Successful Babur-3 test gives Pakistan ticket to elite nuke triad club

[The Deterrent]

On an entirely unrelated matter. Navy got to keep eye on Extremist elements. We don't want submarine with nuke babur in it hostile takeover like that of Frigate take over 2 years ago. Navy is the weakest link in containing the extremist elements.

True. In that regard, the crew of those subs must be filtered through the reliability program SPD has for these purposes. Furthermore, since there wouldn't be any physical integration possible on the sub, I believe the codes would either come from the VLF facility or stored on-board and used by authorized personnel only (as done by USN till late 90s). Absolutely nothing can be done unless the weapon is armed using the correct procedure and codes.

 

[Bratva]

Yup, the person mentioned SPD.....which was the authority for the recent test.
What establishment does SPD represents.

Since NSFC comes under SPD and SPD comes under technically Joint chiefs of Staff. So Army has partial stake in it as of running Naval Strategic command

 

[The Deterrent]

Since NSFC comes under SPD and SPD comes under technically Joint chiefs of Staff. So Army has partial stake in it as of running Naval Strategic command

NCA is the highest authority in this matter and sits on top of the hierarchy, Joint Chief is a part of it.

 

[Bratva]

True. In that regard, the crew of those subs must be filtered through the reliability program SPD has for these purposes. Furthermore, since there wouldn't be any physical integration possible on the sub, I believe the codes would either come from the VLF facility or stored on-board and used by authorized personnel only (as done by USN till late 90s). Absolutely nothing can be done unless the weapon is armed using the correct procedure and codes.

I know it sound bitchy, but since we are discussing theoretical scenarios. Only one VLF facility that too at karachi is like inviting a burglar to house to rob you off easily. If another base in not constructed in Balochistan in 5 year time frame and india attacks, one of their first task would be to destroy the only VLF base of Pakistan. Whats the use of single VLF if it is going to get destroyed in first 24-48 hours and those theoretical nuke subs would be running headless making the crew more dangerous and fidgety. and could possibly launch nuke attack if they think they are not being able to communicate with high command because Pakistan has been nuked.

 

[The Deterrent]

I know it sound bitchy, but since we are discussing theoretical scenarios. Only one VLF facility that too at karachi is like inviting a burglar to house to rob you off easily. If another base in not constructed in Balochistan in 5 year time frame and india attacks, one of their first task would be to destroy the only VLF base of Pakistan. Whats the use of single VLF if it is going to get destroyed in first 24-48 hours and those theoretical nuke subs would be running headless making the crew more dangerous and fidgety. and could possibly launch nuke attack if they think they are not being able to communicate with high command because Pakistan has been nuked.

Haha of course.
Well you're absolutely right, the chain of command should be strong and reliable. I believe a second facility can be established in Balochistan, somewhere near Turbat or Ormara. HF/VHF/UHF communication is there for backup anyways, though the sub needs to surface or deploy a comms buoy, which might give away its location.
The second-strike capability is an ongoing thing at the moment. With the establishment of NSFC, VLF facility, S-26/S-30 contracts and SLCM tests, Pakistan is building it up at a good pace. An operationally credible capability could be attained around 2020-2022.

 

[Safriz]

Most probable firing mechanism of SLCM.

That tube is being used in the ground based launcher. It wasnt meant for sea

Oh we do a quite a bit of stuff thats not done anywhere else, we did so in the past and will continue to do so in the future.
No, it isn't that black and white. I'm not doing anything.


Well if you wanna call a submersible, which can travel a few kilometers and fire a single object once only, a submarine...then by all means, why not.

I have to disagree as such a submersible platform is too expensive to build and even then it needs a control boat on surface sending signals vis a cable.
The ISPR video release shows the launch from quite a distance and we see no boats on surface.

I know it sound bitchy, but since we are discussing theoretical scenarios. Only one VLF facility that too at karachi is like inviting a burglar to house to rob you off easily. If another base in not constructed in Balochistan in 5 year time frame and india attacks, one of their first task would be to destroy the only VLF base of Pakistan. Whats the use of single VLF if it is going to get destroyed in first 24-48 hours and those theoretical nuke subs would be running headless making the crew more dangerous and fidgety. and could possibly launch nuke attack if they think they are not being able to communicate with high command because Pakistan has been nuked.

You do realize that attack on nuclear facilities itself is an initiative for launching nuclear war?

 

[Thorough Pro]

Naval Strategic Command was setup a few years ago with some very specific objectives in mind, with a critical "Things to do" list, and required funding. There are a number of things that need to be done to establish a credible 2nd strike capability, and things are progressing quietly on many fronts. Some developments are critical ground work that is not disclosed in the public and some is openly advertised, like the recent launch.

Remember, Pakistan never puts all its eggs in one basket, recent launch was a major milestone achievement disclosed to public, but it is not the only achievement, some are kept under wraps. A lot of sons and daughters are sweating day and night on challenging projects, some are already very successful, others are pretty close. All things will eventually be disclosed but only when the time is right.

I mentioned in an earlier post, there are some great projects underway with very good results, those who know, will never speak, because they love their country, they are calm and confident and quietly smile at enemy's delusions.

Just be positive, pay your taxes and choose your leaders sensibly. The only thing that will have a negative impact on the great work being done by our talented scientists and engineers, is political un-stability and its negative impact on our stabilising economy. Ensure these two things keep running smoothly and there will be many great news in near future.

May ALLAH protect and guide us.

 

[The Deterrent]

I have to disagree as such a submersible platform is too expensive to build and even then it needs a control boat on surface sending signals vis a cable.
The ISPR video release shows the launch from quite a distance and we see no boats on surface.

You are free to disagree with anything.

 

[The Deterrent]

As per press release they mentioned mobile platform and we are quite sure that they are more credible than you (A person sitting behind an ID who knows a 15 year keyboard analyst talking about missiles).

Yeah, I never said that the platform was not mobile. Thank you for your credibility concerns, I was very moved by them.

 

[The Deterrent]

Good for you and update your knowledge that submerged patoons are not mobile.

Great, let me check the rulebook which says that.

 

[Tiger Awan]

Yup, the person mentioned SPD.....which was the authority for the recent test.
What establishment does SPD represents.

SPD handles all the strategic organisations of Pakistan. Previously they were all part of Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission and PAEC reported directly to PM (under no ministry). But after nuke test they changed it. National Command Authority (NCA) was established and SPD was made its secretariat. DG SPD is a Lt Gen and all strategic organisations of Pakistan (PAEC, NESCOM, KRL, SUPARCO, PNRA etc) report to SPD

 

[Bratva]

That tube is being used in the ground based launcher. It wasnt meant for sea


I have to disagree as such a submersible platform is too expensive to build and even then it needs a control boat on surface sending signals vis a cable.
The ISPR video release shows the launch from quite a distance and we see no boats on surface.


You do realize that attack on nuclear facilities itself is an initiative for launching nuclear war?

How come PNS hameed (VLF base) is a nuclear base ?

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Let's just say that those disclosures were not entirely accurate. Anyways, the system is that mature (post-boost phase) because it is essentially deploying the same technologies as land based Babur. Only the underwater launch, water clearance, booster ignition and capsule ejection are the new parameters needing verification.

@The Deterrent I believe it was you led us to this earlier, but it appears that the Babur-3 SLCM test was done much in the same pattern as the MBDA SCALP Naval (for submarines):

"During September 2010, a high depth ignition test of SCALP Naval’s booster was organised by MBDA. The underwater test, which set the booster in operation for several seconds, was carried out at a significant depth in a Norwegian fjord using an instrumented model of a SCALP Naval rear section secured in a submerged structure."

http://www.mbda-systems.com/press-r...f-scalp-naval-in-its-submarine-configuration/

"Using an underwater platform simulating the launch conditions prevailing on the future Barracuda nuclear-powered attack submarine, this firing permitted all the intended test objectives to be demonstrated: the validation of the launch phase with the subsequent change of environment from water to air as well as the missile’s flight."

http://www.mbda-systems.com/press-r...of-scalp-naval-frances-future-cruise-missile/​

I think it's very telling that the ISPR release did not specify that a submarine - much less Agosta 90B - was used to test-fire the Babur-3. I think the ambiguity had more to do with poor communications skills in our PR ranks than any desire to just confuse people, but the term "underwater mobile platform" was specifically referring to a bespoke test system.

I am just curious about why the range was capped to 450 km. Is it because the Babur-3 was designed for a standard length torpedo tube (in the Agosta 90B)? In that case, there's limited room for the capsule, booster, and missile. If coupled with weight considerations (so as to maintain submarine speed), then a smaller and/or lighter - but shorter-range - turbofan makes sense. But surely, these restrictions wouldn't be in place with the next-gen SSPs, which could benefit from longer torpedo tubes? Or could these new SSPs use VLS that necessitate a (apparently) smaller Babur-3?

 

[HRK]

"Using an underwater platform simulating the launch conditions prevailing on the future Barracuda nuclear-powered attack submarine, this firing permitted all the intended test objectives to be demonstrated: the validation of the launch phase with the subsequent change of environment from water to air as well as the missile’s flight."

http://www.mbda-systems.com/press-r...of-scalp-naval-frances-future-cruise-missile/
I think it's very telling that the ISPR release did not specify that a submarine

@ 0:13 but I find it difficult some thing similar for babar-3 .....

reason pushing tug was missing in our case ... so until unless the firing system/ mechanism was autonomous & submersible it is difficult to believe it was not a submarine for babar-3 test

 

[Safriz]

@ 0:13 but I find it difficult some thing similar for babar-3 .....
View attachment 368530

reason pushing tug was missing in our case ... so until unless the firing system/ mechanism was autonomous & submersible it is difficult to believe it was not a submarine for babar-3 test
View attachment 368529

Yes but in using a pontoons underwater,there are always surface vehicles visible nearby as pontoon needs to be controlled from surface.
There are no surface crafts / boats/Tug boats visible in Babur test.