Featured SSK Agosta 90B Class Attack Submarine Information Pool

[Enigma SIG]

There are different types of marine steels for different uses for surface or subsurface ships.

The technologies are not shared esp for steel used in subs or minesweepers. For eg, PN Munsif Class that was put in service in the 90s uses a low magnetic steel used in it's hull construction. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripartite-class_minehunter
IN which has been making ships and subs still can't produce their own minesweepers. They actually retired their last soviet era ships a few years ago.
I'm okay with us starting slow but have to keep on increasing our capability and can't go backwards. If Pakistan can produce low magnetic steel, it can be a supplier to a number of countries that have some semblance of ship building.
Same would of course help in lowering subs signature against MAD type of devices etc.

I think it is just a matter of funding research into high impact projects. You see a project like JF-17 and the amount of expertise that Pakistan has built around it and ponder as to why it is not taken as a blueprint for other projects as well.

 

[iLION12345_1]

When would that happen in next century. For GOD sake we ordered our Hangoor in 2015. And we haven't received even a single one.

The timing is normal for the class and size of the Subs. These subs are very large as compared to most conventional subs. Not to mention the Subs we are getting are not the same ones from 2015, they’ve likely been made better along the way as new versions of the Type 039 have been unveiled, with 041 being the latest. They are also not an exact copy of the 039 but a Pakistan specific version, which means even more design changes were needed for it. All of that adds up to a very normal timeline for the construction of such vessels, especially the fact that ships, after they are launched, still take a year or two to commission due to testing, weapons installation, training and so on. Two of our Type 054AP were already launched but won’t be commissioned for another year or so, and We are receiving 4 of these at once, it will make up for the time.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

I think it is just a matter of funding research into high impact projects. You see a project like JF-17 and the amount of expertise that Pakistan has built around it and ponder as to why it is not taken as a blueprint for other projects as well.

We learned something about raising a production line and maybe some integration work, but I don't think it went much further than that. CAC had done the bulk of the design and development work, not us.

In fact, we're trying to build actual design and development capacity through Project AZM, but even then, our lack of investment and skilled domestic manpower is bottlenecking the vision. It's been 4 years since we had announced Project AZM, and we're not seeing anything emerge from it.

I'm not being pessimistic, but we don't need to look at India or Turkey to see faults. In fact, our semi-secret nuclear weapons program was showing signs of growth within 1-2 years of it starting in the 1970s. We had a number of public and even private sector firms (e.g., DESCON) engage in R&D and construction of facilities (e.g., New Labs). It was very obvious, and the world us took seriously.

In the next few years, we need to see (or at least know of) things like wind-tunnel facilities, scaled technology demonstrators, subsystem design and development initiatives, and inputs.

 

[GriffinsRule]

I think it is just a matter of funding research into high impact projects. You see a project like JF-17 and the amount of expertise that Pakistan has built around it and ponder as to why it is not taken as a blueprint for other projects as well.

It's due to the hand holding from AVIC that we got so much with a meager investment. However, research and development is more costly and takes longer. But I agree we should not sit back on our laurels and keep innovating and taking advantage of the universities in China for research.
I like the realistic approach by the navy in terms of Milgem and Jinnah class ships. AZM started out very ambitious and will certainly be scaled back and rely on our partners to help fill in the tech gaps. It's to be expected and is the smart way forward to develop these new and expensive platforms in collusion with others.

 

[Enigma SIG]

We learned something about raising a production line and maybe some integration work, but I don't think it went much further than that. CAC had done the bulk of the design and development work, not us.

In fact, we're trying to build actual design and development capacity through Project AZM, but even then, our lack of investment and skilled domestic manpower is bottlenecking the vision. It's been 4 years since we had announced Project AZM, and we're not seeing anything emerge from it.

I'm not being pessimistic, but we don't need to look at India or Turkey to see faults. In fact, our semi-secret nuclear weapons program was showing signs of growth within 1-2 years of it starting in the 1970s. We had a number of public and even private sector firms (e.g., DESCON) engage in R&D and construction of facilities (e.g., New Labs). It was very obvious, and the world us took seriously.

In the next few years, we need to see (or at least know of) things like wind-tunnel facilities, scaled technology demonstrators, subsystem design and development initiatives, and inputs.

If you ask me we didn't need production line experience considering we have the Big 3 assembling tin cans for us since the last 50 odd years. Supply chain and logistics yes definitely that needs to be worked on.

Also big design bureaus need to be setup as everything is CAD/CAM nowadays and you need metallurgy experience for that.

Also passion: I'm not an engineer but have a long term vision of creating my own scale model hobby aircraft business in Pakistan, hopefully someday.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

It's due to the hand holding from AVIC that we got so much with a meager investment. However, research and development is more costly and takes longer. But I agree we should not sit back on our laurels and keep innovating and taking advantage of the universities in China for research.
I like the realistic approach by the navy in terms of Milgem and Jinnah class ships. AZM started out very ambitious and will certainly be scaled back and rely on our partners to help fill in the tech gaps. It's to be expected and is the smart way forward to develop these new and expensive platforms in collusion with others.

We should split AZM into two parts.

Part-1: Collaborate with another country on the twin-engine program (which is the current PAF ASR) with the aim of replacing the Mirages and F-16A/Bs through the 2030s. I think the TFX is the right horse (albeit a dark horse) because Turkey is more willing to share production and IP with a partner (as it needs the economies of scale). It's also a chance for us to ride shotgun on the development process and learn everything from design to supply chain management to nurturing a private sector support ecosystem.

Part-2: Concurrently with part-one, indigenously design a single-engine fighter from the ground-up with the aim of replacing the JF-17 from the mid-to-late 2040s (i.e., 20 years from now). We take the learnings (and possibly even some of the inputs of the TFX, e.g., the TR Motor engine) and apply it to our in-house project. In fact, if we set a realistic timeframe, we could try developing an optionally piloted vehicle (OPV) that can serve as MRCA and UCAV.

 

[GriffinsRule]

We should split AZM into two parts.

Part-1: Collaborate with another country on the twin-engine program (which is the current PAF ASR) with the aim of replacing the Mirages and F-16A/Bs through the 2030s. I think the TFX is the right horse (albeit a dark horse) because Turkey is more willing to share production and IP with a partner (as it needs the economies of scale). It's also a chance for us to ride shotgun on the development process and learn everything from design to supply chain management to nurturing a private sector support ecosystem.

Part-2: Concurrently with part-one, indigenously design a single-engine fighter from the ground-up with the aim of replacing the JF-17 from the mid-to-late 2040s (i.e., 20 years from now). We take the learnings (and possibly even some of the inputs of the TFX, e.g., the TR Motor engine) and apply it to our in-house project. In fact, if we set a realistic timeframe, we could try developing an optionally piloted vehicle (OPV) that can serve as MRCA and UCAV.

Totally agree. I think PAF probably already recognizes the first part but they are not looking at JF-17s replacement which is a folly. Can't have the mind set of operating thunders for the next fifty years. World will be much different place and not forgiving to this jet. Start the process now and in twenty years we could bear the fruit of forward planning. We should take a queue from Europe and US. That single engine platform would also serve as a basis for our stealthy loyal wingman type drone.

 

[Surya 1]

Excellent boomer indeed.

 

[Thorough Pro]

India is not in an advantageous position to attack and gain anything. Don't be impressed by their numbers, our current situation is not that weak that India will try anything.

No how about defending ourselves in case of India's attack because current size of submarines is not enough.

 

[Reichmarshal]

as the covid and the economic situation goes from bad to worse in India, it will try to divert the attention by doing some sort of adventure in Pakistan.

 

[TsAr]

as the covid and the economic situation goes from bad to worse in India, it will try to divert the attention by doing some sort of adventure in Pakistan.

that would be the worst thins Modi will do in his life....

 

[Reichmarshal]

that would be the worst thins Modi will do in his life....

He will do it non the less

 

[kursed]

We learned something about raising a production line and maybe some integration work, but I don't think it went much further than that. CAC had done the bulk of the design and development work, not us.

In fact, we're trying to build actual design and development capacity through Project AZM, but even then, our lack of investment and skilled domestic manpower is bottlenecking the vision. It's been 4 years since we had announced Project AZM, and we're not seeing anything emerge from it.

I'm not being pessimistic, but we don't need to look at India or Turkey to see faults. In fact, our semi-secret nuclear weapons program was showing signs of growth within 1-2 years of it starting in the 1970s. We had a number of public and even private sector firms (e.g., DESCON) engage in R&D and construction of facilities (e.g., New Labs). It was very obvious, and the world us took seriously.

In the next few years, we need to see (or at least know of) things like wind-tunnel facilities, scaled technology demonstrators, subsystem design and development initiatives, and inputs.

In all honesty, thanks to ‘Atoms for Peace’ program from the US - the kind of talent we had at hand to build the weapons program was once in a lifetime opportunity.

Pakistan, as of today, simply is decades behind in terms of research and hands on expertise of any aviation related fields. And these issues can’t be leapfrogged by just a declaration of intent to start a new fighter program.

It was very obvious, and the world us took seriouIn the next few years, we need to see (or at least know of) things like wind-tunnel facilities, scaled technology demonstrators, subsystem design and development initiatives, and inputs.

We are currently in the process of building our own wind tunnel, this alongside the new weapons testing facility, for which the Chinese have provided us tracking equipment for, does point to an active program for new generation of systems.


But it’s not something that will bear fruit overnight. It’s at least a multi decade effort.

 

[khanasifm]

SSK Agosta 90B Class

 

[[--Leo--]]

How many sub's are upgraded by Turkey till now?