The significance of Arihant

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
You did not answer the question. We bought it for SAM role and it will not be guarding indian cities.

What nonsense. So what if it's been bought for the SAM role? If an MRBM is headed for the SAM, is the operator is going to refuse to engage it because of its bureaucratic nomenclature?

To the West and Russia, the S-400 doesn't qualify to be a BMD because the threats they face are ICBMs. To us, the S-400 gives us a full BMD solution since the main threats we face are missiles that fall within the envelope of the SAM.

And the S-400 creates an area effect. 2 regiments can easily protect the whole of Delhi. The Russians use 5 regiments to protect Moscow.

Oversupply of what? Our billion-dollar warships are going to sea without AWS helicopters or towed array sonars.

Are you making excuses now? We have an oversupply of ASW helicopters already. This is Paksitan we are talking about, not China.

And do remember that any Pakistani attempt at putting nukes at sea is going to be based on the Type 039, not their current batch of western subs. So you are comparing the current IN to a future hypothetical PN.

The range comes in to play when you are hunting. For SSB role it is less of a factor.

Doesn't make sense. Range is range. Fuel consumption is the same for a particular depth and speed regardless of the role you want to perform.

For hunting, you stay still. For SSB, you keep moving. So it's obvious which role will need more fuel.

Surprised to see Lada has much less range. Then again russian AIP and a sub per design. Then again Type 39B is 1000 ton bigger.

1000 ton bigger also means more fuel requirements and more fuel consumption.

Only SMX Ocean can do what you want this fictional Pakistani SSB to do. But even the SMX Ocean cannot be a sufficiently good SSB and will suffer the same problems. Hence, you need a much bigger sub, by which point you need a reactor to power it.

Any nukes at sea will be propaganda at best, or an anti-shipping weapon at worst. The Pakistanis do not pose a real threat to India from sea.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
giphy.gif


What??? PAC-3 has more kills against ballistic missiles than any other BMD system. When's the last time a Russian SAM even shot down the right aircraft operationally, let alone a ballistic missile?

The PAC-3 was considered to be inferior to the S-300PMU-2 when we compared the two back in the early 2000s, never mind now, along with the Arrow-2. The PAC-3 matches up to the 9M96 but couldn't do much against the 48N6, and definitely not against the 40N6.

An old snippet from 2005:
India is not impressed with the PAC-3 missile unit offered with the two-tier US anti-missile defence system, on the grounds that it is slow for the very low reaction period in the sub-continent, and therefore, the Pentagon will demonstrate more advanced technologies when defence minister Pranab Mukherjee visits the country.

So it's not just the missile itself, but the entire package. Slower deployment, slower reaction speed, lower range, higher cost etc.

Different story that the Americans are warmongers while the Russians are peaceful folks. :p And we can only rely on tests for comparison. Perhaps the S-300/400 would have done even better than the PAC-3 in the same situation.
 

Vicky

Rajaraja Chola
Dec 1, 2017
371
414
Canada
But it does. Survivability is the whole logic of second strike capability. To survive they need range and unlimited endurance. How will they hide from p8i and it's magnetic anamoly detector. There endurance will greatly decrease with heavy ballistic missiles . Plus they will have to master the tech of firing ballistic missiles from under water.

.

Can you tell me how the P8I with its MAD will magically find a sub just by flying through a section of the ocean. For it needs to successfully operate it needs other surveillance assets to point out the information where the sub might be in a general area in a point of time. Do we have other assets? Cyber, Humint, Sosus kinda etc are required to create a reliable surveillance scenario capable of interception during wartime. I highly doubt India has such assets nor our politicos are interested in having such capabilities which they don't understand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ashwin

Vicky

Rajaraja Chola
Dec 1, 2017
371
414
Canada
S-400 SA-20 Triumf - Russia / Soviet Nuclear Forces
And the anti-missile capability of the system has been increased to the limits established by the ABM Treaty demarcation agreements -- it can intercept targets with velocities of up to 4.8 km/sec, corresponding to a ballistic missile range of 3,500 km.

a gas-dynamic control system enables the 9M96 missile to maneuver at altitudes of up to 35 km at forces of over 20g, which permits engagment of non- strategic ballistic missiles.

Which aircraft flies at 35Km?



I already told you, we have an oversupply because we have to deal with China. This is an in-your-face fact.



You think we do not have underwater sensors? That's pretty much among the cheapest sensors available for submarine hunting.



SSK Kilo Class (Type 636) - Naval Technology
Range is 7,500 miles when snorkelling at 7kt and 400 miles when submerged at 3kt.

Lada Class Patrol Submarine | Military-Today.com
The Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) system increases the Lada class submerged endurance to 45 days. The submerged cruising range is 500 nautical miles (900 km) at 3 knots.

Why else do you think the Americans don't give two hoots about SSKs?

An AIP can keep you underwater, that doesn't mean you are carrying enough fuel to go everywhere you want. Most of the times you are not even moving.

With Indian fishing still involved in bottom trawling if we had Sosus net I bet we would be seeing pictures of Sosus net and sensors pretty much every week. I like your optimism, but it doesn't drive our security establishment. We just bought diver detections net for our naval harbour in the last 2 years or so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ashwin

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
With Indian fishing still involved in bottom trawling if we had Sosus net I bet we would be seeing pictures of Sosus net and sensors pretty much every week. I like your optimism, but it doesn't drive our security establishment.

You are being optimistic if you think the forces release pictures.

Even considering we don't have underwater hydrophones, we still have an oversupply of sensors to deal with the very tiny number of submarines that the Pakistanis can actually deploy.

We just bought diver detections net for our naval harbour in the last 2 years or so.

The diver detection sonars were bought to prevent terrorist attacks, not for conventional warfare.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
Can you tell me how the P8I with its MAD will magically find a sub just by flying through a section of the ocean. For it needs to successfully operate it needs other surveillance assets to point out the information where the sub might be in a general area in a point of time. Do we have other assets? Cyber, Humint, Sosus kinda etc are required to create a reliable surveillance scenario capable of interception during wartime. I highly doubt India has such assets nor our politicos are interested in having such capabilities which they don't understand.

Yes, we have everything we need. Right from satellites and HUMINT trailing submarines from their harbour to all the underwater sensors necessary to detect a sub using subs, ships and aircraft.

In fact we are among the few countries in the world that have all the technologies necessary for this job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vstol Jockey

Vicky

Rajaraja Chola
Dec 1, 2017
371
414
Canada
You are being optimistic if you think the forces release pictures.

Even considering we don't have underwater hydrophones, we still have an oversupply of sensors to deal with the very tiny number of submarines that the Pakistanis can actually deploy.



The diver detection sonars were bought to prevent terrorist attacks, not for conventional warfare.

Forces don't need to release pictures. Fishermen's can if there are sensors on ground floor caught in their net.

Moreover as you had said in previous posts, our mission is to challenge China. I really don't think we have made the kind of investment required to track Chinese sub in North Indian ocean wrt to Cyber and Humint.
Every country has her surprises. I believe Pakistan too has hers. We need unbridled surveillance.
Yes, we have everything we need. Right from satellites and HUMINT trailing submarines from their harbour to all the underwater sensors necessary to detect a sub using subs, ships and aircraft.

In fact we are among the few countries in the world that have all the technologies necessary for this job.

Sometimes you are sounding like Asif Gafoor. No offense. Making things believe we have is also an art of war. People who have some real inside knowledge in our establishment won't so confidently claim like this.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
Forces don't need to release pictures. Fishermen's can if there are sensors on ground floor caught in their net.

Lol. It's easier to win a lottery than catch such sensors in a net.

Moreover as you had said in previous posts, our mission is to challenge China. I really don't think we have made the kind of investment required to track Chinese sub in North Indian ocean wrt to Cyber and Humint.
Every country has her surprises. I believe Pakistan too has hers. We need unbridled surveillance.

Forget it, you don't really know anything about the advances we have made in anti-submarine technology.

Sometimes you are sounding like Asif Gafoor. No offense. Making things believe we have is also an art of war. People who have some real inside knowledge in our establishment won't so confidently claim like this.

That's because you have no clue what you're talking about. ASW was a massive priority field after the incident with PNS Ghazi in the 1971 war. By the time it was the 80s, we had already started developing and fielding our own sensors. Sonars and other underwater tech saw massive investment from the navy since then. Even our nuclear submarine program dates back to the 70s.

Stop using your ignorance as a crutch. Indigenisation in our underwater tech happened long before you were even born.

Here's an example.
INS Kattabomman - Wikipedia

What you are hoping we have, we have deployed and have been using it for years now.
 

Vicky

Rajaraja Chola
Dec 1, 2017
371
414
Canada
Lol. It's easier to win a lottery than catch such sensors in a net.



Forget it, you don't really know anything about the advances we have made in anti-submarine technology.



That's because you have no clue what you're talking about. ASW was a massive priority field after the incident with PNS Ghazi in the 1971 war. By the time it was the 80s, we had already started developing and fielding our own sensors. Sonars and other underwater tech saw massive investment from the navy since then. Even our nuclear submarine program dates back to the 70s.

Stop using your ignorance as a crutch. Indigenisation in our underwater tech happened long before you were even born.

Here's an example.
INS Kattabomman - Wikipedia

What you are hoping we have, we have deployed and have been using it for years now.

Happens once in a while if there are active systems deployed.

Fishermen Accidentally Catch a Secret Navy Device Resting on the Sea Bed

INS Kattabomman has nothing to do with ASW capability. It's an submarine transmission station. How is it even related to ASW field or investment in surveillance we are talking about.
As so far nothing you had claimed has happened except for Towed Array Sonars in our ships and Subs. There has been no articles mentioning our investments in these fields since the 80's. We even dont have a naval version of Dhruv with indigenous Sonars.

People talk about space ships since the 1900, doesn't mean the actual work is going on since then. We talked bout nuclear sub programme from 70's. Actual work started after 93.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
Happens once in a while if there are active systems deployed.

There are more Lotto winners than that.

INS Kattabomman has nothing to do with ASW capability. It's an submarine transmission station. How is it even related to ASW field or investment in surveillance we are talking about.

Look at the date mentioned. Check how far back India started on ASW. And yes, it is part of our ASW set up.

As so far nothing you had claimed has happened except for Towed Array Sonars in our ships and Subs. There has been no articles mentioning our investments in these fields since the 80's. We even dont have a naval version of Dhruv with indigenous Sonars.

Now you just proved you have no clue about our ASW capabilities.

Cheerio.
 

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
5,345
8,827
Bangalore
What nonsense. So what if it's been bought for the SAM role? If an MRBM is headed for the SAM, is the operator is going to refuse to engage it because of its bureaucratic nomenclature?
I said SAM role, meaning it will not be deployed to secure Indian cities for that we have a separate BMD system. Indian military leadership has specifically mentioned on multiple occasions that S400 will be used to make up for the reduced number of fighter squadrons. Which all points to building an A2/AD network along the 3000 km border along with MRSAM and Akash.

We have an oversupply of ASW helicopters already.
Explain

Doesn't make sense. Range is range. Fuel consumption is the same for a particular depth and speed regardless of the role you want to perform.

For hunting, you stay still. For SSB, you keep moving. So it's obvious which role will need more fuel.
Ok here is something useful to discuss. One of us is totally wrong here.

Let me explain my understanding. SSN/SSK (attack subs generally) are used for sea denial, precision land attack, hunting particular surface/sub-surface targets, ISR mission, special ops etc.
SSBNs are used to safely keep nuclear-mated ballistic missiles from enemy eyes as long as its endurance allows it. Generally, it leaves the port to a predefined location (which offers natural geography like undersea ridge) to hide. It periodically checks communications for orders to fire the missile.

So in terms of range, attack subs are constantly on the move while hiding does not consume more fuel. So what am I missing?

Truth. Although rail based systems are also rather hard to locate. However... Russia actually practices deterrence-at-port, forgoing sea patrols on occasion.

https%3A%2F%2Fapi.thedrive.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F03%2Fpier-missile-top.jpg%3Fquality%3D85


Pakistan could theoretically do the same, its just not quite the same when their principle adversary is right next door. My point is that there are options that don't require large at sea patrols or deterrents. Rail garrisons, underground bunkers, large caliber guns, at-port delivery, diffused basing. Lots of options that don't require expensive SSBs or SSBNs.
Pakistan has already clarified its intentions. in this regard.

On Monday, Pakistan announced that it had successfully carried out the first-ever test of its nuclear-capable Babur-3 submarine-launched cruise missile (SLCM) from a submerged platform. The test took place at an unspecified location in the Indian Ocean off the Pakistani coast. Maj. Gen. Asif Ghafoor of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Public Relations released limited footage of the test on Twitter that shows the missile’s ejection, launch, and strike on a target with reasonable accuracy. The Babur-3 SLCM is officially rated for a range of 450 kilometers.

Pakistan’s Babur-3 SLCM is ultimately designed for use with its Agosta 90B diesel-electric submarines, which have reportedly been modified to enable SLCM launches, but remain untested in this regard. Per the Pakistani military’s statement regarding the test, the Babur-3 “is a sea-based variant of Ground Launched Cruise Missile (GLCM) Babur-2, which was successfully tested earlier in December, last year.”

Critically, the Babur-3 is capable of nuclear payload delivery. Once fully developed and tested on-board a submarine, Pakistan would possess – in theory, at least – a sea-based second strike capability. Pakistan has been working toward this capability for years; in 2012, it set up a Naval Strategic Force Command. Pakistan’s statement notes this with little ambiguity: “Babur-3 SLCM in land-attack mode, is capable of delivering various types of payloads and will provide Pakistan with a Credible Second Strike Capability, augmenting deterrence.” Specifically, the statement noted that the Babur-3 test was a “step towards reinforcing [Pakistan’s] policy of credible minimum deterrence.”

Pakistan Tests New Sub-Launched Nuclear-Capable Cruise Missile. What Now?

On rail-based system, Pakistan rail network is not widely distributed. Is this enough to hide?

pakistan-railways-past-present-future-cpec-11-638.jpg
 

safriz

Well-Known member
Jan 1, 2018
1,858
670
UK, Pakistan
giphy.gif


What??? PAC-3 has more kills against ballistic missiles than any other BMD system. When's the last time a Russian SAM even shot down the right aircraft operationally, let alone a ballistic missile?



Truth. Although rail based systems are also rather hard to locate. However... Russia actually practices deterrence-at-port, forgoing sea patrols on occasion.

https%3A%2F%2Fapi.thedrive.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F03%2Fpier-missile-top.jpg%3Fquality%3D85


Pakistan could theoretically do the same, its just not quite the same when their principle adversary is right next door. My point is that there are options that don't require large at sea patrols or deterrents. Rail garrisons, underground bunkers, large caliber guns, at-port delivery, diffused basing. Lots of options that don't require expensive SSBs or SSBNs.
I guess only typhoon class can launch a Ballistic missile while docked. No other submarine in the world can do this.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
I said SAM role, meaning it will not be deployed to secure Indian cities for that we have a separate BMD system. Indian military leadership has specifically mentioned on multiple occasions that S400 will be used to make up for the reduced number of fighter squadrons. Which all points to building an A2/AD network along the 3000 km border along with MRSAM and Akash.

How are you able to speculate these things?

Have you considered what will happen if this happens?
Indian Air Force wants to buy second lot of S-400 missile systems from Russia

The S-400 is an area defence system. The 40N6 gives it tremendous range even when it comes to BMD.


Count the number of helicopters we have, and count the number of subs they have. There's an oversupply.

And I'm not even considering 10 years down the line, when they will actually have the subs necessary for nuke strikes, in comparison to what we will have by then.

Ok here is something useful to discuss. One of us is totally wrong here.

Let me explain my understanding. SSN/SSK (attack subs generally) are used for sea denial, precision land attack, hunting particular surface/sub-surface targets, ISR mission, special ops etc.
SSBNs are used to safely keep nuclear-mated ballistic missiles from enemy eyes as long as its endurance allows it. Generally, it leaves the port to a predefined location (which offers natural geography like undersea ridge) to hide. It periodically checks communications for orders to fire the missile.

So in terms of range, attack subs are constantly on the move while hiding does not consume more fuel. So what am I missing?

SSKs operate in shallow waters, so they are able to rest on the sea bed. SSBNs operate in the deep sea, so there's nowhere for them to hide behind, hence are on the move. All submarines can hover as well, so you do have some possibilities in certain circumstances.

SSKs either stay still or move at creeping speeds at whatever depth necessary and wait for someone to show up. That's why AIP is a considerable advantage. Since there's no need to move all the time, it consumes very less fuel and can stay on station for many days.

As for SSBs, these subs do not have the necessary submerged range to operate properly in the deep sea, so they have to stay near the shallows, and hiding becomes an option. But if they don't keep moving they will inadvertently come across the enemy, so maintaining movement is the best option. But at the same time, it's only an SSB, its underwater range is absolutely inadequate for this role, hence completely unrealistic. An SSB is the complete opposite of an SSBN.

An SSBN is most vulnerable when it's not moving or is in the shallows, that's why our nuke submarine base opens up to deep waters very quickly, less than 2Km. An SSB will have to deal with the same vulnerability. And SSBNs use the various layers of ocean water with different temperatures to hide, where they can choose to hover or move, depending on the circumstances.

SMX Ocean is the only SSK which provides sufficient access to the deep sea while submerged, but even this sub is too small to carry ballistic missiles.
 

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
5,345
8,827
Bangalore
How are you able to speculate these things?

Have you considered what will happen if this happens?
Indian Air Force wants to buy second lot of S-400 missile systems from Russia
Yeah, i am the one speculating !.

From your link:
“Let us get the first one in place and, yes, we may need to get a second one, given the length of our borders,” a senior Indian Air Force officer said after Air Chief Marshal Birendra Singh Dhanoa’s annual press conference here.

At the press conference, Dhanoa described the acquisition of both the Rafale fighter jet from France and the S-400 missile defence system from Russia as “game changers” and as a “booster dose” to shore up fast depleting numbers of squadrons and capabilities.

Count the number of helicopters we have, and count the number of subs they have.
What are you talking about? ASW helicopters should be the same number of submarines?:oops: I cannot begin to reason with any arguments like these.

SSKs operate in shallow waters, so they are able to rest on the sea bed. SSBNs operate in the deep sea, so there's nowhere for them to hide behind, hence are on the move. All submarines can hover as well, so you do have some possibilities in certain circumstances.

SSKs either stay still or move at creeping speeds at whatever depth necessary and wait for someone to show up. That's why AIP is a considerable advantage. Since there's no need to move all the time, it consumes very less fuel and can stay on station for many days.

As for SSBs, these subs do not have the necessary submerged range to operate properly in the deep sea, so they have to stay near the shallows, and hiding becomes an option. But if they don't keep moving they will inadvertently come across the enemy, so maintaining movement is the best option. But at the same time, it's only an SSB, its underwater range is absolutely inadequate for this role, hence completely unrealistic. An SSB is the complete opposite of an SSBN.

An SSBN is most vulnerable when it's not moving or is in the shallows, that's why our nuke submarine base opens up to deep waters very quickly, less than 2Km. An SSB will have to deal with the same vulnerability. And SSBNs use the various layers of ocean water with different temperatures to hide, where they can choose to hover or move, depending on the circumstances.
This is not at all what we are talking about. SSB is obviously inadequate for the role. I am specifically asking about this.
For hunting, you stay still. For SSB, you keep moving. So it's obvious which role will need more fuel.
For hunting why are you saying 'you stay still' compared to SSBN which should keep moving?
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
Yeah, i am the one speculating !.

From your link:

What's wrong with what's in the link. You had issues with coverage of the SAM, Dhanoa is talking about doubling orders.

What are you talking about? ASW helicopters should be the same number of submarines?:oops: I cannot begin to reason with any arguments like these.

Uh, yes, you buy assets based on what your enemy has.

This is not at all what we are talking about. SSB is obviously inadequate for the role. I am specifically asking about this.

For hunting why are you saying 'you stay still' compared to SSBN which should keep moving?

Because if you move, you are easy to detect. So the hunter stays still and lets the prey come to it. That's why SSKs are normally positioned around choke points.

SSBN operates in deep waters, so it moves.

What's so confusing about this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: vstol Jockey

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India

PN's main goal is to keep their sea lines of communication open during war. So that region is of main interest to them. That's where they will expect fuel, weapons and ammo to come in to Pakistan, from the Gulf countries.

But the ridge is too deep for sub operations. So there's not much PN can do there. They will be forced to stick to their coast, where they can at least manage air superiority if necessary.
 

vstol Jockey

Professional
Dec 1, 2017
6,206
12,120
New Delhi
What's wrong with what's in the link. You had issues with coverage of the SAM, Dhanoa is talking about doubling orders.



Uh, yes, you buy assets based on what your enemy has.



Because if you move, you are easy to detect. So the hunter stays still and lets the prey come to it. That's why SSKs are normally positioned around choke points.

SSBN operates in deep waters, so it moves.

What's so confusing about this?
How do you detect a snake hiding in the grass? stomp the ground around. The snake will move and get caught. Remember PNS Ghazi?
 

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
5,345
8,827
Bangalore
What's wrong with what's in the link. You had issues with coverage of the SAM, Dhanoa is talking about doubling orders.
Where did i question the range? You are to yet prove that we bought S400 to cover our cities. but your link is proving otherwise (How it is to make up the shortage of fighters)

Uh, yes, you buy assets based on what your enemy has.
Yes, And IN gave the requirement to be around ~60 MRH currently (Last decade tender) We barely have half of it. It has to do with so many variables like the area to cover, availability etc. Not one to one relationship with subs.

Count the number of helicopters we have, and count the number of subs they have.

According to you, if they have 5 subs then we should have 5 helicopters!

Because if you move, you are easy to detect. So the hunter stays still and lets the prey come to it. That's why SSKs are normally positioned around choke points.

SSBN operates in deep waters, so it moves.

What's so confusing about this?
You describing only one mission of an attack submarine, Sea denial. Not all the other mission of hunting other surfaces/sub surface elements to ISR.

If SSBN is moving all the time isn't exposing itself? Also if its SSB in shallow waters then the same logic applies. It doesn't have to move.