Pakistan's Nuclear Submarine Development | News and Discussions

[kurup]

he wasnt kidding nor is anyone here......our top brass is in the conflict zones tending to an insurgency; not issuing ludicrous, unrealistic, hollow albeit troublesome statements like "surgical strikes" or "cold starts"

Anyway offtopic since you have replied :

In the past , they have only started 4 wars but not able to won a single one and still harboring the wet dream of capturing kashmir which is not going to happen .In the process still training and sending terrorist but with no success and you are the less aggressive country .


On topic : anybody care to answer post #527

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

Seems like most of you missed it or don't know what I am saying-----I am talking about nuc tipped small yield torpedoe---a little one---you don't need to hit the enemy sub with it---if it explodes 2---3 miles away from it---the concussion would crush the enemy sub.

You see explosions work different in water than above water---that is why depth charges---basically massive explosion underwater play havoc on subs---and when you have a mini nuc explosion underwater---it would crush subs at 2-3 miles away from the point of explosion.

 

[MastanKhan]

Anyway offtopic since you have replied :

In the past , they have only started 4 wars but not able to won a single one and still harboring the wet dream of capturing kashmir which is not going to happen .In the process still training and sending terrorist but with no success and you are the less aggressive country .


On topic : anybody care to answer post #527

Hi,

Senor---looking at your numbers and size---any war that we come out intact is a victory---for you a cease fire is a loss---. But if you feel good about it please do so.

 

[kṣamā]

Thats where most of you 'commoners' are wrong

A nuclear submarine is only 'mammoth' if it is built to carry ballistic missiles in large numbers.
But a submarine carrying nuclear tipped cruise missiles does not need to be too large,and wont need powerful reactor, it wont need a reactor at all, it may even run on conventional power.as nuclear submarine may no necessarily mean a nuclear propelled sub,it may well be a conventional sub modified for carrying nuclear tipped cruise missiles in large enough numbers to act as a deterrent and strategic asset.

Thanks "General", but my question was weather PN has tech to miniaturize a rector for nuclear propelled subs with nuclear tipped missiles, though they could have a diesel elec sub to do the same but with lesser efficiency . As far is this "Commoner" is concerned, he can show u a candle or two about nuclear tech.

 

[Safriz]

www.defence.pk/forums/pakistan-navy/41-pn-news-discussion-11.html#post3594376

Read the latest interview of Navy cheif posted by fatman17.
No decisions have been made as of yet,so this thread and the Qing class submarine thread are just speculation and fanboy threads.
Join the party and show us your candles on nuclear tech.

 

[v9s]

Corrected......

lol ...isn't it old news that Saudi Arabia helped finance the erieyes?

 

[v9s]

Thanks "General", but my question was weather PN has tech to miniaturize a rector for nuclear propelled subs.

Yes we do. It has been mentioned before that Pakistan started work on miniaturizing a reactor in the late 90s.

 

[Armstrong]

Then why are they quite on Karachi situation ? It is claiming more lives than in other insurgency hit areas.

I think practical solution should also be provided by these top brass. Urban areas are as important as rural and tribal ones.

Because the Karachi situation is a quagmire of militant wings of the political party, petty criminals who've grown into something not so petty & the TTP all vying for the lucrative business they call 'Bhataa Collection' or Ransom Money. The Rangers & the Police are more than capable of handling the situation but as it so happens, allegedly, everyone from the ruling party at the center to the ruling party in two of provinces alongside others are involved in it or so, unless I'm mistaken, the Supreme Court of Pakistan declared. Naturally neither the Rangers nor the Police are allowed to clean up the mess. If memory serves, the Army has in the past said that they'd send in their boys if the Government gives the order to do so & that was a year or so ago.

Neither the political nor the social environment in the country right now allows for any such unilateral step to be taken by the Army otherwise a Regiment or two may have been dispatched a year or two ago.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

Hi,

Seems like most of you missed it or don't know what I am saying-----I am talking about nuc tipped small yield torpedoe---a little one---you don't need to hit the enemy sub with it---if it explodes 2---3 miles away from it---the concussion would crush the enemy sub.

You see explosions work different in water than above water---that is why depth charges---basically massive explosion underwater play havoc on subs---and when you have a mini nuc explosion underwater---it would crush subs at 2-3 miles away from the point of explosion.

for 2 to 3 miles
the device would have a greater yield like 20-30 kt it woudnt be a small nuke

 

[The Deterrent]

Hi,

Seems like most of you missed it or don't know what I am saying-----I am talking about nuc tipped small yield torpedoe---a little one---you don't need to hit the enemy sub with it---if it explodes 2---3 miles away from it---the concussion would crush the enemy sub.

You see explosions work different in water than above water---that is why depth charges---basically massive explosion underwater play havoc on subs---and when you have a mini nuc explosion underwater---it would crush subs at 2-3 miles away from the point of explosion.

Like a Nasr-warhead inside a indigenous/modified long range torpedo (e.g. Blackshark)? That would certainly be deadly, but don't you think it would be a little unecessary? Given that the use of such a weapon in the start of a war could quickly escalate the situation beyond control.

 

[kurup]

Hi,

Senor---looking at your numbers and size---any war that we come out intact is a victory---for you a cease fire is a loss---. But if you feel good about it please do so.

No sir , you never came intact after 71.

How come ceasefire is a loss when we were not the aggressor . Moreover we never lost land .

 

[Jango]

Hi,

Seems like most of you missed it or don't know what I am saying-----I am talking about nuc tipped small yield torpedoe---a little one---you don't need to hit the enemy sub with it---if it explodes 2---3 miles away from it---the concussion would crush the enemy sub.

You see explosions work different in water than above water---that is why depth charges---basically massive explosion underwater play havoc on subs---and when you have a mini nuc explosion underwater---it would crush subs at 2-3 miles away from the point of explosion.

Wouldn't this serve to escalate and worsen the situation?

A nuke is only going to be used as a last resort, and so the consequences can hypothetically be forsaken and forgotten when you are fighting for your life.

But a nuke tipped warhead to destroy a sub? That would

1-Escalate the situation if other guy gets to know this

2-Radiate the water. When we are going to use a sub torpedo, it is mostly going to be near our shores rather than India's. And a nuke tipped warhead will release radiation, that will contaminate our immediate water supply perhaps, and the sea life in the vicinity.

 

[tony singh]

Remeber how Pakistan made a nuclear bomb. After the fall of Dhaka, Pakistan economy was in shyte.. But we still managed to made a N-bomb. and it's a 5-8 year plan. 200 Mil/year is not difficult to set aside for a nuke sub. I don't why indians act so dumb sometimes. It's not like we are going to develop a nuke sub over night. It's a long shot. So funding is a moderate issue!

It would be at least $1bn + project in the long run and that would increase depending on the number of nuclear vessels you would require, it would make more sense to lease a Chinese Nuclear submarine which would be quicker and more cost-effective.

It is reported that the Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV) project for India cost $2.9 billion.

I do not understand the need why Pakistan would need to spend such a amount on a nuke sub project apart from prestige factor as you already have more nukes to India.

 

[tony singh]

self delete

 

[Rajput_Pakistani]

No sir , you never came intact after 71.

How come ceasefire is a loss when we were not the aggressor . Moreover we never lost land .

Why don't u go to appropriate thread for this discussion?? And btw 1947, 1971 & 1984 you were the aggressor. Apart from naked aggression against Pakistan, India is the culprit against China, Sikkim, Hyderabad also.