Modernized by Turkey, Pakistan's Agosta 90B submarine to launch soon

[Lone Nazi]

The 'ToT' is often limited to constructing ships using OEM-supplied material kits. In other words, the steel, engines and other critical components all have to come from France. KSEW cuts the steel and constructs it, but it needs to rely on Naval Group/DCNS to provide the inputs. In all likelihood, DCNS isn't offering those inputs, or they're now too expensive. So the PN is now doing the same thing through China.

The first step to breaking this pattern is owning the design of the ship and empowering KSEW to engage core input suppliers directly. This way, it can keep constructing additional vessels, albeit with imported engines, steel, etc. But it can choose its suppliers, and in turn, control cost. This is what it's doing with the MILGEM from Turkey.

I understand and am quite a bit satisfied with your answer. But what is bothering that our economy in Musharraf Era was in quite a good shape and we could have afforded to manufacture 2 or 3 more subs in Pakistan. Regarding parts and components..Under ToT agreement Dcns or anyother french vendor is liable to provide us with the components that are required or help us with their local manufacturing..you very well know the western laws...else we could sue the hell out of them under breach of contract. Building subs locally maybe bit expensive at first but once their was a whole production facility...we could have gotten then for a mere fraction to the cost we have to buy the imported ones now. Besides modifying them accordingly just as we did now enabled them to carry babur.

I understand and am quite a bit satisfied with your answer. But what is bothering that our economy in Musharraf Era was in quite a good shape and we could have afforded to manufacture 2 or 3 more subs in Pakistan. Regarding parts and components..Under ToT agreement Dcns or anyother french vendor is liable to provide us with the components that are required or help us with their local manufacturing..you very well know the western laws...else we could sue the hell out of them under breach of contract. Building subs locally maybe bit expensive at first but once their was a whole production facility...we could have gotten then for a mere fraction to the cost we have to buy the imported ones now. Besides modifying them accordingly just as we did now enabled them to carry babur.

would like to add that we have just ordered $5 billion worth of Chinese subs.....yeah..on soft loans....but building this agostas at home...even if the production plant costed $2billion or so...It should have been considered sincerly.

 

[Pakistani Fighter]

would like to add that we have just ordered $5 billion worth of Chinese subs.....yeah..on soft loans....but building this agostas at home...even if the production plant costed $2billion or so...It should hav

5 billion dollars?
@HRK @Dazzler @Bilal Khan (Quwa)

 

[Blacklight]

Regarding parts and components..Under ToT agreement Dcns or anyother french vendor is liable to provide us with the components that are required or help us with their local manufacturing..you very well know the western laws...else we could sue the hell out of them under breach of contract.

What you have said, does have an element of rationale to it, except the above. Remember the F16A/B saga? We paid for it in full, LM manufactured it, and then they were put in storage, and we piad for storage as well. Why? Because congress stopped it.

As we are already stretched thin financially, getting into any venture where we are not 100% sure would be unadvisable. Besides the french already back tracked on the JF-17 sub-sytems, due to the Rafale being sold to India. So the element of trust, with them, has already been damaged.

 

[Lone Nazi]

What you have said, does have an element of rationale to it, except the above. Remember the F16A/B saga? We paid for it in full, LM manufactured it, and then they were put in storage, and we piad for storage as well. Why? Because congress stopped it.

As we are already stretched thin financially, getting into any venture where we are not 100% sure would be unadvisable. Besides the french already back tracked on the JF-17 sub-sytems, due to the Rafale being sold to India. So the element of trust, with them, has already been damaged.

Brother this is very different. We have ToT documented agreement just for Agosta class subs. We can challenge it in the French courts under breach of contract if they refuse to comply as needed. The French companies can be very heavily penalized if found guilty of not complying with the contract. All What was Needed was MONEY and we had quite a bit in Musharraf era...and the status of major Non-Nato US Ally.

 

[ziaulislam]

Brother this is very different. We have ToT documented agreement just for Agosta class subs. We can challenge it in the French courts under breach of contract if they refuse to comply as needed. The French companies can be very heavily penalized if found guilty of not complying with the contract. All What was Needed was MONEY and we had quite a bit in Musharraf era...and the status of major Non-Nato US Ally.

they would have provided the knock down kits at twice the price..
purpose of tot is to learn for future projects, and get something back..
PN should have than design its own midget sub, worked on getting the supply line established(basic steel industry) ..its not this simple..

 

[Lone Nazi]

they would have provided the knock down kits at twice the price..
purpose of tot is to learn for future projects, and get something back..
PN should have than design its own midget sub, worked on getting the supply line established(basic steel industry) ..its not this simple..

This is very debatable. But atleast PN Should have taken a heard start from a lead project. Agosta Class was that lead project provided it had the ToT. It feels like our naval engineers are very undermined and underestimated.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

I understand and am quite a bit satisfied with your answer. But what is bothering that our economy in Musharraf Era was in quite a good shape and we could have afforded to manufacture 2 or 3 more subs in Pakistan. Regarding parts and components..Under ToT agreement Dcns or anyother french vendor is liable to provide us with the components that are required or help us with their local manufacturing..you very well know the western laws...else we could sue the hell out of them under breach of contract. Building subs locally maybe bit expensive at first but once their was a whole production facility...we could have gotten then for a mere fraction to the cost we have to buy the imported ones now. Besides modifying them accordingly just as we did now enabled them to carry babur.

Our economy under Mushy was structurally flawed, to say the least. Things looked good because of the infusion of US aid, which went into financing projects (stimulating the local economy) to keeping our balance-of-payment (BoP) in decent condition. However, we didn't do anything to improve our fundamentals, so when that aid went away, the economy basically tanked and we haven't recovered since. Worse, the reliance on aid under Mushy got our business sector hooked on importing, which has furthered eroded our BoP and incentive to make goods locally for export.

I agree with you on the legal stuff, but this is assuming the ToT contract doesn't preclude us from building these subs alone (with KSEW engaging input suppliers directly). Moreover, KSEW likely didn't get the actual design of the Agosta 90B to replicate it without DCNS' assistance. Though to be fair, it figured out enough to upgrade it without DCNS' help (and, instead, with Turkey's guidance). But I assure you, the ToT wasn't as deep as we thought.

would like to add that we have just ordered $5 billion worth of Chinese subs.....yeah..on soft loans....but building this agostas at home...even if the production plant costed $2billion or so...It should have been considered sincerly.

The submarines from China cost about $2.8 billion to $3.2 billion US. The $4-5 billion US figure is unsubstantiated -- it came from the Financial Times without any verification. However, it might have been right in that Pakistan did sign a big naval agreement with China, but it evidently also included 4 Type 054A/P frigates and other ships.

That said, I do agree with you in that after the Agosta 90B, the right solution should've been to explore getting our own conventional submarine design. But that wasn't a thought on anyone's mind, we all got too comfortable.

Today, the situation is a little different. We know the PN decided to take ownership of the frigate issue by buying off design help from Turkey to make a 'made in Pakistan' frigate. Likewise, the PN's working on its own LRMPA to ultimately replace the P-3Cs. It's also increasing the local design/engineering input in the FAC(M) program.

With submarines, they should start thinking about collaborating with Turkey on a design that could replace the Agosta 90Bs in the 2040/2050 timeframe. It's a long time, sure, but the MILDEN is supposed to leverage all of the emerging tech, and knowing the complexity of this field, we might need that much time too.

In the interim, we could also work on shallow water attack (SWAT) boats or miniature SSKs of our own. This can be a good basis to learn submarine design, development and construction. Likewise, the PN could induct the low-cost boats to build up its submarine fleet.

 

[Lone Nazi]

Our economy under Mushy was structurally flawed, to say the least. Things looked good because of the infusion of US aid, which went into financing projects (stimulating the local economy) to keeping our balance-of-payment (BoP) in decent condition. However, we didn't do anything to improve our fundamentals, so when that aid went away, the economy basically tanked and we haven't recovered since. Worse, the reliance on aid under Mushy got our business sector hooked on importing, which has furthered eroded our BoP and incentive to make goods locally for export.

I agree with you on the legal stuff, but this is assuming the ToT contract doesn't preclude us from building these subs alone (with KSEW engaging input suppliers directly). Moreover, KSEW likely didn't get the actual design of the Agosta 90B to replicate it without DCNS' assistance. Though to be fair, it figured out enough to upgrade it without DCNS' help (and, instead, with Turkey's guidance). But I assure you, the ToT wasn't as deep as we thought.


The submarines from China cost about $2.8 billion to $3.2 billion US. The $4-5 billion US figure is unsubstantiated -- it came from the Financial Times without any verification. However, it might have been right in that Pakistan did sign a big naval agreement with China, but it evidently also included 4 Type 054A/P frigates and other ships.

That said, I do agree with you in that after the Agosta 90B, the right solution should've been to explore getting our own conventional submarine design. But that wasn't a thought on anyone's mind, we all got too comfortable.

Today, the situation is a little different. We know the PN decided to take ownership of the frigate issue by buying off design help from Turkey to make a 'made in Pakistan' frigate. Likewise, the PN's working on its own LRMPA to ultimately replace the P-3Cs. It's also increasing the local design/engineering input in the FAC(M) program.

With submarines, they should start thinking about collaborating with Turkey on a design that could replace the Agosta 90Bs in the 2040/2050 timeframe. It's a long time, sure, but the MILDEN is supposed to leverage all of the emerging tech, and knowing the complexity of this field, we might need that much time too.

In the interim, we could also work on shallow water attack (SWAT) boats or miniature SSKs of our own. This can be a good basis to learn submarine design, development and construction. Likewise, the PN could induct the low-cost boats to build up its submarine fleet.

Bilal bhai you are senior researcher and defence analyst here aswell as on Quwa. I would like to urge you to get to the root of this Agost class ToT( present or not) drama and actually kinda get or figure out the specifics of it. Why wasn't domestic production considered at all. Maybe interview a present or retired Good ranking naval officer to get the insight into this. I surprised its been 20 years and this wasnt debated here enough at all.

Our economy under Mushy was structurally flawed, to say the least. Things looked good because of the infusion of US aid, which went into financing projects (stimulating the local economy) to keeping our balance-of-payment (BoP) in decent condition. However, we didn't do anything to improve our fundamentals, so when that aid went away, the economy basically tanked and we haven't recovered since. Worse, the reliance on aid under Mushy got our business sector hooked on importing, which has furthered eroded our BoP and incentive to make goods locally for export.

I agree with you on the legal stuff, but this is assuming the ToT contract doesn't preclude us from building these subs alone (with KSEW engaging input suppliers directly). Moreover, KSEW likely didn't get the actual design of the Agosta 90B to replicate it without DCNS' assistance. Though to be fair, it figured out enough to upgrade it without DCNS' help (and, instead, with Turkey's guidance). But I assure you, the ToT wasn't as deep as we thought.


The submarines from China cost about $2.8 billion to $3.2 billion US. The $4-5 billion US figure is unsubstantiated -- it came from the Financial Times without any verification. However, it might have been right in that Pakistan did sign a big naval agreement with China, but it evidently also included 4 Type 054A/P frigates and other ships.

That said, I do agree with you in that after the Agosta 90B, the right solution should've been to explore getting our own conventional submarine design. But that wasn't a thought on anyone's mind, we all got too comfortable.

Today, the situation is a little different. We know the PN decided to take ownership of the frigate issue by buying off design help from Turkey to make a 'made in Pakistan' frigate. Likewise, the PN's working on its own LRMPA to ultimately replace the P-3Cs. It's also increasing the local design/engineering input in the FAC(M) program.

With submarines, they should start thinking about collaborating with Turkey on a design that could replace the Agosta 90Bs in the 2040/2050 timeframe. It's a long time, sure, but the MILDEN is supposed to leverage all of the emerging tech, and knowing the complexity of this field, we might need that much time too.

In the interim, we could also work on shallow water attack (SWAT) boats or miniature SSKs of our own. This can be a good basis to learn submarine design, development and construction. Likewise, the PN could induct the low-cost boats to build up its submarine fleet.

Agosta class project should have been taken as head start to our ingenious submarine production facility. If it was a matter of funding or technical assistance we should have asked the Turks way back like a decade ago. Turks also have the tot and assembled the German designed subs themselves. I think this was never taken so seriously. It's not about the skills or manpower. There are thousands of foreigner qualified quality Pakistani engineers abroad. If Abdul Qadeer khan can come back for the cause of nation, so can those engineers as loyalty/patriotism should never be doubted. Pn needs to issue a tender to hire such qualified experts and come up with innovative ingenious production of domestic naval assets.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Bilal bhai you are senior researcher and defence analyst here aswell as on Quwa. I would like to urge you to get to the root of this Agost class ToT( present or not) drama and actually kinda get or figure out the specifics of it. Why wasn't domestic production considered at all. Maybe interview a present or retired Good ranking naval officer to get the insight into this. I surprised its been 20 years and this wasnt debated here enough at all.

I've been looking into it. The closest answer I got was -- from someone who was in the DGDP at one point (won't reveal the time-frame) -- "ToT is just an empty marketing term." He said this to me 3 years ago.

OEMs were okay with offering "ToT" because it made defence contracts like this look good, but very little of the production process was passed to us. In the end, the "ToT" still involved sourcing inputs from the OEM, and the OEMs still owned the design. So, for us to make more of these submarines, we basically had to order it from the French, and they could -- and ultimately did -- say "no." They wanted us to buy the Marlin SSK instead.

It's the same story with the F-22P and Hangor.

Our mistake isn't the weak "ToT" but the fact that we never fought for offsets. With offsets, a % of the contract value could've come back to Pakistan through investment. So, we could've required DCNS to spend 33% of the Agosta 90B contract to help set-up Gwadar Shipyards, for example. How would that have benefited us? Well, a percentage of the defence contract would've actually gone into supporting our industry, and Gwadar Shipyards may have competed for regional ship-repair, shipbuilding, etc contracts 20+ years ago.

 

[Lone Nazi]

I've been looking into it. The closest answer I got was -- from someone who was in the DGDP at one point (won't reveal the time-frame) -- "ToT is just an empty marketing term." He said this to me 3 years ago.

OEMs were okay with offering "ToT" because it made defence contracts like this look good, but very little of the production process was passed to us. In the end, the "ToT" still involved sourcing inputs from the OEM, and the OEMs still owned the design. So, for us to make more of these submarines, we basically had to order it from the French, and they could -- and ultimately did -- say "no." They wanted us to buy the Marlin SSK instead.

It's the same story with the F-22P and Hangor.

Our mistake isn't the weak "ToT" but the fact that we never fought for offsets. With offsets, a % of the contract value could've come back to Pakistan through investment. So, we could've required DCNS to spend 33% of the Agosta 90B contract to help set-up Gwadar Shipyards, for example. How would that have benefited us? Well, a percentage of the defence contract would've actually gone into supporting our industry, and Gwadar Shipyards may have competed for regional ship-repair, shipbuilding, etc contracts 20+ years ago.

Ultimately it all feels like twirling in hands of our lovely politicians and their personal interests above national interests. Even in agosta class acquisition there was huge corruption scandal ongoing specially on the French side..and ours too(B.Bhutto acquired) but those records would be burned till now lol .
I hope our Navy learns from the past and grows far stronger onwards.

 

[ali_raza]

Ultimately it all feels like twirling in hands of our lovely politicians and their personal interests above national interests. Even in agosta class acquisition there was huge corruption scandal ongoing specially on the French side..and ours too(B.Bhutto acquired) but those records would be burned till now lol .
I hope our Navy learns from the past and grows far stronger onwards.

thank ppp specialy zardari

 

[Blacklight]

Janab what on earth we are buying from China. The subs we are buying sure as hell are not Type 39 or Type 41 for that matter. Thailand bought Type 39 ships and ordered those 3 years after us and they already have gotten first one. We are almost paying double price for each sub so what on earth we really are buying and when will first arrive.
@Rashid Mahmood

After Rashid Sahab replied, have you figured out what we are buying?

 

[ali_raza]

I've been looking into it. The closest answer I got was -- from someone who was in the DGDP at one point (won't reveal the time-frame) -- "ToT is just an empty marketing term." He said this to me 3 years ago.

OEMs were okay with offering "ToT" because it made defence contracts like this look good, but very little of the production process was passed to us. In the end, the "ToT" still involved sourcing inputs from the OEM, and the OEMs still owned the design. So, for us to make more of these submarines, we basically had to order it from the French, and they could -- and ultimately did -- say "no." They wanted us to buy the Marlin SSK instead.

It's the same story with the F-22P and Hangor.

Our mistake isn't the weak "ToT" but the fact that we never fought for offsets. With offsets, a % of the contract value could've come back to Pakistan through investment. So, we could've required DCNS to spend 33% of the Agosta 90B contract to help set-up Gwadar Shipyards, for example. How would that have benefited us? Well, a percentage of the defence contract would've actually gone into supporting our industry, and Gwadar Shipyards may have competed for regional ship-repair, shipbuilding, etc contracts 20+ years ago.

i guess biggest loss was not going U214 in 2007.which was 95% done deal according to HDW officials in ideas 2006.
bank guarantees and everything was ready only sign were remaining.
PN was adamant on 650mm tubes which wasn’t as big as they made it to be.
considering we went same configurations in 2016 enroute turks.
we wasted a decade.chinese were anyway another option even today we need atleast 3 western boats.to complete dream of 14 boats 11+3

After Rashid Sahab replied, have you figured out what we are buying?

bazooka launchers included in those boats.
ab bazooka ka size
me ni batao ga

 

[StormBreaker]

Hi,

First of all---this never works for a smaller power in times of crisis---a bigger power will interven and stop that from happening.

So---until and unless---the assets are already in your arena---they will never get there in times of crisis---specially the ocean going assets---.

Air and ground may work due to our border with china.

PN planners were caught sleeping when the indian Sub surfaced at the time of chinese frigate's arrival a few years ago---.

Navy has been sleeping at the helm quite often---Agosta french engineer killing---Atlantique flight---Saab 2000 destroyed at naval base---lack of control over the Gwadar city security---sending 20 soldiers on bus to gwadar un-armed right after feb 27th---the soldiers that got executed---.

And this 8 submarine drama---.

Thailand ordered the subs after us and they supposedly got theirs---what is happening to these over priced pakistani subs---?

That first para is soo true !!!!
Ideal scenario if China tries to officially announce help to Pakistan, China gets pressurized heavily by others as well as UN, and the possibility of providing india material help by other powers, them jumping in...

 

[ali_raza]

I've been looking into it. The closest answer I got was -- from someone who was in the DGDP at one point (won't reveal the time-frame) -- "ToT is just an empty marketing term." He said this to me 3 years ago.

OEMs were okay with offering "ToT" because it made defence contracts like this look good, but very little of the production process was passed to us. In the end, the "ToT" still involved sourcing inputs from the OEM, and the OEMs still owned the design. So, for us to make more of these submarines, we basically had to order it from the French, and they could -- and ultimately did -- say "no." They wanted us to buy the Marlin SSK instead.

It's the same story with the F-22P and Hangor.

Our mistake isn't the weak "ToT" but the fact that we never fought for offsets. With offsets, a % of the contract value could've come back to Pakistan through investment. So, we could've required DCNS to spend 33% of the Agosta 90B contract to help set-up Gwadar Shipyards, for example. How would that have benefited us? Well, a percentage of the defence contract would've actually gone into supporting our industry, and Gwadar Shipyards may have competed for regional ship-repair, shipbuilding, etc contracts 20+ years ago.

the irony is we r buying soo many same system with turkish stamps on it.cos we have fukeed up our credibility soo much no one wants to deal directly
french went to indian club solidly because of same stupidity of ours
we didn’t made them stay or captured them in a contract better still make them engaged