile when it is launched. Because #2 is heavily contingent upon where I am at the moment.

Which is where the INS comes in, after factoring in the known position of the vessel.

4)Once I get to know where I am,I then go ahead and define way points starting from launch point .This as I said again is based on "altitude profile that I have"--or basically TERCOM/DSMAC data that I get from either ISRO/or chinese satellites(in case of pakistan).

I don't think any cruise missile relies on real-time TERCOM data from satellites.

5)Once a set of way points are selected missile uses these to perform any of these actions-
(a) Lateral control of missile-- this amounts to finding exact bank angle that would satisfy the way point criteria
(b) Terrain following or
(c) Barometric hold/Altitude Hold autopilot

So in light of point #2,3, and 4, you must define the way points etc in the submarine and not at dockyard when missiles are being stored!

That's precisely why I said that the data can be fed when the capsuled SLCM is aboard the sub, via a port. Then it can be loaded into the torpedo tube and fired when needed.


Now that almost all of your 'queries' have been answered, please spare us from allegations of 'fake' missiles. Pakistan is not North Korea or Iran.

@Bratva @The Deterrent @Valar Dohaeris Mr. Amardeep Mishra is here to simply dig for information. Raise various technical questions out of curiosity that challenge somebody's capabilities, and the person will become boisterous and try to 'prove technically' how they definitely have said capability. Mr. Mishra will keep raising questions until he has the answers he is looking for, and then he'll raise some more, just because... His posts are to be read because he is obviously knowledgeable about various technical subjects, and then safely ignored.

Relax, there is no real information here which is not available on the internet anyway.

 

[CriticalThought]

I don't think any cruise missile relies on real-time TERCOM data from satellites.

It would be a cool feature to build into Babur! Although there would be a lot of work to guard against jamming and false signals. It would be inadvisable to use such a design against a technologically advanced enemy.

 

[amardeep mishra]

Which is where the INS comes in, after factoring in the known position of the vessel.

Hi @The Deterrent
Yes What I wanted to say was the "launch point" of a cruise missile is a variable parameter(unless of course if it is a test). So one cant program the way points well in advance when missiles are being stored in torpedo tubes in harbour. That was what I wanted to establish. I also wanted to establish that this procedure is a part of submarine's command and control architecture(subtics in case of PN) and hence this missile couldnt have been fired from a french sub as majority of members are claiming here.

I don't think any cruise missile relies on real-time TERCOM data from satellites.

I think you're misquoting me,there is never a real-time TERCOM from sats.All i wanted to say was altitude maps that are stored in cruise missiles are obtained from ISRO(in case of IN) and various chinese sats(in case of PN). Thats all.

That's precisely why I said that the data can be fed when the capsuled SLCM is aboard the sub, via a port. Then it can be loaded into the torpedo tube and fired when needed.

Wait a second,you're trying to say that --you'll have an additional RLG package(outside of submarine's CC architecture) whose data alongwith compass data you will use to first program the cruise missile and then slide it down the torpedo tube for firing? My friend we are not talking about an engineering project or make shift arrangement. We are talking about a weapon system. While you may have a makeshift idea but in case of submarine this is not how things work in regards to cruise missiles. As I said the launch point of CM is a variable parameter one that is computed from a highly sophisticated RLG/FOG coupled with digital compass and fed to submarine's CC architecture which then uses CAM/NAM framework to define the mission profile. I would humbly suggest you to read the literature!

 

[IceCold]

I also wanted to establish that this procedure is a part of submarine's command and control architecture(subtics in case of PN) and hence this missile couldnt have been fired from a french sub as majority of members are claiming here.

Even though repeated members have told you contrary to what you are hell bent on establishing here , you still want to beat around the bush, please do so but at the very least spare us Pakistanis from your pearls of wisdom. I mean its getting tired reading the repeated lines again and again. What people like you dont want to understand is that you dont built a bullet without a gun to fire it.

 

[The Deterrent]

Hi @The Deterrent
Yes What I wanted to say was the "launch point" of a cruise missile is a variable parameter(unless of course if it is a test). So one cant program the way points well in advance when missiles are being stored in torpedo tubes in harbour. That was what I wanted to establish. I also wanted to establish that this procedure is a part of submarine's command and control architecture(subtics in case of PN) and hence this missile couldnt have been fired from a french sub as majority of members are claiming here.

I hope you do realize that there are only 4 torpedo tubes, and 16-18 weapons including torpedoes, AShMs and mines are supposed to be carried. The torpedo tubes aren't "filled" in the harbor.
That said again, it wasn't fired from a sub but it can be in the future.

Wait a second,you're trying to say that --you'll have an additional RLG package(outside of submarine's CC architecture) whose data alongwith compass data you will use to first program the cruise missile and then slide it down the torpedo tube for firing? My friend we are not talking about an engineering project or make shift arrangement. We are talking about a weapon system. While you may have a makeshift idea but in case of submarine this is not how things work in regards to cruise missiles. As I said the launch point of CM is a variable parameter one that is computed from a highly sophisticated RLG/FOG coupled with digital compass and fed to submarine's CC architecture which then uses CAM/NAM framework to define the mission profile. I would humbly suggest you to read the literature!

Nope, you are misquoting me.
I realize the procedure of how AShMs are usually launched, but you are confusing it with Babur's specific requirements. The missile's INS itself can handle the launch. All it theoretically needs is the current location and the first point on land, so that it may simply cruise to that point after which its TERCOM/DSMAC should kick in.

I would refer you to @Fenrir , as he has had more practical experience with this stuff.

They don't need to be integrated into SUBTICS. Torpedoes do because they remain in constant contact with the submarine's FCS and hardlinked to the submarine via control wires until autonomous tracking takes place within what could be considered terminal distance.

Norway is currently doing last-life upgrades on its Ula class submarines which includes FCS mods to make them able to handle newer generations of torpedoes.

The submarines are also having JSM - called NSM-SL when sub-launched - integrated into them, though the missile while be featured on the Ula replacement, not the Ulas themselves. The Ulas will be used for test-launches.

Because they don't use any systems that would need to be hard-linked with a submarine's FCS, and can be launched using the same protocols that see any foreign object evacuated from the torpedo tubes, such as MJK commandoes, the JSM can be launched regardless of any mods to the submarines systems.

Using strictly passive forms of guidance, they need minimal contact with the submarine itself.

Most SLCMs have their own control systems like Tomahawk's "Tactical Tomahawk Weapons Control System" that can be integrated into a boat's FCS to allow the missile to receive mid-course updates, but that's not strictly necessary.

It's still a good idea to integrate a missile into the greater FCS, which would require a modification of SUBTICS on French-origin submarines.

...

I can tell you from professional experience that when we do integration for AUVs we do need to make mods if we're running a control wire to the submarine mothership. But for disposable, one-shot systems like Mine Sniper, no such thing needs to be done. Just flood the tubes and launch and let the AUV's active guidance do its work.

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/a-not-so-silent-war-babur-3-ssk-interception.471758/page-6#ixzz4WOvNV3ON

 

[v9s]

Hi @The Deterrent
Yes What I wanted to say was the "launch point" of a cruise missile is a variable parameter(unless of course if it is a test). So one cant program the way points well in advance when missiles are being stored in torpedo tubes in harbour. That was what I wanted to establish. I also wanted to establish that this procedure is a part of submarine's command and control architecture(subtics in case of PN) and hence this missile couldnt have been fired from a french sub as majority of members are claiming here.

Quoted for posterity to establish what a dumba$$ you are.

@Bratva @The Deterrent @Valar Dohaeris Mr. Amardeep Mishra is here to simply dig for information. Raise various technical questions out of curiosity that challenge somebody's capabilities, and the person will become boisterous and try to 'prove technically' how they definitely have said capability. Mr. Mishra will keep raising questions until he has the answers he is looking for, and then he'll raise some more, just because... His posts are to be read because he is obviously knowledgeable about various technical subjects, and then safely ignored.

Trust me, he is a dumba$$. It has been established time and time again with his interactions with actual professionals like @gambit. He uses textbook descriptions to seem smart and impress.

And people with actual knowledge of our defence capabilities aren't stupid enough to reveal more than they have to.

 

[kṣamā]

Quoted for posterity to establish what a dumba$$ you are.



Trust me, he is a dumba$$. It has been established time and time again with his interactions with actual professionals like @gambit. He uses textbook descriptions to seem smart and impress.

And people with actual knowledge of our defence capabilities aren't stupid enough to reveal more than they have to.

So all Hindus are sub human and dumba$$ that's established. Pakistanis are superhumans from krypton that's established too. Now coming to this matter let be see if I have got this right: PN launched babur from an augosta's torpedo tube for the first time. ISPR recorded the video and declared second strike capability. But at the same time classified the Ground breaking RnD as state secrets and witheld all literature of the same. As per few learned members with deep contacts know that many previous tests where also performed in outmost secrecy. And before I forget all of it is obviously completely indegeneous tech. So did I miss something?

 

[amardeep mishra]

I would refer you to @Fenrir , as he has had more practical experience with this stuff.

Hi dear @The Deterrent
This is what happens when one doesnt go through the plethora of scientific literature or the published literature. I will quote all the relevant links to point out that the system Mr Fenrir is talking about is actually an evolution of old TWCS which "resides in the launch platform".
http://m.lockheedmartin.com/m/us/products/ttwcs.html
Here is a link directly from the manufacturer.The above link clearly states that-
It is Integrated with the ship's navigation, communication, situational awareness and launch systems, TTWCS computes the missile's route to strike targets.The system also provides the capability to plan new missions aboard the launch platform and communicate with multiple Tomahawks to rapidly retarget and redirect the missiles in flight.

For more details of the above mentioned system and launch sequence kindly refer to-
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/systems/tmpc-aps.htm
and
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/systems/twcs.htm
From the above link-
"The TOMAHAWK Weapon Control System (TWCS:predecessor to TTWCS) is the element of the surface ship weapon system which prepares and launches the TOMAHAWK cruise missile. The TWCS must be interoperable with communications, navigation, and other weapon systems."

All the three links clearly mention that -
(i) Fire control system of the cruise missile is "integrated" with ship's own navigation system,situation awareness etc.
(ii) In order to have cruise missile as an effective weapon system,mission planning or the weapon control system of the cruise missile should be an integral part of the command and control of naval vessel.

So all Hindus are sub human and dumba$$ that's established. Pakistanis are superhumans from krypton that's established too. Now coming to this matter let be see if I have got this right: PN launched babur from an augosta's torpedo tube for the first time. ISPR recorded the video and declared second strike capability. But at the same time classified the Ground breaking RnD as state secrets and witheld all literature of the same. As per few learned members with deep contacts know that many previous tests where also performed in outmost secrecy. And before I forget all of it is obviously completely indegeneous tech. So did I miss something?

Hi! You should learn to distinguish troll from intelligent discussions. No need to fuel any troll and focus on topic at hand!

All it theoretically needs is the current location and the first point on land, so that it may simply cruise to that point after which its TERCOM/DSMAC should kick in.

What you're saying is "theoretically" correct as the CM mostly relies on GPS over sea untill land mass is reached. However there is an issue with this and that is--who will determine the "set of waypoints--GPS coordinates" from the time your missile receives itz first GPS(when it breaks the surface of water) signal to the 'first GPS signal over land'?
There can be two possibilities-
a) Either your missile makes do with just "two waypoints".
or
b) Your missile is programmed with super advanced AI that computes best possible set of way points to reach to the first way point over land.
Now leaving "theoretical" scenarios for a second and talking about how it is actually done-- well,this task is usually performed by a system that is part of vessels bigger command and control architecture as I have highlighted from the official links from the manufacturer.I dont think there is any possibility of doubt.
Thanks!

 

[v9s]

So all Hindus are sub human and dumba$$ that's established. Pakistanis are superhumans from krypton that's established too. Now coming to this matter let be see if I have got this right: PN launched babur from an augosta's torpedo tube for the first time. ISPR recorded the video and declared second strike capability. But at the same time classified the Ground breaking RnD as state secrets and witheld all literature of the same. As per few learned members with deep contacts know that many previous tests where also performed in outmost secrecy. And before I forget all of it is obviously completely indegeneous tech. So did I miss something?

Nothing you said is remotely relevant to what I said because you're putting words in my mouth.

Hi! You should learn to distinguish troll from intelligent discussions. No need to fuel any troll and focus on topic at hand!
!

Stroking your ego much? You are a bookworm, not intelligent.

 

[The Deterrent]

Hi dear @The Deterrent
This is what happens when one doesnt go through the plethora of scientific literature or the published literature. I will quote all the relevant links to point out that the system Mr Fenrir is talking about is actually an evolution of old TWCS which "resides in the launch platform".
http://m.lockheedmartin.com/m/us/products/ttwcs.html
Here is a link directly from the manufacturer.The above link clearly states that-
It is Integrated with the ship's navigation, communication, situational awareness and launch systems, TTWCS computes the missile's route to strike targets.The system also provides the capability to plan new missions aboard the launch platform and communicate with multiple Tomahawks to rapidly retarget and redirect the missiles in flight.

For more details of the above mentioned system and launch sequence kindly refer to-
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/systems/tmpc-aps.htm
and
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/systems/twcs.htm
From the above link-
"The TOMAHAWK Weapon Control System (TWCS:predecessor to TTWCS) is the element of the surface ship weapon system which prepares and launches the TOMAHAWK cruise missile. The TWCS must be interoperable with communications, navigation, and other weapon systems."

All the three links clearly mention that -
(i) Fire control system of the cruise missile is "integrated" with ship's own navigation system,situation awareness etc.
(ii) In order to have cruise missile as an effective weapon system,mission planning or the weapon control system of the cruise missile should be an integral part of the command and control of naval vessel.

Yeah, you forgot that Babur =/= Tomahawk.
That is how it is usually done (and should be done), but Pakistan has a habit of breaking rules. I'll leave you to that.

What you're saying is "theoretically" correct as the CM mostly relies on GPS over sea untill land mass is reached. However there is an issue with this and that is--who will determine the "set of waypoints--GPS coordinates" from the time your missile receives itz first GPS(when it breaks the surface of water) signal to the 'first GPS signal over land'?
There can be two possibilities-
a) Either your missile makes do with just "two waypoints".
or
b) Your missile is programmed with super advanced AI that computes best possible set of way points to reach to the first way point over land.
Now leaving "theoretical" scenarios for a second and talking about how it is actually done-- well,this task is usually performed by a system that is part of vessels bigger command and control architecture as I have highlighted from the official links from the manufacturer.I dont think there is any possibility of doubt.
Thanks!

I think you should give this a break, this is clearly overloading your processor.

 

[amardeep mishra]

Yeah, you forgot that Babur =/= Tomahawk.
That is how it is usually done (and should be done), but Pakistan has a habit of breaking rules. I'll leave you to that.

OK my friend @The Deterrent
As you say! I merely wanted to point out that firing of cruise missile cant be accomplished without integrating it to the command and control architecture of the launching platform--either ship or submarine! thats all! And I have furnished relevant links to back that claim--from manufacturer itself.