Pakistan's Nuclear Submarine Development | News and Discussions

[k!ng_0f_(~)3@rt$]

any submarine can launch a neuclear missile so no need of neuclear sub for pakistan we just need to upgrade a method of finding subs and also destroying them by some anti sub weapon...otherwise nuclear sub will b too expensive for our economy...

Finally got a reliable answer This topic went so long :-O

 

[Kompromat]

It would be good for India if Pakistan tries to match India weapon for weapon even if it doesnt make any sense having it.

Its not about weapons, its about capability that feeds into our deterrent.The industrial and technological benefits are on the side. We already have one marine based nuclear deterrent, having one nuclear sub will be enough to complete the triad as well as to keep a technological parity with India if not numerical. This submarine, will do what PNS Ghazi did in 1965.

 

[KS]

Its not about weapons, its about capability that feeds into our deterrent.The industrial and technological benefits are on the side. We already have one marine based nuclear deterrent, having one nuclear sub will be enough to complete the triad as well as to keep a technological parity with India if not numerical. This submarine, will do what PNS Ghazi did in 1965.

Why would you quote a one and half year old reply ?

This submarine, will do what PNS Ghazi did in 1965

Well I dont need to remind you what happened to PNS Ghazi ultimately.. Do I ?

 

[Kompromat]

Why would you quote a one and half year old reply ?

Its not invalid is it?

Well I dont need to remind you what happened to PNS Ghazi ultimately.. Do I ?

Without going into what happened to it in 1971,which you are still going to believe what you will like to, what i meant was the fear factor that Ghazi had caused to the Indian air craft carrier,which never left its port throughout the war.

 

[Kompromat]

Aeronaut vikrant did no stayed in port in 71 please wiki it

I was talking about the 1965 war sir.

 

[KS]

Without going into what happened to it in 1971,which you are still going to believe what you will like to, what i meant was the fear factor that Ghazi had caused to the Indian air craft carrier,which never left its port throughout the war.

And similarly how the 65 experience made us invent new tactics and hunt down the Ghazi in 71, this too will be improvised. There sis going to be no conventional military parity between India and Pakistan. Ever. It is the nukes and the fact that India has more to loose in a war (a north-korea-south korea scenario) that saves Pakistan's skin.

BTW your claims about bottling up Vikrant itself is dubious at best,

http://www.defencejournal.com/march98/pak3wars1.htm

Two naval myths, too, got generated at that time. That the whole of the Indian Navy was bottled up in harbour because of the presence of a single Pakistani submarine at sea. And, the Indian Naval expansion during the seventies and eighties was a reaction to the Pakistan Navy's bombardment of Dwarka. The real facts, however, were that almost seventy five percent of the Indian Navy was caught under maintenance in harbour after an intensive three months anti-submarine work up with a British submarine in the Bay of Bengal.

And the author is no ordinary tom,dick or harry but Vice Adm (Retd) Iqbal F Quadir

 

[Slayer786]

And similarly how the 65 experience made us invent new tactics and hunt down the Ghazi in 71, this too will be improvised. There sis going to be no conventional military parity between India and Pakistan. Ever. It is the nukes and the fact that India has more to loose in a war (a north-korea-south korea scenario) that saves Pakistan's skin.

BTW your claims about bottling up Vikrant itself is dubious at best,

Pakistan And Its Three Wars - 1

Two naval myths, too, got generated at that time. That the whole of the Indian Navy was bottled up in harbour because of the presence of a single Pakistani submarine at sea. And, the Indian Naval expansion during the seventies and eighties was a reaction to the Pakistan Navy's bombardment of Dwarka. The real facts, however, were that almost seventy five percent of the Indian Navy was caught under maintenance in harbour after an intensive three months anti-submarine work up with a British submarine in the Bay of Bengal.

And the author is no ordinary tom,dick or harry but Vice Adm (Retd) Iqbal F Quadir

It is funny when a Pakistani expert or author writes anything which the Indians like, they will quote him and give his examples, but anything written against India, they will term it bias and tend to ignore it. How fair are we in our judgement?

 

[Kompromat]

@ks

Its not a Nk/Sk scenario,as there is no nuclear balance in that region.

Pakistan has a defensive military doctrine,which requires assets with an element of fear,eventhough those weapons seeing combat is unlikely.

Nasr and Nuclear Sub may never be used,but they act as a psyops weapon to force,enemy planners to redesign their posture. It allows balance to be maintained.

I have read about the naval workshop issue in regards to IN in 65 before. That however cannot dispel the fact that the flagship of the Indian navy remained out of combat,dramatically reducing IN's effectiveness.

Fear factor was present,in the 65 engagement. Ghazi altered the balance of power and a tiny Pakistan navy with a handful of assets developed the guts to go and bomb Dwarka.

Why didn't it happen in 71,well because there were subs in the Indian fleet too.

Our nuclear sub will be just that...a statement of intent to the Indian navy,which will keep 'perceptions' at a more equal level than before,reducing the likelihood of an actual conflict.



Peace.

 

[KS]

It is funny when a Pakistani expert or author writes anything which the Indians like, they will quote him and give his examples, but anything written against India, they will term it bias and tend to ignore it. How fair are we in our judgement?

Because its simple common sense that while aggarandizing claims by opposition needs to be taken with a pinch of salt, claims that actually favor the opposition need not be suspected.

I mean what incentive does the Vice Admiral have in poking into the Pakistani propaganda himself unless he just wants to tell the truth ?

 

[Slayer786]

Because its simple common sense that while aggarandizing claims by opposition needs to be taken with a pinch of salt, claims that actually favor the opposition need not be suspected.

I mean what incentive does the Vice Admiral have in poking into the Pakistani propaganda himself unless he just wants to tell the truth ?

If you take this argument then anything this Vice Admiral writes against India will be now ignored as per your explanation. But if he writes in favor again will be accepted. What a bunch of Hippocrates we have in our indian membership here. LOL.

So fair.

 

[Tacticool]

I don't think we should give examples of 1965 or other wars. Our fathers and grand fathers were really high morale Muslims. While we are just talkative rats with eyes on Bollywood actresses.

 

[kurup]

If you take this argument then anything this Vice Admiral writes against India will be now ignored as per your explanation. But if he writes in favor again will be accepted. What a bunch of Hippocrates we have in our indian membership here. LOL.

So fair.

Funny considering the fact that when Indian media write any negative news about India or positive news about pakistan, it will be seen as gospel truth by pakistanis.

While if the same media write some positive news about India or negative news about pakistan , then it is toilet media for pakistanis.

What a bunch of Hippocrates we have in our pakistani membership here. LOL.

So fair.

 

[S.Y.A]

Funny considering the fact that when Indian media write any negative news about India or positive news about pakistan, it will be seen as gospel truth by pakistanis.

While if the same media write some positive news about India or negative news about pakistan , then it is toilet media for pakistanis.

What a bunch of Hippocrates we have in our pakistani membership here. LOL.

So fair.

indian media is inside india and knows what goes in there, and will definitely have its facts straight ragarding india, but it can't be certain about anything in pakistan, and any reporting bi indian media regarding pakistan will be based on bias

 

[kurup]

indian media is inside india and knows what goes in there, and will definitely have its facts straight ragarding india, but it can't be certain about anything in pakistan, and any reporting bi indian media regarding pakistan will be based on bias

Good .

Now apply the same logic to the points raised by the Vice Admiral and you will get your facts regarding naval battles of 65 war .

 

[Slayer786]

Funny considering the fact that when Indian media write any negative news about India or positive news about pakistan, it will be seen as gospel truth by pakistanis.

While if the same media write some positive news about India or negative news about pakistan , then it is toilet media for pakistanis.

What a bunch of Hippocrates we have in our pakistani membership here. LOL.

So fair.

HAHAHA!!!! lagta hain bohot jalan horahi hain. I never wrote that I will only believe if an Indian wrote anything in favor of Pakistan, but will take it as bias if theat indian writer wrote against Pakistan. You indians did that.
For me really, whatever indians write is all pure BS. They are not worth even reading. So i tend to ignore all indian rants.

ofcourse, I do consider neutral sources as valuable insights.