Pakistan Ordering 8 Chinese Submarines

I think 212/214s were considered a while back then finance become a stumbling block, no the money is there I think PN wants to go for Chinese boats as there is a nuclear element to this deal. You would certainly know better then me, but feel the French and Germans may be reluctant to give Pakistan boats it can use for nukes (unsure if a nation needs assistance from the manufacturer to do this, think the Israelis managed with help on the Dolphins).

Chinese boats certainly make sense from this point of view. Deterrence patrols in the sub continental setting are certainly something new. I am not sure they would require the long endurance of UK/US/Russian SSNs, and certainly they would have to remain within the Indian Ocean or Arabian Sea if using cruise missiles. Here surely ambiguity is the game. Pakistan would possibly always try to keep a sub based in the fiendly waters of an ally like Oman. I’m not sure.

If finance was the stumbling block with the Germans Mountain, as you suggest, I dont think its difficult to see how the Chinese boats came into the picture and it wont be anything to do with nuclear jitters on the European builders part. For that the French have already provided Pakistan with boats capable of delivering a nuclear strike. Acquire a few dozen US Mk67’s and swap out the 150kg conventional rapid-expanding part with something altogether more ‘flashy’ and set four going with timers on the warhead, from the tubes of an Agosta90B, into the shallows in Mumbai harbour….another does the same in Chennai….the first cruises up the coast and posts a similar package into the yards at Cochin. Simplicity itself…with huge effect for relatively little outlay. This concept has been around a very, very long time…so anyone supplying a submarine to a nuclear weapons state is doing so in the knowledge that their platform could be so utilised.

Then we come back to the original premise of a cruise missile integration. Its not a terribly complex job of adding LACM capability to a submarine…its giving away nothing secret to say that fire control for the, now retired, UK S-class boats TLAM fit largely consisted of a newly embarked laptop with a line into the boats fire control system. There was a bit more to it of course….but not a shockingly large amount. The indigenous LACM in Pakistan is one of quite familiar dimension if memory serves….just under 21″ in diameter and about 20ft in length. NATO standard torp tube is about 2ft longer than that. The pieces are all there for nuclear LACM capability in the Agosta’s if one was so sought.

Deterrence is not just the ability to make a couple of big bangs by itself Mountain. Deterrence is the ability to sway the oppositions decision making in your favour by implicit threat of force that he can do nothing to counter. If he can find your subs ambiguity works against you…he has to kill your sub at the rush as its a possible WMD threat….whether it is carrying instant sunshine or not. You’re then back to needing covert deterrence patrol and a boat capable of running such a patrol….IF you want to mount a deterrence policy. You can of course have a nuclear strike platform without it being a deterrent…just make sure not to confuse the two!.

Do we even know any public domain details on what these submarines actually are…as in class, size, complement, displacements, etc, etc. Perhaps an idea to ascertain basic facts like that before we give them a deterrence role?. If you look at one of the last ‘proper’ SSBs that was knocking about…. a later mark Golf class….you’ve got a hull that, if memory serves, was just short of 100m long, and could sustain a crew of 80 for a 70 day patrol.

Now a Kilo is more like 70m with a complement of 50 and an endurance more like 45 days. I’ve yet to see anything credible in Chinese submarine design that suggests they could do vastly better than the Russians on a rough Kilo sized hull. So if were looking at the Chinese Kilo-inspired hull for this buy then we don’t have a hull naturally suited to long endurance high discretion deterrence patrols. If this is the survivable part of your nuclear triad you probably don’t want it too close to ASW threat systems either. If, at best, I’m keeping 3 chinese and 1 French boat out at a time I don’t think I want to have 25% of my force running lazy circles on AIP in the IO occasionally sticking up an HF mast to make sure I can still pickup the local equivalent of Radio 4.

Good news for the PN of course that new hulls are on the way. Given that they will be matched up against opfor SSNs though I’d have thought going for a more dedicated coastal force with, say, Type212’s would have been the better option even if it meant fewer boats?.

I think 212/214s were considered a while back then finance become a stumbling block, no the money is there I think PN wants to go for Chinese boats as there is a nuclear element to this deal. You would certainly know better then me, but feel the French and Germans may be reluctant to give Pakistan boats it can use for nukes (unsure if a nation needs assistance from the manufacturer to do this, think the Israelis managed with help on the Dolphins).

Chinese boats certainly make sense from this point of view. Deterrence patrols in the sub continental setting are certainly something new. I am not sure they would require the long endurance of UK/US/Russian SSNs, and certainly they would have to remain within the Indian Ocean or Arabian Sea if using cruise missiles. Here surely ambiguity is the game. Pakistan would possibly always try to keep a sub based in the fiendly waters of an ally like Oman. I’m not sure.

Do we even know any public domain details on what these submarines actually are…as in class, size, complement, displacements, etc, etc. Perhaps an idea to ascertain basic facts like that before we give them a deterrence role?. If you look at one of the last ‘proper’ SSBs that was knocking about…. a later mark Golf class….you’ve got a hull that, if memory serves, was just short of 100m long, and could sustain a crew of 80 for a 70 day patrol.

Now a Kilo is more like 70m with a complement of 50 and an endurance more like 45 days. I’ve yet to see anything credible in Chinese submarine design that suggests they could do vastly better than the Russians on a rough Kilo sized hull. So if were looking at the Chinese Kilo-inspired hull for this buy then we don’t have a hull naturally suited to long endurance high discretion deterrence patrols. If this is the survivable part of your nuclear triad you probably don’t want it too close to ASW threat systems either. If, at best, I’m keeping 3 chinese and 1 French boat out at a time I don’t think I want to have 25% of my force running lazy circles on AIP in the IO occasionally sticking up an HF mast to make sure I can still pickup the local equivalent of Radio 4.

Good news for the PN of course that new hulls are on the way. Given that they will be matched up against opfor SSNs though I’d have thought going for a more dedicated coastal force with, say, Type212’s would have been the better option even if it meant fewer boats?.

2x eight boats > 16

Some may be in training or being overhauled, at best you can only assume half that number available, but even if you go with the full 16 warheads, it is still a small number of relativley small nukes against a country with a big land mass and massive population. Double that would make the enemy think twice.

This is not enough to maintain a deterrence posture against India. They may just decide to take the damage of just 2 nuke cruise missiles.

2x eight boats > 16

Whilst it is fair to observe that the Pakistani economy has its problems exacerbated by the chaotic nature of their political system when it comes to defence procurement Pakistan has a reputation for pragmatism and careful spending.

They buy what they can afford, if they can’t afford it they save up or transfer budget from one arm of the military to help get the capability if it is for the greater benefit. A good example of that is when they recently purchased the surplus F-16 from Jordan with the Army transferring funds to the Airforce to enable the procurement to go through. You rarely see vanity projects with Pakistani defence procurement, whilst they do look to advance their indigenous defence industry they don’t over stretch gaining foreign help in areas of weakness but with an eye to tech transfer. They upgrade and overhaul equipment to keep it relevant and have become canny at getting spares for their fleet of aging French jets.

Pakistans navy knows it can’t go toe to toe with the Indian navy so instead looks to invest in force multipliers, Submarines are just that. Even with India’s significant upgrades in the area of ASW Pakistans submarines are still a potent threat. Going on other procurements of Chinese equipment like the ZDK-03 they will be very clear what they expect out of any Chinese submarine procured and no doubt look towards a number of changes and upgrades.

Interesting post Fedaykin.

The ZDK-03s are actually based in Karachi and are rumoured to be supporting the PN so may be able to provide some targeting information to any subs.

If you have 2 nuke cruise missiles per boat, plus 4 AShM and several torps, there is no reason why you couldn’t Multi-role those boats.

This is not enough to maintain a deterrence posture against India. They may just decide to take the damage of just 2 nuke cruise missiles.

You don’t think the oldest ships will retire once the newest are or have been delivered? It will be a few years before those 8 new ones are ready. Those Agota 70s are from the 1979/1980. so about 35 years old today. If China delivers 2 boats per year as per next year or the year after, then you are looking at 40+ years. While e.g. Singapore’s Archer class (ex–Swedisch Sjoormen from 1970) are older, I would personally not like to go to war in subs that old. 13 is too optimistic.

PN just recently upgraded these 2 subs with the SUBTICS command system last year and can fire sub launched Harpoons. Certainly not much older then the Kilos the IN are upgrading. The plan is to use these to train crews, not to go to war in.

Plan is to start building 4 in Pakistan in addition to Chinese manufactureof 4, so this should speed up things.

Its unlikely China will ever get back its loan for sub purchase given a bankrupt Pakistan and its failed economy.

still though, its additional employment for chinese workers, so not a terrible loss.

Whilst it is fair to observe that the Pakistani economy has its problems exacerbated by the chaotic nature of their political system when it comes to defence procurement Pakistan has a reputation for pragmatism and careful spending.

They buy what they can afford, if they can’t afford it they save up or transfer budget from one arm of the military to help get the capability if it is for the greater benefit. A good example of that is when they recently purchased the surplus F-16 from Jordan with the Army transferring funds to the Airforce to enable the procurement to go through. You rarely see vanity projects with Pakistani defence procurement, whilst they do look to advance their indigenous defence industry they don’t over stretch gaining foreign help in areas of weakness but with an eye to tech transfer. They upgrade and overhaul equipment to keep it relevant and have become canny at getting spares for their fleet of aging French jets.

Pakistans navy knows it can’t go toe to toe with the Indian navy so instead looks to invest in force multipliers, Submarines are just that. Even with India’s significant upgrades in the area of ASW Pakistans submarines are still a potent threat. Going on other procurements of Chinese equipment like the ZDK-03 they will be very clear what they expect out of any Chinese submarine procured and no doubt look towards a number of changes and upgrades.

Pakistan also wants to deploy a sea-based leg of its nuclear deterrent. If they assign dedicated boats for this role, that would reduce the number available for conventional taskings considerably.

If you have 2 nuke cruise missiles per boat, plus 4 AShM and several torps, there is no reason why you couldn’t Multi-role those boats.

Pakistan doesn’t have a reputation of backing out of contracts and China doesn’t have a reputation of overcharging their clients.

Its unlikely China will ever get back its loan for sub purchase given a bankrupt Pakistan and its failed economy.

still though, its additional employment for chinese workers, so not a terrible loss.

These new subs would not be for this purpose only.

Given the proximity of the two countries even a handful of surviving nukes will cause tens of millions of civilian deaths on both sides. I’m not sure if a full triad is needed in this Indo-Pak context. India has other concerns i.e China/Pakistan combined threat so they are going down that line.

At best it would be on the lines of the alleged Israeli nuclear tipped SLCMs.

Given the length of the coast line according to google earth, 13 would be an overkill in my opinion. Indian shipping towards straits of Hormuz can be easily blocked with a land based battery of ASMs etc.

Pakistan also wants to deploy a sea-based leg of its nuclear deterrent. If they assign dedicated boats for this role, that would reduce the number available for conventional taskings considerably.

You don’t think the oldest ships will retire once the newest are or have been delivered? It will be a few years before those 8 new ones are ready. Those Agota 70s are from the 1979/1980. so about 35 years old today. If China delivers 2 boats per year as per next year or the year after, then you are looking at 40+ years. While e.g. Singapore’s Archer class (ex–Swedisch Sjoormen from 1970) are older, I would personally not like to go to war in subs that old. 13 is too optimistic.

Given the length of the coast line according to google earth, 13 would be an overkill in my opinion. Indian shipping towards straits of Hormuz can be easily blocked with a land based battery of ASMs etc.

This will enable a fleet of 11 AIP equipped submarines for active duty, PN is modernising the 2 old Agosta 70s with modern systems to enable them to provide realistic training. So a fleet of 13 subs in total. Should mean PN can have 4 boats in the water constantly. That is very very good for a Navy of Pakistan’s size.

You don’t think the oldest ships will retire once the newest are or have been delivered? It will be a few years before those 8 new ones are ready. Those Agota 70s are from the 1979/1980. so about 35 years old today. If China delivers 2 boats per year as per next year or the year after, then you are looking at 40+ years. While e.g. Singapore’s Archer class (ex–Swedisch Sjoormen from 1970) are older, I would personally not like to go to war in subs that old. 13 is too optimistic.

This will enable a fleet of 11 AIP equipped submarines for active duty, PN is modernising the 2 old Agosta 70s with modern systems to enable them to provide realistic training. So a fleet of 13 subs in total. Should mean PN can have 4 boats in the water constantly. That is very very good for a Navy of Pakistan’s size.

More News

http://www.janes.com/article/50368/pakistan-in-talks-with-china-for-eight-submarines

The Pakistani government has approved the purchase of eight new submarines from China, senior Pakistan Navy officers told the National Assembly’s defence committee on 31 March.

In 2011 the government revealed that the navy had begun discussions with China to buy six submarines, with the number of platforms subsequently raised to eight. Those discussions began after the Pakistan Navy stepped back from pursuing the purchase of three submarines from Germany on cost grounds.

The navy officials who spoke on 31 March neither revealed the type of boats to be ordered nor a likely price.

A Pakistani Foreign Ministry official told IHS Jane’s that while he did not know which platform would be supplied to Pakistan, “in the recent past, there have been reports of discussions for the Type 041 submarines”.

The Type 041 ‘Yuan’ class is described by IHS Jane’s Fighting Ships as a diesel electric attack submarine (SSK), potentially with Stirling air independent propulsion, that is armed with YJ-2 (YJ-82) anti-ship missiles and a combination of Yu-4 (SAET-50) passive homing and Yu-3 (SET-65E) active/passive homing torpedoes.

Since 2004 12 Type 041 submarines are believed to have been launched, while the US Department of Defense estimated in its May 2013 annual report to Congress on China’s military that production could reach 20 ships. An export version, marketed as the S20 and unveiled in February 2013, displaces about 2,300 tonnes.

The PN is known to operate five French submarines: three Agosta 90B (Khalid-class) submarines purchased in the 1990s and two ageing Agosta 70 (Hashmat-class) boats dating from the late 1970s.

Lieutenant General Talat Masood (retd), who is now a commentator on defence affairs, told IHS Jane’s it was “difficult to imagine a price of less than USD500 million per submarine, if not more”. By comparison IHS Jane’s DS Forecast notes that the Indian Navy is paying USD763 million per boat for six DCNS Scorpene SSKs.

Masood said that in view of the close defence collaboration that exists between China and Pakistan, Beijing was likely to extend a long-term loan, possibly at a low interest rate, to cover the cost of the Type 041s.

Want to read more? For analysis on this article and access to all our insight content, please enquire about our subscription options ihs.com/contact

Well in any case, if we are talking new builds the Chinese side of the acquisition will certainly provide PN with a modern and valuable capability. By all accounts China has become highly adept at designing and building SSKs.

Ok — that’s another way to maintain the production base. Not quite as convenient from the PLAN POV. 😉

As for France, someone should tell Pakistan than MN doesn’t operate any non-nuclear boats.

4 of the 8 will be manufactured in Pakistan, so should not hurt PLAN plans too much.

Yes, unsure what used subs PN were after, any, French option is off the cards due to tech transfer issues and India