Future Infantry Weapons Requirement - Pakistan Army

@Joe Shearer

Need to your opinion on something. How would you compare the Carl Gustav M4 RCL against the latest RPGs? Do you think that both systems have a place with the infantry or do you think that one can be replaced with the other? Now I know that RCL has a lower muzzle velocity, is fielded by a crew of two and maybe its armour penetration isn't as good as that of the RPGs but it has a better and wider range of ammunition, can be coupled with optics, laser range finders and thermal weapons sights. Its airburst ammunition is clearly better for taking care of enemy that is entrenched or taking cover. Correct me if I'm wrong. Would you like to see both with the infantry or would you choose one over the other. If so, why?

You probably know the RCL very well but here are a few pictures of the latest and lighter variant and a video showing the time fuse of the airburst round being set and fired.

RAMPAGE said:

@Joe Shearer

Need to your opinion on something. How would you compare the Carl Gustav M4 RCL against the latest RPGs? Do you think that both systems have a place with the infantry or do you think that one can be replaced with the other? Now I know that RCL has a lower muzzle velocity, is fielded by a crew of two and maybe its armour penetration isn't as good as that of the RPGs but it has a better and wider range of ammunition, can be coupled with optics, laser range finders and thermal weapons sights. Its airburst ammunition is clearly better for taking care of enemy that is entrenched or taking cover. Correct me if I'm wrong. Would you like to see both with the infantry or would you choose one over the other. If so, why?

You probably know the RCL very well but here are a few pictures of the latest and lighter variant and a video showing the time fuse of the airburst round being set and fired.

Click to expand...

I don't know, there must have been intensive testing and trials, and we've been using the Carl Gustav for ages, but I just can't accept this two person monster replacing RPGs. For one thing, RPGs are flexible and cheap, and light to lug around: don't forget that the average weight of an Indian soldier is much lesser than the Americans and Europeans for whom these weapons were first designed. Neither is perfect, both have their plusses and minuses, but I am waiting for the day when a lighter RPG, with better explosives, and more capability against contemporary tanks to be become available.

There is the argument that you just don't lug the Carl Gustav around, you put in a vehicle, which for one thing gets rid of the ammo carrying problem (with its normal ammunition issue, and with the need to fire multiple rounds even at one target, there is not much hope of a CG lasting a whole day in the battlefield if the second soldier is carrying ammunition physically). Well, yes, sure, but that's not apples and apples, is it? For a squad, the quickest reaction AT weapon is still the RPG.

Arsalan said:

n cholistan ke garmi mein we wont even need an enemy for these troops
jan lo gy kay bachy ke

Click to expand...

This is being used by Russian soldiers in Syria with only camouflage being different and Syria is not very cold country

RAMPAGE said:

@Joe Shearer

Need to your opinion on something. How would you compare the Carl Gustav M4 RCL against the latest RPGs? Do you think that both systems have a place with the infantry or do you think that one can be replaced with the other? Now I know that RCL has a lower muzzle velocity, is fielded by a crew of two and maybe its armour penetration isn't as good as that of the RPGs but it has a better and wider range of ammunition, can be coupled with optics, laser range finders and thermal weapons sights. Its airburst ammunition is clearly better for taking care of enemy that is entrenched or taking cover. Correct me if I'm wrong. Would you like to see both with the infantry or would you choose one over the other. If so, why?

You probably know the RCL very well but here are a few pictures of the latest and lighter variant and a video showing the time fuse of the airburst round being set and fired.

Click to expand...

Even if we have the money I have doubts that Sweden would sell us these

Zarvan said:

Even if we have the money I have doubts that Sweden would sell us these

Click to expand...

Of course they would.

TaimiKhan said:

Surveillance System (Small Drones at Platoon / Company Level - Quadcopter kind of system)

Click to expand...

This is number one on the things that need to happen. It is useless to keep adding body armour if one does not know what is attacking them... a minute of advance warning can prevent a massacre from a rocket attack a kilometer away or two away
Troop carriers are number two because wars fought on stationary lines are a thing of the past
What we need to do is stop concentrating on single troops because the troop carriers we have now (read trucks) are going to sitting ducks in case of attacks. First gwt the troops safely to the battlefield and back then concentrate on what they have to do there.
The G3 being bashed everywhere is heavy and cumbersome but not obsolete in any way because of the flat terrians that most of the war front is fought on. An eventual replacement is needed and price and ability to perform in different enviroments might make a very small list we can choose from...
What we need and are totally ignoring are sniper rifles with thier own minds reducing the training needed for troops and changing the battlefield with less exposure time of the troops themselves to risks
attachments including grenade launchers might be useful in certain areas but not as a standard... more important are anti tank weapons being given to squads
Battle armour should be given to the special forces and rangers first then distributed elsewhere

Zarvan said:

This is being used by Russian soldiers in Syria with only camouflage being different and Syria is not very cold country


Even if we have the money I have doubts that Sweden would sell us these

Click to expand...

Study that bro!! They used it with HEAVY modifications in warm climate areas.

Furthermore, there are lots of things that are not realistic for us anyway so what is the point here? We both know there are things that we wont go for practically no matter how much one wish of it. You have to draw a line somewhere. Learn the difference between optimism and delusion, patriotism and foolishness!!

RAMPAGE said:

Of course they would.

Click to expand...

You must know they have blacklisted us and they are not ready to sell us weapons.

Arsalan said:

Study that bro!! They used it with HEAVY modifications in warm climate areas.

Furthermore, there are lots of things that are not realistic for us anyway so what is the point here? We both know there are things that we wont go for practically no matter how much one wish of it. You have to draw a line somewhere. Learn the difference between optimism and delusion, patriotism and foolishness!!

Click to expand...

What are not realistic ? I know the difference between them but Russians are claiming that Pakistan is interested in buying this system and we have to go for future soldier program eventually and I won't be surprised if we adopt this. And more technical things like laptop will be used by officers only

Zarvan said:

You must know they have blacklisted us and they are not ready to sell us weapons.


What are not realistic ? I know the difference between them but Russians are claiming that Pakistan is interested in buying this system and we have to go for future soldier program eventually and I won't be surprised if we adopt this. And more technical things like laptop will be used by officers only

Click to expand...

We cannot afford this whole system and even those Russian officials mentioned that when they say that people may adopt components. Remember when our officials said that 13 nations are interested in buying JF17 and how our people got excited? I though we have learned some bit from that or the COUNTLESS other such episodes!

Arsalan said:

We cannot afford this whole system and even those Russian officials mentioned that when they say that people may adopt components. Remember when our officials said that 13 nations are interested in buying JF17 and how our people got excited? I though we have learned some bit from that or the COUNTLESS other such episodes!

Click to expand...

Sir things included this system will be part of our infantry only question is whether we would adopt this Russian made system or design and develop these things in Pakistan. Process can be slow but we are already seeing increase use of gadgets among infantry and it would increase more

Zarvan said:

Sir things included this system will be part of our infantry only question is whether we would adopt this Russian made system or design and develop these things in Pakistan. Process can be slow but we are already seeing increase use of gadgets among infantry and it would increase more

Click to expand...

So no we are agreeing on this. You are now talking about components and not the whole system as well. Yes, the FUTURE may see increase in gadgets being used and SOME will be adopted some of these components, SOME!

Arsalan said:

So no we are agreeing on this. You are now talking about components and not the whole system as well. Yes, the FUTURE may see increase in gadgets being used and SOME will be adopted some of these components, SOME!

Click to expand...

Sir never trust Pakistan Army leadership they are quite capable of buying entire system with TOT to avoid the hardwork in Pakistan but personally I think night vision and other technological parts will come. Bulletproofs and pads and other parts will be from Pakistan

Joe Shearer said:

I don't know, there must have been intensive testing and trials, and we've been using the Carl Gustav for ages, but I just can't accept this two person monster replacing RPGs. For one thing, RPGs are flexible and cheap, and light to lug around: don't forget that the average weight of an Indian soldier is much lesser than the Americans and Europeans for whom these weapons were first designed. Neither is perfect, both have their plusses and minuses, but I am waiting for the day when a lighter RPG, with better explosives, and more capability against contemporary tanks to be become available.

There is the argument that you just don't lug the Carl Gustav around, you put in a vehicle, which for one thing gets rid of the ammo carrying problem (with its normal ammunition issue, and with the need to fire multiple rounds even at one target, there is not much hope of a CG lasting a whole day in the battlefield if the second soldier is carrying ammunition physically). Well, yes, sure, but that's not apples and apples, is it? For a squad, the quickest reaction AT weapon is still the RPG.

Click to expand...

I am no military professional but I would guess that RPG’s could never replace RL rifles or anti –tank missiles. RPG would be very effective against the armour lacking infantry support and / or in an urban environment. In standard battle field conditions RL rifles and Tow, Milan or similar weapons would be far more deadly..

Zarvan said:

You must know they have blacklisted us and they are not ready to sell us weapons.

Click to expand...

Have they now? No matter, we can always pick them up from a friendly country, that is if we haven't got any lying around already and reproduce them in-house. Not too much rocket science to it.

RAMPAGE said:

Have they now? No matter, we can always pick them up from a friendly country, that is if we haven't got any lying around already and reproduce them in-house. Not too much rocket science to it.

Click to expand...

We need to develop these things with China and Turkey and Ukraine. By the way RPG 32 is also really good

Zarvan said:

Sir never trust Pakistan Army leadership they are quite capable of buying entire system with TOT to avoid the hardwork in Pakistan but personally I think night vision and other technological parts will come. Bulletproofs and pads and other parts will be from Pakistan

Click to expand...

Lolz!!
I wish they were. You do seem to believe that somehow we are sitting on piles of money, unfortunately that is NOT the case. Then there is the case of value for money and priority!